ML15351A233: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
=Text= | =Text= | ||
{{#Wiki_filter:Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTable of ContentsSHINE Medical | {{#Wiki_filter:Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTable of ContentsSHINE Medical Technologies 19-iRev. 0CHAPTER 19ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWTable of Contents SectionTitlePage | ||
==19.1INTRODUCTION== | ==19.1INTRODUCTION== | ||
OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT....................................19.1-119.1.1PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION.................................19.1-119.1.2REGULATORY PROVISIONS, PERMITS, AND REQUIREDCONSULTATIONS.............................................................................................19.1-319.2PROPOSED ACTION...........................................................................................19.2-119.2.1SITE LOCATION AND LAYOUT........................................................................19.2-619.2.2RADIOISOTOPE FACILITY DESCRIPTION......................................................19.2-1119.2.3WATER CONSUMPTION AND TREATMENT...................................................19.2-12 19.2.4COOLING AND HEATING DISSIPATION SYSTEMS........................................19.2-1319.2.5WASTE SYSTEMS............................................................................................19.2-14 19.2.6STORAGE, TREATMENT, AND TRANSPORTATION OF RADIOACTIVEAND NONRADIOACTIVE MATERIALS, INCLUDING LEU, WASTE, RADIOISOTOPES, AND ANY OTHER MATERIALS.........................................19.7-2119.3DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT........................................19.3-119.3.1LAND USE AND VISUAL RESOURCES...........................................................19.3-119.3.2AIR QUALITY AND NOISE................................................................................19.3-919.3.3GEOLOGIC ENVIRONMENT............................................................................19.3-65 19.3.4WATER RESOURCES.......................................................................................19.3-7119.3.5ECOLOGICAL RESOURCES............................................................................19.3-9619.3.6HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES......................................................19.3-12019.3.7SOCIOECONOMICS.........................................................................................19.3-13419.3.8HUMAN HEALTH...............................................................................................19.3-16419.4IMPACTS OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION, OPERATIONS, AND DECOMMISSIONING...........................................................................................19.4-119.4.1LAND USE AND VISUAL RESOURCES...........................................................19.4-119.4.2AIR QUALITY AND NOISE................................................................................19.4-619.4.3GEOLOGIC ENVIRONMENT............................................................................19.4-3119.4.4WATER RESOURCES.......................................................................................19.4-3419.4.5ECOLOGICAL RESOURCES............................................................................19.4-40 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTable of ContentsSHINE Medical | OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT....................................19.1-119.1.1PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION.................................19.1-119.1.2REGULATORY PROVISIONS, PERMITS, AND REQUIREDCONSULTATIONS.............................................................................................19.1-319.2PROPOSED ACTION...........................................................................................19.2-119.2.1SITE LOCATION AND LAYOUT........................................................................19.2-619.2.2RADIOISOTOPE FACILITY DESCRIPTION......................................................19.2-1119.2.3WATER CONSUMPTION AND TREATMENT...................................................19.2-12 19.2.4COOLING AND HEATING DISSIPATION SYSTEMS........................................19.2-1319.2.5WASTE SYSTEMS............................................................................................19.2-14 19.2.6STORAGE, TREATMENT, AND TRANSPORTATION OF RADIOACTIVEAND NONRADIOACTIVE MATERIALS, INCLUDING LEU, WASTE, RADIOISOTOPES, AND ANY OTHER MATERIALS.........................................19.7-2119.3DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT........................................19.3-119.3.1LAND USE AND VISUAL RESOURCES...........................................................19.3-119.3.2AIR QUALITY AND NOISE................................................................................19.3-919.3.3GEOLOGIC ENVIRONMENT............................................................................19.3-65 19.3.4WATER RESOURCES.......................................................................................19.3-7119.3.5ECOLOGICAL RESOURCES............................................................................19.3-9619.3.6HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES......................................................19.3-12019.3.7SOCIOECONOMICS.........................................................................................19.3-13419.3.8HUMAN HEALTH...............................................................................................19.3-16419.4IMPACTS OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION, OPERATIONS, AND DECOMMISSIONING...........................................................................................19.4-119.4.1LAND USE AND VISUAL RESOURCES...........................................................19.4-119.4.2AIR QUALITY AND NOISE................................................................................19.4-619.4.3GEOLOGIC ENVIRONMENT............................................................................19.4-3119.4.4WATER RESOURCES.......................................................................................19.4-3419.4.5ECOLOGICAL RESOURCES............................................................................19.4-40 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTable of ContentsSHINE Medical Technologies 19-iiRev. 0Table of Contents (cont'd) | ||
SectionTitlePage19.4.6HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES......................................................19.4-4919.4.7SOCIOECONOMICS.........................................................................................19.4-5019.4.8HUMAN HEALTH...............................................................................................19.4-6119.4.9WASTE MANAGEMENT....................................................................................19.4-81 19.4.10TRANSPORTATION..........................................................................................19.4-8319.4.11POSTULATED ACCIDENTS.............................................................................19.4-9219.4.12ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE............................................................................19.4-105 19.4.13CUMULATIVE EFFECTS...................................................................................19.4-11219.5ALTERNATIVES...................................................................................................19.5-119.5.1NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE.............................................................................19.5-119.5.2REASONABLE ALTERNATIVES.......................................................................19.5-219.5.3COST-BENEFIT OF THE ALTERNATIVES.......................................................19.5-72 19.5.4COMPARISON OF THE POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS...............19.5-93 | |||
==19.6CONCLUSION== | ==19.6CONCLUSION== | ||
| Line 34: | Line 35: | ||
==19.1INTRODUCTION== | ==19.1INTRODUCTION== | ||
OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTTable of | OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTTable of Contents SectionTitlePage | ||
==19.1INTRODUCTION== | ==19.1INTRODUCTION== | ||
OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT...............................19.1-119.1.1PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION........................19.1-119.1.2REGULATORY PROVISIONS, PERMITS, AND REQUIREDCONSULTATIONS....................................................................................19.1-3 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies19.1-iiRev. 0List of | OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT...............................19.1-119.1.1PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION........................19.1-119.1.2REGULATORY PROVISIONS, PERMITS, AND REQUIREDCONSULTATIONS....................................................................................19.1-3 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies19.1-iiRev. 0List of Tables NumberTitle19.1.2-1Permits and Approvals Required for Construction and Operation19.1.2-2Consultations Required for Construction and Operation Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of FiguresSHINE Medical Technologies 19.1-iiiRev. 0List of Figures NumberTitleNone Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.1-ivRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations Acronym/AbbreviationDefinition CFRCode of Federal Regulations COEU.S. Army Corps of Engineers CPConstruction Permit DOEU.S. Department of Energy EAEnvironmental Assessment EREnvironmental Report ERREndangered Resources ReviewFAAFederal Aviation Administration FDAU.S. Food and Drug Administration FWSU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service HEUhighly enriched uranium HFRHigh Flux ReactorI-131iodine-131 IREInstitut National des Radioéléments LEUlow enriched uranium Mo-99molybdenum-99NEPANational Environmental Policy Act NRCU.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission NRCLNational Research Council NRUNational Research Universal NTPNuclear Technology Products Radioisotopes OLOperating License SHINESHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. | ||
SHPOState Historic Preservation Office SPCCSpill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.1-vRev. 0Tc-99mtechnetium-99m U-235uranium-235WNNWorld Nuclear NewsXe-133xenon-133Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd) | |||
Acronym/AbbreviationDefinition Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies 19.1-1Rev. 0CHAPTER 19 | |||
==19.1INTRODUCTION== | ==19.1INTRODUCTION== | ||
OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTIn accordance with the provisions of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 50 "Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities," and supporting guidance, SHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. (SHINE) is providing this Environmental Report (ER) in support of an application to construct and operate a radioisotope facility in Janesville, Wisconsin. SHINE is providing this comprehensive ER as required with its application. The ER provides information to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to facilitate preparation of an Environmental Assessment (EA) in accordance with the provisions of 10CFR 51 Subpart A, National Environmental Policy Act - Regulations Implementing Section102 (2). This chapter provides an introduction to the assessment of the environmental effects of construction, operation, and decommissioning of this facility on the site and surrounding areas.This ER follows the content and organization of the Final Interim Staff Guidance Augmenting NUREG-1537, Part 1, Chapter 19 (NRC, 2012). This ER supports the | OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTIn accordance with the provisions of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 50 "Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities," and supporting guidance, SHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. (SHINE) is providing this Environmental Report (ER) in support of an application to construct and operate a radioisotope facility in Janesville, Wisconsin. SHINE is providing this comprehensive ER as required with its application. The ER provides information to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to facilitate preparation of an Environmental Assessment (EA) in accordance with the provisions of 10CFR 51 Subpart A, National Environmental Policy Act - Regulations Implementing Section102 (2). This chapter provides an introduction to the assessment of the environmental effects of construction, operation, and decommissioning of this facility on the site and surrounding areas.This ER follows the content and organization of the Final Interim Staff Guidance Augmenting NUREG-1537, Part 1, Chapter 19 (NRC, 2012). This ER supports the regulat ory review that is performed by the NRC under 10 CFR 51. This regulation requires that environmental impacts from the project be evaluated and described in a concise, clear, and analytical manner. This ER describes the project, potential alternatives, and the methods and sources used in the environmental impact analysis.This ER discusses the existing environment at the proposed Janesville, Wisconsin site (referred to throughout the ER as the SHINE site) and vicinity, and summarizes the environmental impacts of construction, operation, and decommissioning. In addition, this ER considers appropriate impact mitigation measures, and reviews alternative sites and technologies. | ||
The SHINE facility produces molybdenum-99 (Mo-99), iodine-131 (I-131), and xenon-133 (Xe-133). The decay product of Mo-99, technetium-99m (Tc-99m), is used for diagnostic nuclear medicine procedures. The purpose and need for the proposed action is provided in Section 19.1.1 and a description of the proposed action is provided in Section19.2.19.1.1PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTIONThe proposed federal action is the issuance of a Construction Permit (CP) and Operating License (OL), under the provisions of 10 CFR 50, that would allow SHINE to construct and operate a radioisotope facility to produce Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133. Further discussion of the proposed action is provided in Section 19.2.Molybdenum-99There is currently no domestic production of Mo-99 and its daughter isotope technetium-99m (Tc-99m). The U.S. is forced to import its entire supply of these isotopes, which are used in 80percent of nuclear medicine procedures. Tc-99m is an essential ingredient in diagnostic radiopharmaceuticals used for:*Bone scans*Lung perfusion imaging*Kidney scans and functional imaging*Liver scans Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical | The SHINE facility produces molybdenum-99 (Mo-99), iodine-131 (I-131), and xenon-133 (Xe-133). The decay product of Mo-99, technetium-99m (Tc-99m), is used for diagnostic nuclear medicine procedures. The purpose and need for the proposed action is provided in Section 19.1.1 and a description of the proposed action is provided in Section19.2.19.1.1PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTIONThe proposed federal action is the issuance of a Construction Permit (CP) and Operating License (OL), under the provisions of 10 CFR 50, that would allow SHINE to construct and operate a radioisotope facility to produce Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133. Further discussion of the proposed action is provided in Section 19.2.Molybdenum-99There is currently no domestic production of Mo-99 and its daughter isotope technetium-99m (Tc-99m). The U.S. is forced to import its entire supply of these isotopes, which are used in 80percent of nuclear medicine procedures. Tc-99m is an essential ingredient in diagnostic radiopharmaceuticals used for:*Bone scans*Lung perfusion imaging*Kidney scans and functional imaging*Liver scans Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies 19.1-2Rev. 0*Sentinel lymph node localization*Cardiac perfusion imaging*Brain perfusion imaging*Gall bladder function imaging | ||
*Blood pool imaging*Thyroid and salivary gland imaging*Meckel's scansBetween 95 and 98 percent of the world's supply of Mo-99 is produced by just four organizations (NRCL, 2009):*MDS Nordion (Canada). | *Blood pool imaging*Thyroid and salivary gland imaging*Meckel's scansBetween 95 and 98 percent of the world's supply of Mo-99 is produced by just four organizations (NRCL, 2009):*MDS Nordion (Canada). | ||
*Covidien (Netherlands). | *Covidien (Netherlands). | ||
*Institut National des Radioéléments (IRE) (Belgium).*Nuclear Technology Products Radioisotopes (Pty) Ltd. (NTP) (South Africa).Two of these companies (MDS Nordion [approximately 60 percent of the U.S. supply] and Covidien [approximately 40 percent of U.S. supply]) supply nearly all of the Mo-99 used in the U.S. These two companies obtain the vast majority of their Mo-99 from two reactors (NRCL, 2009):*National Research Universal (NRU) reactor in Chalk River, Ontario, Canada.*High Flux Reactor (HFR) in Petten, the Netherlands.The NRU reactor has been in operation since 1957 and HFR has been in operation since 1961. | *Institut National des Radioéléments (IRE) (Belgium).*Nuclear Technology Products Radioisotopes (Pty) Ltd. (NTP) (South Africa).Two of these companies (MDS Nordion [approximately 60 percent of the U.S. supply] and Covidien [approximately 40 percent of U.S. supply]) supply nearly all of the Mo-99 used in the U.S. These two companies obtain the vast majority of their Mo-99 from two reactors (NRCL, 2009):*National Research Universal (NRU) reactor in Chalk River, Ontario, Canada.*High Flux Reactor (HFR) in Petten, the Netherlands.The NRU reactor has been in operation since 1957 and HFR has been in operation since 1961. | ||
Due to the age of these reactors, disruption of the supply of Mo-99 is an ongoing concern.The most recent disruptions of Mo-99 supply resulted from the shutdown of HFR from August 2008 to February 2009 and again from February 2010 to September 2010 for repairs. Concurrent with the HFR shutdown, the NRU reactor was also shut down for repairs from May 2009 to August 2010 (WNN, 2009; Fissile Material, 2010; MSNBC, 2010). While both reactors were shut down, there was an increase in production from other Mo-99 producers in Europe and South Africa; however, the U.S. experienced a shortage of Mo-99/Tc-99m, resulting in hospitals and clinics postponing or cancelling | Due to the age of these reactors, disruption of the supply of Mo-99 is an ongoing concern.The most recent disruptions of Mo-99 supply resulted from the shutdown of HFR from August 2008 to February 2009 and again from February 2010 to September 2010 for repairs. Concurrent with the HFR shutdown, the NRU reactor was also shut down for repairs from May 2009 to August 2010 (WNN, 2009; Fissile Material, 2010; MSNBC, 2010). While both reactors were shut down, there was an increase in production from other Mo-99 producers in Europe and South Africa; however, the U.S. experienced a shortage of Mo-99/Tc-99m, resulting in hospitals and clinics postponing or cancelling diagn ostic imaging procedures (NRCL, 2009).In addition to the age of the HFR and NRU reactors, there are three other supply reliability concerns:*Increasing demand, both domestically and globally, for Mo-99.*Increasing difficulty of transporting Mo-99 across international borders, especially by air, due to security concerns.*The short half-life of Mo-99 (2.75 days) and Tc-99m (6.01 hours).Because of these supply reliability concerns and national security concerns, U.S. government policy and law is to encourage the domestic production of Mo-99. The SHINE facility makes a significant contribution toward accomplishing these goals.Current U.S. demand for Mo-99 is between 5000 and 7000 6-day curies per week, and this demand is projected to grow in the range of 3 to 10 percent per year (NRCL, 2009). The SHINE facility can produce up to 8200 6-day curies of Mo-99 per week. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies 19.1-3Rev. 0The SHINE facility also helps achieve U.S. government nonproliferation objectives. Most of the world's production of Mo-99 is achieved by irradiating highly enriched uranium (HEU) targets in research and test reactors. The U.S. is the primary supplier of HEU for Mo-99 production. In 1992 Congress passed the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (U.S. Government, 1992). One of the nonproliferation objectives of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 was to create a strategy to phase out U.S. exports of HEU for radioisotope production. Based on this, the U.S. is encouraging Mo-99 producers to eliminate use of HEU in medical isotope production. The SHINE facility uses LEU (less than 20 percent enrichment) to produce Mo-99.Iodine-131There are two methods used to produce I-131: irradiation of tellerium-130 in a nuclear reactor, and generation as a by-product of the irradiation of uranium-235 (U-235) for Mo-99 production. | ||
Both methods are used to supply the U.S. I-131 is used for (NM, 2012):*Radiation therapy. | Both methods are used to supply the U.S. I-131 is used for (NM, 2012):*Radiation therapy. | ||
*Radioactive labeling for | *Radioactive labeling for di agnostic radiopharmaceuticals.Currently, there is no commercial production of I-131 in the U.S. The U.S. supply of I-131 is provided by DRAXIMAGE (66 percent), Covidien (26 percent), and MDS Nordion (8 percent). | ||
These companies obtain their I-131 for U.S. consumption from two reactors (OECD, 2010):*NRU reactor in Chalk River, Ontario, Canada. | These companies obtain their I-131 for U.S. consumption from two reactors (OECD, 2010):*NRU reactor in Chalk River, Ontario, Canada. | ||
*SAFARI-1, Pelindaba, South Africa.The SAFARI-1 reactor has been in operation since 1965 (OECD, 2010). As discussed above for Mo-99, due to the ages of the reactors, disruption of the supply of I-131 is an ongoing concern.Xenon-133Xe-133 gas is produced as a by-product of the irradiation of U-235 for Mo-99 production. Xe-133 is used for (RxList, 2012):*Lung imaging. | *SAFARI-1, Pelindaba, South Africa.The SAFARI-1 reactor has been in operation since 1965 (OECD, 2010). As discussed above for Mo-99, due to the ages of the reactors, disruption of the supply of I-131 is an ongoing concern.Xenon-133Xe-133 gas is produced as a by-product of the irradiation of U-235 for Mo-99 production. Xe-133 is used for (RxList, 2012):*Lung imaging. | ||
*Diagnostic evaluation of pulmonary function. | *Diagnostic evaluation of pulmonary function. | ||
*Assessment of cerebral blood flow.19.1.2REGULATORY PROVISIONS, PERMITS, AND REQUIREDCONSULTATIONSThis section lists and summarizes the status of federal, state, local, and other permits and consultations required for the construction and operation of the proposed SHINE radioisotope facility. The applicable law, ordinance, or regulation that governs each permit and/or consultation is also identified.Table 19.1.2-1 lists the permits and other approvals required for construction and operation of the SHINE facility. The table provides the following information for each permit or approval, as applicable:*Name of the responsible regulatory agency*Applicable law, ordinance, or regulation Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical | *Assessment of cerebral blood flow.19.1.2REGULATORY PROVISIONS, PERMITS, AND REQUIREDCONSULTATIONSThis section lists and summarizes the status of federal, state, local, and other permits and consultations required for the construction and operation of the proposed SHINE radioisotope facility. The applicable law, ordinance, or regulation that governs each permit and/or consultation is also identified.Table 19.1.2-1 lists the permits and other approvals required for construction and operation of the SHINE facility. The table provides the following information for each permit or approval, as applicable:*Name of the responsible regulatory agency*Applicable law, ordinance, or regulation Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies 19.1-4Rev. 0*Name of the permit or approval*Activity covered by the permit or approval*Current statusTable 19.1.2-2 lists the consultations required for construction and operation of the SHINE facility. The table provides the following information for each consultation, as applicable:*Name of the responsible regulatory agency | ||
*Applicable law, ordinance, or regulation*Required consultation | *Applicable law, ordinance, or regulation*Required consultation | ||
*Summary of any surveys required to complete the consultation*Current statusIn addition to the formal consultations listed in Table 19.1.2-2, SHINE has made informal contacts with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the National Nuclear Security Administration, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Wisconsin Department of Health Services, and the City of Janesville Community Development Department. The purpose of these informal consultations was to inform the agencies about the project and to coordinate project planning.An on-site field delineation completed in accordance with U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) guidance (COE, 2010) found no jurisdictional wetlands or waters of the United States on the SHINE site. Therefore, no permitting or consultation with the COE is expected to be required.No potential administrative delays or other problems have been identified that would prevent any required agency consultations or approvals. The SHINE facility is designed and planned to comply with all applicable environmental quality standards and regulatory requirements. The facility also will comply with current Good Manufacturing Practices followed by the pharmaceutical industry. | *Summary of any surveys required to complete the consultation*Current statusIn addition to the formal consultations listed in Table 19.1.2-2, SHINE has made informal contacts with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the National Nuclear Security Administration, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Wisconsin Department of Health Services, and the City of Janesville Community Development Department. The purpose of these informal consultations was to inform the agencies about the project and to coordinate project planning.An on-site field delineation completed in accordance with U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) guidance (COE, 2010) found no jurisdictional wetlands or waters of the United States on the SHINE site. Therefore, no permitting or consultation with the COE is expected to be required.No potential administrative delays or other problems have been identified that would prevent any required agency consultations or approvals. The SHINE facility is designed and planned to comply with all applicable environmental quality standards and regulatory requirements. The facility also will comply with current Good Manufacturing Practices followed by the pharmaceutical industry. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies 19.1-5Rev. 0Table 19.1.2-1 Permits and Approvals Required for Construction and Operation (Sheet 1 of 5)AgencyRegulatory AuthorityPermit or ApprovalActivity CoveredStatusU.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atomic Energy Act10 CFR 50.50Construction PermitConstruction of the SHINE facilityAddressed in this license application10 CFR 50.57Operating LicenseOperation of the SHINE facilityAddressed in this license application10 CFR 40Source Material LicensePossession, use, and transfer of radioactive source materialAddressed in this license application10 CFR 30By-Product Material LicenseProduction, possession, and transfer of radioactive by-product materialAddressed in this license application10 CFR 70Special Nuclear Material LicenseReceipt, possession, use, and transfer of special nuclear materialAddressed in this license applicationNational Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)10 CFR 51Environmental Assessment or Environmental Impact Statement in accordance with NEPASite approval for construction and operation of a radioisotope facilityAddressed in this license applicationFederal Aviation Administration (FAA)Federal Aviation Act14 CFR 77Construction NoticeConstruction of structures that potentially may impact air navigation SHINE submitted structure evaluation requests on October 26, 2011. The FAA issued Determinations of No Hazard to Air Navigation on November 9 and 15, 2011.U.S. Environmental Protection AgencyResource Conservation and | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies19.1-11Rev. 0Native American Nations:-Citizen Potawatomi Nation, Oklahoma-Flandreau Santee Sioux Tribe of South Dakota-Forest County Potawatomi Community, Wisconsin-Hannahville Indian Community, Michigan-Ho-Chunk Nation of Wisconsin-Lower Sioux Indian Community, Minnesota-Prairie Band of Potawatomi Nation, Kansas-Prairie Island Indian Community, Minnesota-Santee Sioux Nation, Nebraska-Sisseton-Wahpeton Oyate, South Dakota-Spirit Lake Tribe, North Dakota-Upper Sioux Community, Minnesota-Winnebago Tribe of NebraskaNational Environmental Policy ActNational Historic Preservation ActNative American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act Consultation regarding protection of traditional Native American religious and cultural resourcesNoneConsultation letters were sent to the Native American tribes on July 26, 2012. The Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska responded on August 2, 2012, requesting notification if any burial sites are discovered. No other responses have been received.Table 19.1.2-2 Consultations Required for Construction and Operation (Sheet 2 of 2)AgencyRegulatory AuthorityRequired ConsultationSurveys RequiredStatus Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTable of ContentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.2-iRev. 0SECTION 19.2PROPOSED ACTIONTable of | |||
t or Ttritium Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.2-viiRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/ | Recovery Act40 CFR 261 and 262Acknowledgement of Notification of Hazardous Waste ActivityGeneration of hazardous | ||
wasteNotification not yet submittedClean Water Act40 CFR 112, Appendix FSpill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plans for Construction and OperationStorage of oil during construction and operationSPCC Plans not yet preparedU.S. Department of TransportationHazardous Material Transportation Act40 CFR 107Certificate of RegistrationTransportation of hazardous materialsRegistration application not yet submitted Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies 19.1-6Rev. 0Wisconsin Department of Natural ResourcesFederal Clean Air ActWisconsin Statutes Chapter 285Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapter NR 406Air Pollution Control Construction PermitConstruction of an air pollution emission source that is not specifically exemptedPermit application not yet | |||
submittedFederal Clean Air ActWisconsin Statutes Chapter 285Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapter NR 407Air Pollution Control Operation PermitOperation of an air pollution emission source that is not specifically exemptedPermit application not yet submittedTable 19.1.2-1 Permits and Approvals Required for Construction and Operation (Sheet 2 of 5)AgencyRegulatory AuthorityPermit or ApprovalActivity CoveredStatus Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies 19.1-7Rev. 0Wisconsin Department of | |||
Natural Resources, continuedFederal Clean Water ActWisconsin Statutes Chapter 283Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapter NR 216Construction Storm Water Discharge PermitDischarge of storm water runoff from the construction | |||
siteNotice of Intent to be covered by general permit not yet | |||
submittedFederal Clean Water ActWisconsin Statutes Chapter 283 Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapter NR 216Industrial Storm Water Discharge PermitDischarge of storm water runoff from the site during facility operationNotice of Intent to be covered by general permit not yet submitted. The facility may be eligible for an industrial Storm Water Discharge Permit exclusion under Wisconsin Admistrative Code NR 216.21(3)Wisconsin Statutes Chapters 280 ad 281Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapter NR 809Approval LettersConstruction by the City of Janesville of water and sanitary sewer extensions to the SHINE facilityPlans and specifications not yet submittedWisconsin Statutes Chapter 291Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapter NR 660, 662, and/or 666Compliance with hazardous waste notification, record keeping, and reporting requirementsGeneration of hazardous | |||
waste Notification not yet submitted; other requirements become applicable during operation Wisconsin Department of Safety and Professional ServicesWisconsin Statutes Chapter 101Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapters SPS 361 and 362Building Plan ReviewCompliance with state building codes; required before a local building permit can be issued for a commercial buildingPlans not yet submitted Wisconsin Department of TransportationWisconsin Statutes Chapter 85Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapters Trans 231Permit for Connection to State Trunk HighwayConstruction of driveway connection to U.S. Route 51Permit application not yet | |||
submittedTable 19.1.2-1 Permits and Approvals Required for Construction and Operation (Sheet 3 of 5)AgencyRegulatory AuthorityPermit or ApprovalActivity CoveredStatus Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies 19.1-8Rev. 0Wisconsin Department of Transportation continuedWisconsin Statutes Chapter 85Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapters Trans 231Right of Entry PermitConstruction by the City of Janesville of utility extensions | |||
across U.S. Route 51Permit application not yet | |||
submittedWisconsin Statutes Chapter 114Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapters Trans 56Variance from Height Limitation Zoning Ordinances Construction of structures that exceed height limitations established for Southern Wisconsin Regional AirportPlans not yet submitted for reviewCity of Janesville Community Development DepartmentCity of Janesville Ordinance 18.24.050.ASite Plan Approval (includes | |||
Building Site Permit for the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport Overlay District)Administrative approval of the site layout and plans for parking, lighting, landscaping, etc.Plans not yet submitted for reviewCity of Janesville Ordinance 15.06.070Storm Water Plan Approval (may be included in Site Plan Approval)Administrative approval of grading and drainage plansPlans not yet submitted for | |||
reviewCity of Janesville Ordinance 15.05.080Erosion Control Permit (may be included in Site Plan Approval)Administrative approval of erosion control plans Plans not yet submitted for | |||
reviewCity of Janesville Ordinance 15.01.100.ABuilding PermitConstruction of buildingsPermit application not yet submittedCity of Janesville Ordinance 15.01.100.APlumbing Plan ApprovalInstallation of plumbing systemsPermit application not yet | |||
submittedCity of Janesville Ordinance 15.04.010.AHVAC Plan ApprovalInstallation of heating, ventilation, and air conditioning systemsPermit application not yet submittedCity of Janesville Ordinance 8.32.010Fire Sprinkler and Alarm PermitInstallation of sprinkler and alarm systemsPermit application not yet | |||
submittedCity of Janesville Ordinance 15.01.190.AOccupancy PermitOccupancy of completed buildings Permit application not yet | |||
submittedTable 19.1.2-1 Permits and Approvals Required for Construction and Operation (Sheet 4 of 5)AgencyRegulatory AuthorityPermit or ApprovalActivity CoveredStatus Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies 19.1-9Rev. 0City of Janesville Community Development Department continuedCity of Janesville Ordinance 13.16Sanitary Sewer and Water Supply Facility ApprovalsAdministrative approval of construction, installation, and operation of connections to the municipal sewer and water supply systemsPermit application not yet | |||
submittedCity of Janesville Plan CommissionCity of Janesville Ordinance 18.24.040Conditional Use Permit (when the site property is annexed by the City, the property will automatically be zoned for industrial use)Construction of multiple buildings on the same sitePermit application not yet | |||
submitted Rock County Highway DepartmentWisconsin Statutes Chapter 84Rock County Utility Accommodation Policy 96.00Permit to Construct, Maintain, and Operate Utilities within Highway Right-of-WayConstruction by the City of Janesville of utility extensions across County Trunk Highway GPermit application not yet | |||
submittedNote: No jurisdictional wetlands or waters of the United States have been identified on the SHINE site; therefore, authorization under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act is not expected to be required for construction or operation.Sources for identification of permit requirements: City of Janesville, 2012; State of Wisconsin, 2012; Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 2012.Table 19.1.2-1 Permits and Approvals Required for Construction and Operation (Sheet 5 of 5)AgencyRegulatory AuthorityPermit or ApprovalActivity CoveredStatus Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies19.1-10Rev. 0Table 19.1.2-2 Consultations Required for Construction and Operation (Sheet 1 of 2)AgencyRegulatory AuthorityRequired ConsultationSurveys RequiredStatusU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS)Endangered Species Act, 16 USC 1536Consultation regarding potential to adversely impact protected species; concurrence with no adverse impact or consultation on appropriate mitigation measuresNoneConsultation letter was submitted to the FWS on December 16, 2011; FWS issued a response on January 25, 2012, stating no further action required.Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, 16 USC 668-668cConsultation regarding potential to adversely impact eagles; concurrence with no adverse impact or consultation on appropriate mitigation measuresNoneConsultation letter and response as above.Wisconsin State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)National Historic Preservation Act, Section 106Consultation regarding potential to adversely impact historic resources; concurrence with no adverse impact or consultation on appropriate mitigation measuresPhase I archaeological | |||
surveyPhase I survey was completed on December 15, 2011. Consultation letter was submitted to the SHPO on February 15, 2012; response was received on March 12, 2012 stating agreement with finding that no historic properties will be affected. | |||
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Wisconsin Statutes Chapter 29, Section 604Endangered Resources Review (ERR) to document recorded occurrence of protected species or rare natural habitatsNoneRequest for ERR was submitted on January 16, 2012; ERR response was issued on February 1, 2012, stating no further action required. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies19.1-11Rev. 0Native American Nations:-Citizen Potawatomi Nation, Oklahoma-Flandreau Santee Sioux Tribe of South Dakota-Forest County Potawatomi Community, Wisconsin-Hannahville Indian Community, | |||
Michigan-Ho-Chunk Nation of Wisconsin-Lower Sioux Indian Community, Minnesota-Prairie Band of Potawatomi Nation, | |||
Kansas-Prairie Island Indian Community, Minnesota-Santee Sioux Nation, Nebraska-Sisseton-Wahpeton Oyate, South Dakota-Spirit Lake Tribe, North Dakota-Upper Sioux Community, Minnesota-Winnebago Tribe of NebraskaNational Environmental Policy ActNational Historic Preservation ActNative American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act Consultation regarding protection of traditional Native American religious and cultural resourcesNoneConsultation letters were sent to the Native American tribes on July 26, 2012. The Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska responded on August 2, 2012, requesting notification if any burial sites are discovered. No other responses have been received.Table 19.1.2-2 Consultations Required for Construction and Operation (Sheet 2 of 2)AgencyRegulatory AuthorityRequired ConsultationSurveys RequiredStatus Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTable of ContentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.2-iRev. 0SECTION 19.2PROPOSED ACTIONTable of Contents SectionTitlePage19.2PROPOSED ACTION.....................................................................................19.2-119.2.1SITE LOCATION AND LAYOUT..................................................................19.2-619.2.2RADIOISOTOPE FACILITY DESCRIPTION................................................19.2-11 19.2.3WATER CONSUMPTION AND TREATMENT.............................................19.2-1219.2.4COOLING AND HEATING DISSIPATION SYSTEMS..................................19.2-1319.2.5WASTE SYSTEMS......................................................................................19.2-14 19.2.6STORAGE, TREATMENT, AND TRANSPORTATION OF RADIOACTIVEAND NONRADIOACTIVE MATERIALS, INCLUDING LEU, WASTE, RADIOISOTOPES, AND ANY OTHER MATERIALS...................................19.2-21 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies19.2-iiRev. 0List of Tables NumberTitle19.2.0-1Estimated Materials Consumed During Construction Phase19.2.0-2Proposed Construction/Demolition Equipment Used in the Construction, Preoperational, and Decommissioning Phases 19.2.1-1Sensitive Populations, Nearest Resident, and Landmarks within 5 Miles (8 km) of the Site19.2.5-1Estimated Type and Quantity of Radioactive Wastes Associated with the SHINE Facility Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of FiguresSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-iiiRev. 0List of Figures NumberTitle19.2.1-1SHINE Facility Site Layout19.2.2-1Isotope Production System High-Level Flow Diagram19.2.3-1Water Balance Diagram Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-ivRev. 2[Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]Acronyms and AbbreviationsAcronym/Abbreviation Definition | |||
°Fdegrees Fahrenheit | |||
°Cdegrees Celsius | |||
µS/cmmicro-Siemens per centimeter AEAAtomic Energy Act of 1954 ac.acreAHAacetohydroxamic acid[Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information]Btu/hrbritish thermal units per hour Btu/scfbritish thermal units per standard cubic feet CeCeriumcfmcubic feet per minute CFRCode of Federal Regulations CicuriesCO2carbon dioxideCPConstruction PermitCs-137cesium-137d or Ddeuterium D-Tdeuterium-tritium DSSIDiversified Scientific Services, Inc.EPAU.S. Environmental Protection Agency EREnvironmental Report ESEnergySolutions FDAU.S. Food and Drug Administrationft.feet Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.2-vRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition ft3cubic feetFPfission productg/Lgrams/liter gpmgallons per minute GTCCgreater than Class CgU/Lgrams of uranium per liter H2hydrogen4Heheliumhahectare HNO3nitric acidhrhourHVACheating, ventilation, and air conditioning IiodineI-129iodine-129I-131iodine-131 IUirradiation unit | |||
keffeffective multiplication factorkgkilogramskmkilometerkVkilovolts lbspounds LELlower explosive limit LEUlow enriched uranium Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-viRev. 0[Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition LSAlow specific activity mmetersMmolarMBtu/hrmillion british thermal units per hour MeVmillion electron volts mi.mileMLLWmixed low level waste MomolybdenumMo-99 or 99Momolybdenum-99nneutronNOxnitrogen oxidesNRCU.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission O2oxygenOLOperating LicensePPEpersonal protective equipment PSARPreliminary Safety Analysis Report psigpound-force per square inch gaugePuplutoniumRCAradiologically controlled area RCRAResource Conservation and Recovery Act scfstandard cubic feet SHINESHINE Medical Technologies, Inc.sol'nsolution[Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information] | |||
t or Ttritium Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.2-viiRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition TBPtri-butyl phosphate Tctechnetium Tc-99mtechnetium-99m TCLPToxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure TDNthermal denitration TRCSTSV Reactivity Control System TRPSTSV Reactivity Protection System TStarget solution TSVtarget solution vessel UuraniumU-235uranium-235 U3O8triuranium octoxide (yellowcake) | |||
UO3uranium trioxide (yellowcake)UREXuranium extractionUSGSUnited States Geological SurveyWCSWaste Control Specialists WIWisconsin Xe-133xenon-133 yryear Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-1Rev. 0CHAPTER 1919.2PROPOSED ACTIONThe proposed federal action is issuance of a Construction Permit (CP) and Operating License (OL) to SHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. (SHINE) for a radioisotope production facility to produce molybdenum-99 (Mo-99), iodine 131 (I-131), and xenon-133 (Xe-133). The decay product of Mo-99, technetium-99m (Tc-99m), is used for diagnostic medical isotope procedures.The applicant for this CP and the OL and owner of the radioisotope facility is SHINE Medical Technologies, Inc., a Wisconsin corporation. SHINE has the necessary authority, control, and rights related to the construction and operation of the isotope production facility once the CP and the OL are approved.The projected schedule for the SHINE facility is as follows:*Start date of construction: January 2015.*End date of construction: December 2015. | |||
*Date of commercial operation: June 2016. | *Date of commercial operation: June 2016. | ||
*Date of decommissioning: June 2046.SHINE plans on performing activities in accordance with 10 CFR 50.10(a)(2) prior to receiving the CP. The construction phase of this project requires an average of 248 workers (421 at peak times) and a monthly average of 303 truck deliveries and 9 off-site waste shipments. Materials consumed are shown in Table 19.2.0-1 and also include approximately 24,587 gallons of diesel fuel (as a bounding assumption fuel is assumed to be diesel) on an average monthly basis. The different types of construction equipment used during the construction phase are shown in Table19.2.0-2. These construction activities affect 51.0 acres (ac.) (20.6 hectares [ha]) of land of which approximately 25.1 ac. (10.2 ha) of land are only temporarily affected.Prior to full commercial operation, the SHINE facility equipment undergoes a thorough commissioning phase involving a series of test operations designed to ensure the facility is functioning as designed. Once the equipment has been commissioned, it is used to produce and ship quantities of Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133 for customer qualification and input to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval process. This preoperational phase requires an average of 390 workers (451 at peak times) and a monthly average of 190 truck deliveries and 9 off-site waste shipments. Materials consumed include approximately 11,721 gallons of diesel fuel (as a bounding assumption fuel is assumed to be diesel) on a monthly basis. The different types of construction equipment used during the preoperational phase are shown in Table 19.2.0-2.After the FDA approves SHINE's customer's final products for commercial use, the facility produces and ships several batches of Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133 per week. Production devices are normally operated on a weekly basis and the operation schedules for the devices are normally staggered to accommodate customer requirements. Operational activities require an Chapter 19 - Environmental | *Date of decommissioning: June 2046.SHINE plans on performing activities in accordance with 10 CFR 50.10(a)(2) prior to receiving the CP. The construction phase of this project requires an average of 248 workers (421 at peak times) and a monthly average of 303 truck deliveries and 9 off-site waste shipments. Materials consumed are shown in Table 19.2.0-1 and also include approximately 24,587 gallons of diesel fuel (as a bounding assumption fuel is assumed to be diesel) on an average monthly basis. The different types of construction equipment used during the construction phase are shown in Table19.2.0-2. These construction activities affect 51.0 acres (ac.) (20.6 hectares [ha]) of land of which approximately 25.1 ac. (10.2 ha) of land are only temporarily affected.Prior to full commercial operation, the SHINE facility equipment undergoes a thorough commissioning phase involving a series of test operations designed to ensure the facility is functioning as designed. Once the equipment has been commissioned, it is used to produce and ship quantities of Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133 for customer qualification and input to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval process. This preoperational phase requires an average of 390 workers (451 at peak times) and a monthly average of 190 truck deliveries and 9 off-site waste shipments. Materials consumed include approximately 11,721 gallons of diesel fuel (as a bounding assumption fuel is assumed to be diesel) on a monthly basis. The different types of construction equipment used during the preoperational phase are shown in Table 19.2.0-2.After the FDA approves SHINE's customer's final products for commercial use, the facility produces and ships several batches of Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133 per week. Production devices are normally operated on a weekly basis and the operation schedules for the devices are normally staggered to accommodate customer requirements. Operational activities require an Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-2Rev. 0average of 150 workers and a monthly average of 36 truck deliveries and 1 off-site waste shipment. Materials to be stored on-site in small quantities include 55 gallon drums of lubricating oil and grease for fans, pumps, hoists, trolleys and rotating equipment and hydraulic oil for heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) dampers and hydraulically operated equipment. | ||
Limited on-site storage of acid and caustic chemicals for regeneration of the water treatment demineralizer beds and processes are required. A bounding value of approximately 30,000 gallons (113,562 liters) of diesel fuel for the standby diesel generator are contained in an outside, underground storage tank. Approximately 25.9 acres (10.5 hectares) of land are permanently affected due to operational activities.Once the facility reaches the end of its useful life, it will be decommissioned. Any radioactive equipment and materials will be disposed of according to local and federal laws and regulations. Post-operational decommissioning activities require an average of 205 workers (257 at peak times) and a monthly average of 72 truck deliveries and 191 off-site waste shipments. Materials consumed include approximately 28,607 gallons (108,290 liters) of diesel fuel (as a bounding assumption fuel is assumed to be diesel) on a monthly basis. The different types of construction equipment used during the decommissioning phase are shown in Table 19.2.0-2. | Limited on-site storage of acid and caustic chemicals for regeneration of the water treatment demineralizer beds and processes are required. A bounding value of approximately 30,000 gallons (113,562 liters) of diesel fuel for the standby diesel generator are contained in an outside, underground storage tank. Approximately 25.9 acres (10.5 hectares) of land are permanently affected due to operational activities.Once the facility reaches the end of its useful life, it will be decommissioned. Any radioactive equipment and materials will be disposed of according to local and federal laws and regulations. Post-operational decommissioning activities require an average of 205 workers (257 at peak times) and a monthly average of 72 truck deliveries and 191 off-site waste shipments. Materials consumed include approximately 28,607 gallons (108,290 liters) of diesel fuel (as a bounding assumption fuel is assumed to be diesel) on a monthly basis. The different types of construction equipment used during the decommissioning phase are shown in Table 19.2.0-2. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-3Rev. 0Table 19.2.0-1 Estimated Materials Consumed During Construction PhaseMaterialAmountConcrete27,700 cubic yardsStructural Steel140 tonsMisc. Steel30 tonsSteel Liner100 tonsAsphalt2200 cubic yards Stone Granular Material16,000 cubic yards Roofing150 tons Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-4Rev. 0Table 19.2.0-2 Proposed Construction/Demolition Equipment Used in the Construction,Preoperational, and Decommissioning Phases (Sheet 1 of 2)EquipmentPresent During Construction (Y or N)Present During Preoperation (Y or N)Present During Decommissioning (Y or N)Asphalt Compactor, Cat CB434C, 107 HpYYNAsphalt Paver, Barber Greene AP-1000, 174 HpYYNBackhoe/Loader, Cat 430, 105 HpYYYBoom Lift, JLG 800AJ, 65 HpYYYConcrete Pump, Putzmeister 47Z-Meter, 300 HpYNNCrane, Lattice Boom, Manitowoc 8000, 80t, 205 HpYNYCrane, Picker, Grove RT530E-2 30t, 160 HpYNYCrane, Picker, Grove RT600E-2 50t, 173 HpYNYDump, Duel Axel (15 cy) | ||
Mack, 350 HpYYYExcavator, Large, Cat 345D L, 380 HpYNYExcavator, Medium, Cat 321D LCR,148 HpYNYExtended Forklift, Lull 1044C-54, 115 HpYYYFuel Truck, Mack MP6, 150 HpYNYMaterial Truck, 21/2 ton, F-650, 270 HpYYYMechanic's Truck, 21/2 ton, F-650, 270 HpYYY Chapter 19 - Environmental | |||
<50 HpYYYPortable Welders, <50 HpYYYWalk Behind Compactor, | Mack, 350 HpYYYExcavator, Large, Cat 345D L, 380 HpYNYExcavator, Medium, Cat 321D LCR,148 HpYNYExtended Forklift, Lull 1044C-54, 115 HpYYYFuel Truck, Mack MP6, 150 HpYNYMaterial Truck, 21/2 ton, F-650, 270 HpYYYMechanic's Truck, 21/2 ton, F-650, 270 HpYYY Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-5Rev. 0Table 19.2.0-2 Proposed Construction/Demolition Equipment Used in the Construction,Preoperational, and Decommissioning Phases (Sheet 2 of 2)EquipmentPresent During Construction (Y or N)Present During Preoperation (Y or N)Present During Decommissioning (Y or N)Motor Grader, Cat 140M, 183 HpYYYPickup Truck, F-250, 300 HpYYYSemi Tractor & Trailer (20 cy), Mack MP8, 450 HpYNYSkidsteer Loader, Case SR200, 75 HpYYYTracked Dozer, Cat D6, 150 HpYYYTracked Dozer, Cat D7, 235 HpYYYTracked Dozer, Cat D8, 310 HpYNYTracked Loader, Cat 973C, 242 HpYYYVibratory Soil Compactor, Cat CS74, 156 HpYYYWater Truck, Mack MP6, 150 HpYYYPortable Air Compressors, <50 HpYYYPortable Generators, | ||
<50 HpYYY Chapter 19 - Environmental | <50 HpYYYPortable Welders, <50 | ||
HpYYYWalk Behind Compactor, | |||
<50 HpYYY Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-6Rev. 019.2.1SITE LOCATION AND LAYOUT19.2.1.1Site LocationThe SHINE site is located approximately 4 miles (mi.) (6.4 kilometers [km]) south of Janesville, Rock County, Wisconsin. The SHINE facility is centered at approximately 42° 37' 26.9" N latitude, and 89° 1'29.5" W longitude.The sensitive populations (e.g., schools, daycare facilities, hospitals), nearest resident, and landmarks (including highways, transportation facilities, rivers and other bodies of water) within 5mi. (8 km) of the site are provided in Table 19.2.1-1. There are no daycare centers or retirement homes located within 5 mi. (8 km) of the SHINE facility.19.2.1.2Site LayoutFigure 19.2.1-1 shows the layout of major structures and the site boundary. The site boundaries cover approximately 91 ac. (36.8 ha). The following structures shown in Figure 19.2.1-1 are located on the site: *Production facility building*Support facility building*Waste staging and shipping building | |||
*Diesel generator building | *Diesel generator building | ||
*Administration building*Security station19.2.1.2.1Chemical, Diesel Fuel, and Hazardous and Radioactive Material Receipt, Holding, and Storage AreasThe following buildings and areas receive, store, hold, retain or process chemicals used in the facility and support buildings on the site:*Production facility building-Rejected material -Receiving area | *Administration building*Security station19.2.1.2.1Chemical, Diesel Fuel, and Hazardous and Radioactive Material Receipt, Holding, and Storage AreasThe following buildings and areas receive, store, hold, retain or process chemicals used in the facility and support buildings on the site:*Production facility building-Rejected material -Receiving area | ||
| Line 71: | Line 128: | ||
-CO2-compressed gases room-Mechanical room | -CO2-compressed gases room-Mechanical room | ||
-Boiler room-HVAC chiller room-Trade spaces | -Boiler room-HVAC chiller room-Trade spaces | ||
-General storage Chapter 19 - Environmental | -General storage Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-7Rev. 0-Fire brigade -Health physics (hot)-Health physics (cold)-Ion exchange assembly | ||
-FDA lab-Hot lab-Isolation pack room | -FDA lab-Hot lab-Isolation pack room | ||
-Radioactive waste packaging-Product packing-Material shipping | -Radioactive waste packaging-Product packing-Material shipping | ||
| Line 77: | Line 134: | ||
-Janitorial closet *Diesel generator building-Diesel room | -Janitorial closet *Diesel generator building-Diesel room | ||
-Underground storage tank*Waste staging and shipping facility building*Support facility building-Receiving area -Chemicals room | -Underground storage tank*Waste staging and shipping facility building*Support facility building-Receiving area -Chemicals room | ||
-General storage-Janitorial closet -Propane canister storage (for fork lifts)19.2.1.2.2Underground, Stormwater, and Sewage FeaturesAn underground storage tank near the diesel generator building provides storage for the diesel generator. A sanitary sewer pipeline carries wastewater from the SHINE facility to the city main sewage pipeline. A natural gas pipeline provides commercial natural gas to the SHINE facility. An underground electrical distribution line connecting to the electric transformers provides electricity to the SHINE site. A municipal water line lateral is accessed to provide the SHINE facility with water supply. Infrastructure improvements are discussed in Subsection 19.4.13.7.1.Per Figure 19.2.1-1, the SHINE facility buildings, storage, and miscellaneous structures/areas are surrounded by an exterior stormwater runon diversion berm with an interior and exterior ditch. The exterior ditch directs stormwater and farm field runoff to flow spreaders, which direct the excess water to the surrounding fields. The interior ditch directs excess water to the stormwater vegetated swale, which slopes towards an existing road side drainage. A stormwater overflow storage area is provided for beyond-design events. The stormwater systems are Chapter 19 - Environmental | -General storage-Janitorial closet -Propane canister storage (for fork lifts)19.2.1.2.2Underground, Stormwater, and Sewage FeaturesAn underground storage tank near the diesel generator building provides storage for the diesel generator. A sanitary sewer pipeline carries wastewater from the SHINE facility to the city main sewage pipeline. A natural gas pipeline provides commercial natural gas to the SHINE facility. An underground electrical distribution line connecting to the electric transformers provides electricity to the SHINE site. A municipal water line lateral is accessed to provide the SHINE facility with water supply. Infrastructure improvements are discussed in Subsection 19.4.13.7.1.Per Figure 19.2.1-1, the SHINE facility buildings, storage, and miscellaneous structures/areas are surrounded by an exterior stormwater runon diversion berm with an interior and exterior ditch. The exterior ditch directs stormwater and farm field runoff to flow spreaders, which direct the excess water to the surrounding fields. The interior ditch directs excess water to the stormwater vegetated swale, which slopes towards an existing road side drainage. A stormwater overflow storage area is provided for beyond-design events. The stormwater systems are Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-8Rev. 0designed to address 1-year, 2-year, 24-hour storm events per state regulations, and are also designed to address 10-year and 100-year events, as required by the City of Janesville.19.2.1.2.3Monitoring StationsRefer to Figure 19.4.8-1 for environmental monitoring station locations. The need for monitoring stations is discussed in the following subsections: *Air monitoring - Subsection 19.4.2*Groundwater monitoring - Subsection 19.4.4*Surface water monitoring - Subsection 19.4.4 | ||
*Meteorological monitoring - Subsection 19.4.2*Ecological monitoring - Subsection 19.4.5*Radiological monitoring - Subsection 19.4.8.3 Chapter 19 - Environmental | *Meteorological monitoring - Subsection 19.4.2*Ecological monitoring - Subsection 19.4.5*Radiological monitoring - Subsection 19.4.8.3 Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-9Rev. 0Table 19.2.1-1 Sensitive Populations, Nearest Resident, and Landmarks within 5 Miles (8 km) of the Site(Sheet 1 of 2)Facility Type Location of InterestDistance to Project Site BoundaryResidentialNearest Full-Time Resident0.33 mi. (0.53 km) northwest ParkAirport Park0.30 mi. (0.48 km) northwest Paw Print Park1.16 mi. (1.87 km) northwestMedicalFirst Choice Women's Health Center1.37 mi. (2.20 km) northMercy Clinic South1.58 mi. (2.54 km) northMercy Hospital4.21 mi. (6.78 km) northEducationalBlackhawk Technical College Aviation Center0.89 mi. (1.43 km) southwestRock County Christian School1.14 mi. (1.83 km) southJackson Elementary School1.28 mi. (2.06 km) southCommunity CenterCaravilla Education and Rehabilitation Comm Center1.62 mi. (2.61 km) southAnimal ProductionDairy Production0.51 mi. (0.82 km) eastHorse Pasture0.52 mi. (0.84 km) eastGoat Production0.69 mi. (1.11 km) northwestMacFarland Pheasants, Inc.0.86 mi. (1.38 km) northBeef Production Area0.97 mi. (1.56 km) southwest Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-10Rev. 0Table 19.2.1-1 Sensitive Populations, Nearest Resident, and Landmarks within 5 Miles (8 km) of the Site(Sheet 2 of 2)Facility Type Location of InterestDistance to Project Site BoundaryRivers/Creeks Rock River1.9 mi. (3.1 km) westSpring Brook3 mi. (4.8 km) northTurtle Creek4.5 mi. (7.2 km) southeastFisher Creek3 mi. (4.8 km) northwest Markham Creek2.5 mi. (4.0 km) northwestAirportsSouthern Wisconsin Regional Airport0.4 mi. (0.6 km) westRailroadUnion Pacific Railroad1.7 mi. (2.7 km) northwestHighwaysU.S. Highway 51Adjacent to the site boundaryU.S. Highway 143.75 mi. (6.0 km) northeastInterstate 39/902.1 mi. (3.4 km) east Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-11Rev. 0[Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]19.2.2RADIOISOTOPE FACILITY DESCRIPTIONSHINE proposes to build a radioisotope facility. This facility produces Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133. The SHINE facility consists of eight irradiation units (IUs) capable of producing up to 8200 6-day curies per week of Mo-99. Figure 19.2.2-1 provides a flow diagram of the isotope production process.[Proprietary Information]19.2.2.1General Description of the Isotope Production ProcessThe SHINE facility produces Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133 as fission products of uranium-235 (U-235) in a subcritical, low enriched uranium (LEU) target solution. The subcritical solution is located in an annular target solution vessel (TSV) and driven by an accelerator-based neutron source located on the center axis of the TSV annulus. The neutron source consists of a deuterium (d or D) beam impacting a tritium (t or T) gas target which produces energetic neutrons via the d(t, 4He)n reaction. The neutron source is supplied with tritium gas from a tritium purification system.The neutron population from the driver is increased as it travels through a neutron multiplier on its way to the TSV, and then further multiplied in the target solution itself via subcritical fission reactions. As the target solution is irradiated, radiolysis and fission will create off-gases that are handled by a system designed to recombine hydrogen and oxygen and trap certain volatile fission products.During normal operation, the IUs are operated on a weekly basis. At the end of each irradiation cycle, the target solution is removed from the TSV and transferred to a hot cell where isotopes are selectively extracted. Purified Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133 are tested by quality control, packaged, and shipped to customers.After the target solution passes through the extraction column, it is evaluated for re-use. In most cases, the solution is returned to the TSV with minimal adjustment. At some point, however, certain fission products that have built up over time may need to be removed from the solution, in which case the solution undergoes a clean-up process.Target solution preparation and clean-up, isotope extraction and purification, and any tanks containing target solution (besides the TSV) generate radioactive off-gases that are captured by a radioactive gas treatment system. The neutron generator, target solution preparation, tritium purification, TSV off-gas handling, radioactive gas treatment, target solution clean-up, isotope extraction, and isotope purification generate radioactive waste in various forms that is processed, packaged, (in some cases) staged, and disposed of according to its classification. Subsection 19.2.5 provides additional information on the radioactive waste treatment systems. Refer to Figure 19.2.2-1 for a flow diagram of the radioisotope production process. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-12Rev. 019.2.3WATER CONSUMPTION AND TREATMENT19.2.3.1Water ConsumptionThe Janesville municipal water system will supply the water needs of the SHINE facility. A water use diagram for the facility is provided in Figure 19.2.3-1. Water uses for the facility include the following:*Isotope production*Isotope processing | ||
*Potable water*Fire protection*Facility heating and coolingFor isotope production, water is required for the preparation of the target solution. Water required for isotope production amounts to 175 gallons/day (gpd) (662 liters/day [lpd]). Processing including isotope extraction and purification, target solution clean-up, and waste processing requires 1051 gpd (3979 lpd) of water. There will be no liquid discharges from the radiologically controlled area (RCA) to the Janesville municipal sanitary system.Wastewater from outside the RCA will be discharged to the Janesville municipal sanitary system.Potable water demand is 3270 gpd (12,378 lpd) and blowdown and makeup to the facility heating water system is 2580 gpd (9766 lpd). The makeup requirement to the fire protection system is 5gallons per minute (gpm) (19 liters per minute [lpm]). The largest automatic fire suppression system demand in the event of a fire is 390 gpm (1476 lpm). The automatic fire suppression demand will be supplied by a fire water tank. The makeup water requirement for the facility chilled water supply and distribution system is 5 gpm (19 lpm). The makeup water requirement for the facility heating water system is 5 gpm (19 lpm).19.2.3.2Water TreatmentThe SHINE facility includes the following water treatment processes:*Demineralization (i.e., deionization).*Cooling water treatment. | *Potable water*Fire protection*Facility heating and coolingFor isotope production, water is required for the preparation of the target solution. Water required for isotope production amounts to 175 gallons/day (gpd) (662 liters/day [lpd]). Processing including isotope extraction and purification, target solution clean-up, and waste processing requires 1051 gpd (3979 lpd) of water. There will be no liquid discharges from the radiologically controlled area (RCA) to the Janesville municipal sanitary system.Wastewater from outside the RCA will be discharged to the Janesville municipal sanitary system.Potable water demand is 3270 gpd (12,378 lpd) and blowdown and makeup to the facility heating water system is 2580 gpd (9766 lpd). The makeup requirement to the fire protection system is 5gallons per minute (gpm) (19 liters per minute [lpm]). The largest automatic fire suppression system demand in the event of a fire is 390 gpm (1476 lpm). The automatic fire suppression demand will be supplied by a fire water tank. The makeup water requirement for the facility chilled water supply and distribution system is 5 gpm (19 lpm). The makeup water requirement for the facility heating water system is 5 gpm (19 lpm).19.2.3.2Water TreatmentThe SHINE facility includes the following water treatment processes:*Demineralization (i.e., deionization).*Cooling water treatment. | ||
*Facility heating water system treatment.19.2.3.2.1Water DemineralizationWithin the SHINE facility, most of the water used within the process is demineralized in order to control the addition of chemicals within the water to process streams. This is particularly important given the radiological nature of some parts of the process (and the resultant potential for the formation of activation products), and the necessity of a highly pure Mo-99 product. | *Facility heating water system treatment.19.2.3.2.1Water DemineralizationWithin the SHINE facility, most of the water used within the process is demineralized in order to control the addition of chemicals within the water to process streams. This is particularly important given the radiological nature of some parts of the process (and the resultant potential for the formation of activation products), and the necessity of a highly pure Mo-99 product. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-13Rev. 019.2.3.2.2Cooling Water TreatmentWater for use in the closed-loop cooling water system is typically treated prior to addition to the loop, and then dosed periodically. The dosing is determined by testing. The types of chemicals added to the water are:*Biocides - added to inhibit microbial growth in the water, which can lead to fouling.*Corrosion inhibitors - added to inhibit corrosion of piping and components the cooling water flows through. Often corrosion is inhibited by halogen-based biocides.*Scale inhibitors - added to reduce scale formation, particularly within heat exchangers. The specific inhibitor(s) is selected based on the chemistry of the makeup water for the cooling water system.19.2.3.2.3Facility Heating Water System TreatmentThe SHINE facility uses a closed-circuit heated water system for building heating. This is referred to as a boiler by HVAC engineers, but the water does not change phases. The feedwater for this system is treated to reduce corrosion and to reduce scaling.The magnitude of corrosion and scaling in any specific application is a function of the feedwater chemistry and the operating conditions of the boiler system. In some instances, feedwater is demineralized prior to being fed to the boiler.The boiler capacity is calculated based on 100 pound-force per square inch gauge (psig) steam, and using a combined 5 percent blowdown and losses (i.e., make-up water is 5 percent of steam flow). The peak annual facility HVAC heat load (Btu/hr) is used as the sizing criteria for the required steam flow rate with a 50 percent margin included for other facility heating usage. 19.2.4COOLING AND HEATING DISSIPATION SYSTEMS19.2.4.1Cooling SystemsWater used for SHINE facility cooling is produced at a central location by multiple air-cooled chillers. The chilled water is circulated in primary-secondary fashion, utilizing heat exchangers (shell and tube type) to isolate the process and HVAC loops from the central chilled water loop. This allows for temperature regulation of the water loops. Chillers have N+1 redundancy (i.e.,there will be one redundant unit). They shut down upon a loss of power event.*Cooling water is used in the SHINE facility for process cooling. A water supply temperature of 85 degrees Fahrenheit (°F) (29 degrees Celsius [°C]) with a return average temperature of 100°F (38°C) is assumed.*Chilled water may be used in the facility for process cooling and is used for HVAC cooling. A chilled water supply temperature of 40°F (4°C) with a 50°F (10°C) return temperature is assumed. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-14Rev. 0The air-cooled chillers operate year-round, rejecting heat directly to the atmosphere through a sensible heat transfer process (forced air blowing over coils). No water is consumed or lost by evaporation in this arrangement. The total estimated heat of rejection witnessed by the chillers:*Estimated peak process load: 2.64 x 10 6 british thermal units per hour (Btu/hr) (2.79 x 10 6 kilojoules per hr [kJ/hr]).*Estimated peak HVAC load: 4.66 x 10 6 Btu/hr (4.92 x 10 6 kJ/hr).*Estimated heat of compression: 1.83 x 10 6 Btu/hr (1.93 x 10 6 kJ/hr).*Estimated total heat rejection load: 9.13 x 10 7 Btu/hr (9.63 x 10 6 kJ/hr).For bounding purposes, the units are considered to run continuously (i.e., 24 hrs per day, 7 days per week).Being a closed-loop system, makeup water is periodic and minimal (less than 10 percent of the system capacity per year). Makeup water is treated. Water treatment is standard chemical treatment.The chillers contain non-chlorofluorocarbon refrigerant and are located outdoors. The SHINE facility does not use cooling towers.19.2.4.2Heating SystemMultiple natural gas fired boilers provide heating water to the HVAC air handlers. The peak boiler load is 6.6 MBtu/hr (6.3 kJ/hr), with a total annual natural gas consumption of 7.67 x 10 7 standard cubic feet (scf) (2.17 x 10 6 cubic meters [m 3]). Ultimately, all of this heat ends up in the environment.This assumes a natural gas heat content of 900 Btu/scf, an 80 percent efficient boiler, no recirculation, operation 24 hours per day and 7 days per week, supply air volume of 156,000 cubic feet per minute (4417 cubic meters per minute) at site altitude and a reheat capability up to 75°F (24°C).19.2.5WASTE SYSTEMS19.2.5.1Sources of Radioactive Liquid, Solid, and Gaseous Waste Material 19.2.5.1.1FacilityThe sources of radioactive liquid, solid, gaseous waste generated by the operation of the SHINE facility are as follows:*Neutron generators.*Waste generated by the TSV solution preparation process includes used cans in which new uranium metal is received, personnel protective equipment (PPE), and spent filters.*Waste generated by the operation of the TSV off-gas system includes spent zeolite beds. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-15Rev. 0[Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]*Waste generated by operation of the Mo-99 recovery system includes the spent extraction columns, spent wash solution, and rotovap condensate.*Waste generated by the target vessel solution cleanup process includes [Proprietary Information] UREX raffinate, non-RCRA (Res ource Conservation and Recovery Act) spent solvent when replaced infrequently, spent resin columns, and spent caustic scrubber solution.*Routine waste from maintenance activities.*The Mo-99 purification process produces waste consisting of glassware and liquid waste.19.2.5.1.2Nearby Operating FacilitiesFacilities that handle and store radioactive materials in the area of the SHINE facility are discussed in Subsection 19.3.8.5.19.2.5.2Type and Quantity of Radionuclides and Hazardous MaterialsThe type and quantity of radionuclides and hazardous materials is provided in Table 19.2.5-1.19.2.5.3Description of Waste Systems19.2.5.3.1Solid Radioactive Waste Handling SystemClass A solid waste consists of Class A trash (e.g., personal protective equipment [PPE], Mo-99 purification glassware, filters), extraction columns, and the neutron generators. The Class A trash is consolidated for low specific activity (LSA) shipment. Extraction columns are replaced after each TSV processing batch. After a two week decay period in the Mo extraction cell, the columns are stored within the facility for further decay and consolidated for LSA shipment. The neutron generators are planned to be replaced on an approximately yearly basis. After replacement, the neutron generators are size-reduced and consolidated for shipment as LSA. The Class A trash, extraction columns, and the neutron generators are shipped approximately yearly to EnergySolutions' (ES) disposal site.The zeolite beds are associated with the TSV off-gas system. The toxicity characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP) may or may not result in th e classification of zeolite beds as Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) waste; however, testing of untreated silver mordenite at Hanford indicated the material ex ceeds TCLP limits prior to solidification. The waste is also radioactive and would be a mixed low level waste (MLLW). Tritium, iodine, xenon, and krypton enters these beds. Only iodine is adsorbed in the zeolite beds. The waste classification for this material is a function of both the efficiency of the zeolite beds and the change out frequency of the beds. It is likely the beds, in terms of operational lifetime, could build up enough iodine-129 to be greater than Class C (GTCC) waste. The zeolite is shipped to an off-site processor. The shipment is a Type B shipment and occurs infrequently. The processor for the zeolite beds is Waste Control Specialists (WCS) in Andrews, Texas. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies19.2-16Rev. 2[Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]The ion exchange resin used for removal of cesium-137 (Cs-137) and cerium (Ce) has a high capacity for Cs-137 capture and will be changed out based on curie limits at the receiving facility and also based on shipping limits. The spent resins are solidified in a shielded waste processing hot cell. The used resin is classified as GTCC waste and is shipped as Type B to an off-site location for long-term storage at WCS.As discussed above, the target solution cleanup system uses an anion exchange column to remove technetium and iodine. When the anion exchange resin is replaced, the spent resin is solidified on-site and sent off-site for disposal (WCS in Andrews, Texas). There will be no solid waste disposal at the SHINE site.19.2.5.3.2Liquid Radioactive Waste System Liquid waste discharged from the various processes at the SHINE facility (other than spent solvent) are combined into one of two tanks. Two tanks are needed to allow liquid waste to decay and also so that a somewhat consistent radiological environment exists for waste processing. Once the first tank is filled the other tank will begin to fill. At this point the pH is adjusted so that the waste can be passed through an ion exchange resin for removal of Cs-137 and Ce-144/ | ||
Pr-144. This allows the majority of the liquid stream to become Class A waste. This cleaned-up material is then sent to an evaporator for volume reduction. The evaporator overheads are reused and the bottoms are solidified and shipped to ES for final disposal. The spent resin treatment is discussed in the section above. No liquid radioactive waste is discharged from the SHINE facility.The spent solvent is not a RCRA waste and is replaced once per year. The solvent is sent to a processor (Diversified Scientific Services, Inc [DSSI], in Kingston, Tennessee) for thermal treatment.[Proprietary Information] This waste is classified as Class B waste and is shipped as Type B to WCS in Andrews, Texas. | Pr-144. This allows the majority of the liquid stream to become Class A waste. This cleaned-up material is then sent to an evaporator for volume reduction. The evaporator overheads are reused and the bottoms are solidified and shipped to ES for final disposal. The spent resin treatment is discussed in the section above. No liquid radioactive waste is discharged from the | ||
SHINE facility.The spent solvent is not a RCRA waste and is replaced once per year. The solvent is sent to a processor (Diversified Scientific Services, Inc [DSSI], in Kingston, Tennessee) for thermal treatment.[Proprietary Information] This waste is classified as Class B waste and is shipped as Type B to WCS in Andrews, Texas. | |||
[Proprietary Information] The waste is solidified in a hot cell using Portland cement. Some additives may be required based on the final chemistry of incoming resin and precipitate. These shipments are Type B shipments. There will be no liquid waste disposal at the SHINE site.19.2.5.4Proposed Hazardous Material Disposal ActivityThe only hazardous (or potentially hazardous) materials are [Proprietary Information] and the zeolite beds. Although small quantities of [Proprietary Information] is expected to pass TCLP, and is not considered hazardous waste. Waste streams with a hazardous component are mixed low-level waste such as the zeolite beds and are handled as described in Subsection 19.2.5.3.1. | [Proprietary Information] The waste is solidified in a hot cell using Portland cement. Some additives may be required based on the final chemistry of incoming resin and precipitate. These shipments are Type B shipments. There will be no liquid waste disposal at the SHINE site.19.2.5.4Proposed Hazardous Material Disposal ActivityThe only hazardous (or potentially hazardous) materials are [Proprietary Information] and the zeolite beds. Although small quantities of [Proprietary Information] is expected to pass TCLP, and is not considered hazardous waste. Waste streams with a hazardous component are mixed low-level waste such as the zeolite beds and are handled as described in Subsection 19.2.5.3.1. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-17Rev. 019.2.5.5Direct Radiation Sources Stored On-Site or near the SHINE Facility19.2.5.5.1Direct Radiation Sources Stored On-SiteThe wastes listed in Table 19.2.5-1 are stored on-site for a period of time before they are shipped off-site. The frequency of shipment of each type of waste is provided in Table19.2.5-1.LEU metal is stored in the target solution preparation area. Medical isotopes will not be stored for any significant time period as they must be shipped to clients as quickly as possible.19.2.5.5.2Direct Radiation Sources Stored near the SHINE FacilityThere are no direct radiation sources stored near the SHINE facility. Facilities that handle and store radioactive materials in the area of the SHINE facility are discussed in Subsection 19.3.8.5.19.2.5.6Pollution Prevention and Waste Minimization 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 SHINE facility will have a program for pollution prevention and waste minimization that includes the following:*Waste minimization and recycling for the various phases of the SHINE facility 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. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewProposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies19.2-18Rev. 2[Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]Table 19.2.5-1 Estimated Type and Quantity of Radioactive Wastes Associated with the SHINE Facility(Sheet 1 of 3)DescriptionMatrixClass as | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewProposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies19.2-18Rev. 2 | ||
[Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]Table 19.2.5-1 Estimated Type and Quantity of Radioactive Wastes Associated with the SHINE Facility(Sheet 1 of 3)DescriptionMatrixClass as GeneratedContentsVolume Volume as shipped (ft 3)55-gallon drum equivalent as shippedShipmentTypeNumber of Shipments/yrDestinationNeutron GeneratorSolidAActivated metal parts4338ft3/yr4338590LSA3.00ESExtraction ColumnsSolidAStainless resin columnsClass A TrashSolidAPPE, Mo-99 purification glassware, filters, etcSpent SolventLiquid(a)An-dodecane, tributyl phosphate22 gallons/ | |||
yr--0.4LSA1.00DSSITc/I columnsResinCResin16 gallons/ | |||
yr233.1Type B0.3WCSZeolite BedsSolidGTCCSilver coated beds0.4 ft3/yr0.40.05Type B1.00WCSCs/Ce MediaResinGTCCResin16 gallons/ | |||
yr233.1Type B0.3WCS[Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information]B[Proprietary Information]295 gallons/yr 7911Type B1.00WCS Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewProposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies19.2-19Rev. 0 | |||
[Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]Table 19.2.5-1 Estimated Type and Quantity of Radioactive Wastes Associated with the SHINE Facility(Sheet 2 of 3)DescriptionMatrixClass as GeneratedContentsVolume Volume as shipped (ft 3)55-gallon drum equivalent as shipped Shipment TypeNumber of Shipments/yrDestinationSpent WashesLiquid(a)A[Proprietary Information]59,708 gallons/yr97381324LSA18ESRotvap CondensateLiquid(a)A[Proprietary Information]UREX RaffinateLiquid(a)B[Proprietary Information]Decontamination WasteLiquid(a)ADecon fluid unknownSpent Eluate SolutionLiquid(a)A[Proprietary Information] | |||
NOx Scrubber SolutionLiquid(a)A[Proprietary Information] | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewProposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies19.2-20Rev. 0Table 19.2.5-1 Estimated Type and Quantity of Radioactive Wastes Associated with the SHINE Facility(Sheet 3 of 3)a)Liquid waste discharged from the various processes at the SHINE facility is either solidified and then shipped to a waste depository or reused. | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewProposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies19.2-20Rev. 0Table 19.2.5-1 Estimated Type and Quantity of Radioactive Wastes Associated with the SHINE Facility(Sheet 3 of 3)a)Liquid waste discharged from the various processes at the SHINE facility is either solidified and then shipped to a waste depository or reused. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-21Rev. 019.2.6STORAGE, TREATMENT, AND TRANSPORTATION OF RADIOACTIVE AND NONRADIOACTIVE MATERIALS, INCLUDING LEU, WASTE, RADIOISOTOPES, AND ANY OTHER MATERIALSThere are no storage needs for enriched uranium fuel, irradiated enriched uranium, or medical isotope product. LEU metal (not fuel) is stored in the target solution preparation area. Medical isotopes will not be stored for any significant time period as these items will be transported to clients as quickly as possible. Irradiated enriched uranium is not stored, as the facility cleans up and recycles this material. The radiological wastes listed in Table 19.2.5-1 are stored on-site for a period of time before they are shipped off-site. The frequency of shipment of each type of waste is provided in Table 19.2.5-1. Enough storage capacity is provided on-site to accommodate the amount of waste between shipments to the off-site repositories. Subsections 19.2.5.3.1 and 19.2.5.3.2 discuss solid and liquid radioactive waste handling. Radioactive waste gases are discussed in Subsection 19.4.8.2.The treatment and packaging for shipment of radioactive and nonradioactive wastes and medical isotopes are controlled with SHINE facility procedures.The packaging systems used to transport enriched uranium, radioactive wastes, and medical isotopes are licensed for the class and type of material that is being transported.The target solution for the SHINE irradiation unit is made on-site at the SHINE facility from LEU metal purchased from Y-12, located in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Y-12 is approximately 650 miles by road from Janesville, Wisconsin.The radioactive wastes will be transported to the destinations listed on Table 19.2.5-1. The distances from the SHINE facility to these facilities are provided in Subsection 19.4.10.1.1.The medical isotopes produced by SHINE are shipped to three processing facilities, as discussed in Subsection 19.4.10.1.1. The distances from the SHINE facility to these facilities are provided in Subsection 19.4.10.1.1. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Site Location and Layout | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Site Location and Layout SHINE Medical Technologies Rev. 0 Figure 19.2.1 SHINE Facility Site Layout | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Radioisotope Facility DescriptionSHINE Medical Technologies Rev. 1Figure 19.2.2 Isotope Production System High-Level Flow Diagram Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water Consumption and Treatment SHINE Medical Technologies Rev. 0 Figure 19.2.3 Water Balance Diagram | |||
Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4) | Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4) | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTable of ContentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-iRev. 0SECTION 19. | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTable of ContentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-iRev. 0SECTION 19.3 DESCRIPTION OF THE A FFECTED ENVIRONMENTTable of Contents SectionTitlePage19.3DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT..................................19.3-119.3.1LAND USE AND VISUAL RESOURCES.....................................................19.3-119.3.2AIR QUALITY AND NOISE..........................................................................19.3-919.3.3GEOLOGIC ENVIRONMENT.......................................................................19.3-6519.3.4WATER RESOURCES.................................................................................19.3-7119.3.5ECOLOGICAL RESOURCES......................................................................19.3-9619.3.6HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES................................................19.3-12019.3.7SOCIOECONOMICS....................................................................................19.3-13419.3.8HUMAN HEALTH.........................................................................................19.3-164 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-iiRev. 0List of Tables NumberTitle19.3.1-1Summary of 2006 Land Use/Land Cover within SHINE Site and Region19.3.1-2Crop Production Estimates for SHINE Site and Rock County, Wisconsin19.3.1-3City of Janesville Land Use19.3.2-1Selected Characteristics of Wisconsin Physiographic Provinces19.3.2-2Madison, Wisconsin Climatic Means and Extremes19.3.2-3Rockford, Illinois Climatic Means and Extremes 19.3.2-4Madison, Wisconsin and Rockford, Illinois Additional Climatic Means and Extremes19.3.2-5List of NOAA ASOS Stations Located within the Site Climate Region19.3.2-6List of NOAA COOP Stations in the Site Climate Region for which Clim-20 Summaries are Available19.3.2-6List of NOAA COOP Stations in the Site Climate Region for which Clim-20 Summaries are Available19.3.2-7Nearest Federal Class I Areas to the SHINE Site 19.3.2-8Regional Tornadoes and Waterspouts 19.3.2-9Details of Strongest Tornadoes in Rock County, Wisconsin19.3.2-10 Details of Strongest Tornadoes in Surrounding Counties Adjacent to Rock County, Wisconsin19.3.2-11Precipitation Extremes at Local and Regional NOAA COOP Meteorological Monitoring Stations within the Site Climate Region19.3.2-12Mean Seasonal and Annual Hail or Sleet Frequencies at Rockford, Illinois and Madison, Wisconsin19.3.2-13Ice Storms that have Affected Rock County, Wisconsin19.3.2-14Mean Seasonal Thunderstorm Frequencies at Rockford, Illinois and Madison, Wisconsin Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-iiiRev. 0List of Tables(Continued) | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical | NumberTitle19.3.2-15Design Wet and Dry Bulb Temperatures19.3.2-16Estimated 100-Year Return Maximum and Minimum DBT, MCWB coincident with the 100-Year Return Maximum DBT, Historic Maximum WBT and Estimated 100-Year Annual Maximum Return WBT19.3.2-17Dry Bulb Temperature Extremes at Local and Regional NOAA COOP Meteorological Monitoring Stations within the Site Climate Region19.3.2-18FAA Specifications for Automated Weather Observing Stations19.3.2-19Annual Data Recovery Rates (in Percent) of Dry Bulb Temperatures, Relative Humidity, Wind Speed, and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport for 2005-201019.3.2-20Historical Dry Bulb Temperatures, Relative Humidity, and Wind Speed from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport for 2005-201019.3.2-21Annual Joint Data Recovery Rates of Wind Speed, Wind Direction, and Computed Pasquill Stability Class from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport19.3.2-22Pasquill Stability Class Frequency Distributions from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (Percent) 2005-201019.3.2-23Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class A)19.3.2-24Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class B)19.3.2-25Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class C)19.3.2-26Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class D)19.3.2-27Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class E)19.3.2-28Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class F) | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of FiguresSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-ivRev. 0List of Tables(Continued) | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical | NumberTitle19.3.2-29Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class G)19.3.2-30Representative Environmental Noise Levels19.3.4-1Rockford, Illinois Climatic Means and Extremes19.3.4-2Rainfall Depth-Duration-Frequency Data for Janesville Vicinity19.3.4-3USGS Streamflow Monitoring Stations in Rock County, Wisconsin19.3.4-4Flood Discharge Frequency Data - Rock River at Afton, Wisconsin19.3.4-5Annual Minimum Low Flows - Rock River at Afton19.3.4-6Groundwater Monitoring Well Water Table Elevations19.3.4-7Surface Water Analytical Results19.3.4-8SHINE Medical Surface Water Field Data - Janesville19.3.4-9Groundwater Analytical Results for Monitoring Wells19.3.4-10SHINE Medical Groundwater Field Data - Janesville19.3.5-1Fish Potentially Occurring near the SHINE Site 19.3.5-2Benthic Macroinvertebrates Collected in an Unnamed Stream (Tributaryof the Rock River) near the SHINE Site19.3.5-3Terrestrial Plants Observed on or near the SHINE Site19.3.5-4Mammals Potentially Occurring on or near the SHINE Site19.3.5-5Avifaunal Species Potentially Occurring on or near the SHINE Site 19.3.5-6Reptiles and Amphibians Potentially Occurring on or near the SHINE Site19.3.5-7Protected Species near the SHINE Site19.3.6-1Previously Recorded Cultural Resources Surveys within 1-mi. (1.6-km) of the Site Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-vRev. 0List of Tables(Continued) | ||
NumberTitle19.3.6-2Eligible or Listed Archaeological Sites within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site, Rock County, Wisconsin19.3.6-3Historic Structures and Districts Listed on the NRHP within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site19.3.7-1Rock County Labor Force Distribution by County of Employee Residence19.3.7-2Comparison of Estimated Major SHINE Labor Force Needs with Estimated Rock County Available Work Force19.3.7-3Population and Growth Rates of Municipalities within Rock County19.3.7-4Resident Population Distribution, Growth Rates, and Projections for Rock County 19.3.7-5Estimated Transient Population within 5 mi. (8 km) of the SHINE Site (2010)19.3.7-6Demographic (Race and Ethnicity) Characteristics of Rock County19.3.7-7Median Household and Per Capita Income Levels within RockCounty 19.3.7-8Civilian Labor Force and Unemployment Rates within Rock County, 2002-201219.3.7-9Employment by Industry within Rock County 19.3.7-10Top 10 Employers within the ROI (Rock County), City of Janesville 19.3.7-11Percent of Individuals and Families Living Below the Census PovertyThreshold within Rock County19.3.7-12Housing Unit Characteristics within Rock County19.3.7-13Tax Rates in Rock County and State of Wisconsin 19.3.7-14Major Municipal Water Suppliers in Rock County 19.3.7-15Rock County Community Water Supply Characteristics (2010)19.3.7-16Public Wastewater Treat ment Systems in Rock County 19.3.7-17Public School Enrollment (2012) within Rock County Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-viRev. 0List of Tables(Continued) | |||
NumberTitle19.3.7-18Recreation Facilities within Rock County 19.3.8-1Distance to Nearest Agricultural and Urban Facilities19.3.8-2Chemicals Used/Stored Within Five Miles of the Site Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of FiguresSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-viiRev. 0List of Figures NumberTitle19.3.1-1Aerial View of the SHINE Site19.3.1-2Major Land Uses within the Region19.3.1-3Janesville Site Region19.3.1-4Special Land Use Classifications within the Region 19.3.1-5Prime Farmland within the Site19.3.1-6Prime Farmland within the Region19.3.1-7Other Land Use Features near the SHINE Site19.3.1-8Major Population Centers and Infrastructure19.3.1-9Site Visual Setting 19.3.2-1Principle Tracks of Winter Synoptic Cyclones that Potentially Affect Wisconsin Weather19.3.2-2Physiographic Provinces of Wisconsin19.3.2-3Mean Wisconsin Winter Month Temperatures19.3.2-4Mean Wisconsin Spring Month Temperatures 19.3.2-5Mean Wisconsin Summer Month Temperatures19.3.2-6Mean Wisconsin Autumn Month Temperatures19.3.2-7Mean Wisconsin Winter Month Precipitation 19.3.2-8Mean Wisconsin Spring Month Precipitation19.3.2-9Mean Wisconsin Summer Month Precipitation19.3.2-10Mean Wisconsin Autumn Month Precipitation 19.3.2-11NOAA COOP Network Climate Divisions of Wisconsin19.3.2-12Outline of Climate Region Representative of the Site19.3.2-13Illinois Annual Mean Water Equivalent Precipitation Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of FiguresSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-viii Rev. 0List of Figures(Continued) | |||
NumberTitle19.3.2-14Illinois Annual Mean Snowfall19.3.2-15Illinois Annual Mean Dry Bulb Temperatures19.3.2-16NOAA ASOS Stations Located within the Site Climate Region19.3.2-17NOAA COOP Stations Located within the Site Climate Region 19.3.2-18Wisconsin and Illinois Counties within Site Climate Region Selected for Investigation of Severe Weather Phenomena19.3.2-19Annual Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-20January Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-21February Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-22March Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-23April Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010) 19.3.2-24May Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-25June Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-26July Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010) 19.3.2-27August Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-28September Wind Rose Souther n Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-29October Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-30November Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-31December Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-32Winter Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010) 19.3.2-33Spring Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-34Summer Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010) | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of FiguresSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-ixRev. 0List of Figures(Continued) | |||
NumberTitle19.3.2-35Autumn Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-36Annual Wind Roses Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (Janesville, WI) and Regional Stations19.3.3-1Geotechnical Investigation Boring Locations19.3.3-2Generalized Geologic Cross Section of Rock County, West-East19.3.3-3Wisconsin Stratigraphic Column19.3.3-4Regional Structural Geology19.3.3-5Site Cross Section19.3.3-6Seismic Hazard Map19.3.3-7Capable Fault Zones19.3.4-1Project Area Watershed - Tributary to Rock River 19.3.4-2Project Area Local Drainage19.3.4-3Long-Term Annual Streamflows and Precipitation in Rock County19.3.4-4Project Water Monitoring Locations 19.3.4-5Groundwater Elevation Isopleth, Fourth Quarter, 201119.3.4-6Groundwater Elevation Isopleth, First Quarter, 201219.3.4-7Groundwater Elevation Isopleth, Second Quarter, 2012 19.3.4-8Groundwater Elevation Isopleth, Third Quarter, 201219.3.5-1Ecoregions within a 50-Mi. (80 Km) Radius of the SHINE Site19.3.5-2Ecological Resource Entities of Special Interest in Rock County 19.3.5-3Ecology Sampling Locations19.3.6-1Historic Properties Listed on the National Register of Historic Places Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of FiguresSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-xRev. 0List of Figures(Continued) | |||
NumberTitle19.3.7-1Population Centers within Rock County19.3.7-2Existing Transportation Network within Rock County19.3.7-3Existing Transportation Network in Proximity to the SHINE Site19.3.7-4Major Recreation Facilities within Rock County 19.3.8-1Janesville Features and Distances from Site Boundary (1-6Mile Range)19.3.8-2Janesville Features and Distances from Site Boundary (0-1Mile Range) | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-xiRev. 0Acronyms and AbbreviationsAcronym/Abbreviation Definition | |||
°Cdegrees Celsius | |||
°Fdegrees Fahrenheit | |||
µS/cmmicro-Siemens per centimeter/Qrelative atmospheric concentration AASHTOAmerican Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials ac.acreAFCCCAir Force Combat Climatology Center ASCEAmerican Society of Civil Engineers ASHRAEAmerican Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc.ASOS Stationautomated surface observing station AWOSautomated weather observing station BIABureau of Indian Affairs BLMBureau of Land Management BLSBureau of Labor Statistics BTOCbelow top of casing Bu.bushelCCelciusC-14carbon-14 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-xiiRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition CFRCode of Federal Regulations cfscubic feet per second CFUcolony-forming units Clim-20Climatography of the United States No. 20 cmcentimeter cm/scentimeters per second cm/hrcentimeters per hour cm/yr.centimeters per year cmscubic meters per second COOP(National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) cooperative observing station dBAA-weighted decibels DBTdry bulb temperaturedegdegreesDORDepartment of Revenue DPIDepartment of Public Instruction DWDDepartment of Workforce Development EeastE[M]expected moment magnitude E-coliEscherichia coli Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-xiii Rev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition EDSEnvironmental Data Service ENEeast-northeast EPRIElectric Power Research Institute ESEeast-southeast FFahrenheit FAAFederal Aviation Administration FEMAFederal Emergency Management Agency fpsfeet per second ft.feetgthe acceleration of an object due to the force of gravityGISgeographical information system GMGeneral Motorsgpdgallons per daygpd/ftgallons per day per foot GHGgreenhouse gases Hhighhahectarehr.hourHSGHydrologic Soil Group Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-xivRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition HUCHydrologic Unit CodeI-39Interstate Highway 39I-43Interstate Highway 43I-90Interstate Highway 90I-131iodine-131 IAEAInternational Atomic Energy Agency IDOAIllinois Department of Agriculture IHPAIllinois Historic Preservation Agency ILIllinoisin.inch(es)in. Hginches of mercury in/hrinches per hour in/yrinches per year ISMCSinternational station meteorological climate summaryJFDjoint frequency distribution K-40potassium-40 kg/m2kilograms per square meterKJVLmeteorological station identifier for Janesville, Wisconsin Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-xvRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition kmkilometer(s) | |||
KMSNmeteorological station identifier for Madison, Wisconsin KRFDmeteorological station identifier for Rockford, IllinoisKYKentuckyLlowlb/ft2pounds per square foot LCDlocal climatological dataLdnday night average sound level lpdliters per day lpmliters per minute LU/LCland use/land cover MmoderateMmoment magnitude mmeter(s)m/smeters per secondmax.maximumMCWBmean coincident wet bulb temperature Mgdmillion gallons per day mg/Lmilligrams per liter Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-xviRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition mg/m3milligrams per cubic meterMHSMercy Health SystemMIMichigan mi.mile(s) mi.2square milesminminutesmin.minimum mLmilliliters Mldmillion liters per dayMNMinnesotaMOMissouri mphmiles per hour MPNmost probable number mrem/yrmillirem per yearMSAMSA Professional Services, Inc.MSLabove mean sea level mSV/yrmillisievert per year mVmillivoltMWemegawatt electric Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-xviiRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition MWtmegawatt thermal NnorthNAICSNorth American Industry Classification System NAIPNational Agricultural Imagery Program NAVD 88North American Vertical Datum of 1988 NCDCNational Climatic Data Center NDnot detected above the detection limit NEnortheast NHINational Heritage Inventory NLCD2006National Land Cover Database 2006 NLSINational Lightning Safety Institute NNEnorth-northeast NNWnorth-northwest NOAANational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NPDESNational Pollutant Discharge Elimination SystemNPSNational Park Service NRNatural Resources NRCU.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-xviii Rev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition NRCSNatural Resources Conservation Service NRHPNational Register of Historic Properties NTUnephelometric turbidity unit NWnorthwest NWSNational Weather Service NWSFONational Weather Service Forecast Office PCBpolychlorinated biphenyl PMPprobable maximum precipitation PWRpressurized water reactor remroentgen equivalent man RMSEroot mean square error ROIregion of influence SEsoutheast secsecondsSHstate highway SHINESHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. | |||
SICStandard Industrial Classification sq. kmsquare kilometer sq. mi.square mile SSEsouth-southeast Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-xixRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition SSURGOSoil Survey Geographic Database SSWsouth-southwest Sv/yrsievert per year SWsouthwest SWRASouthern Wisconsin Regional Airport (Janesville, Wisconsin) | |||
SWWDBSouthwest Wisconsin Workforce Development BoardTBEESTeledyne Brown Engineering Environmental ServicesTMDLtotal maximum daily load TOCtop of casing USU.S. Highway USACEU.S. Army Corps of Engineers USAFU.S. Air Force USCBU.S. Census Bureau USDAU.S. Department of Agriculture USDOCU.S. Department of Commerce USDOIU.S. Department of the Interior USEPAU.S. Environmental Protection Agency USFWSU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-xxRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition USGSU.S. Geological Survey UTCUniversal Time, Coordinated UWNRUniversity of Wisconsin Nuclear Reactor vpdvehicles per day WBANWeather Bureau Army Navy WBBAWisconsin Breeding Bird Atlas WBTwet bulb temperature WDNRWisconsin Department of Natural Resources WHSWisconsin Historical Society WIWisconsin WISCLANDWisconsin Initiative for Statewide Cooperation on Landscape Analysis and Data WisDOTWisconsin Department of Transportation WNWwest-northwest WPDESWisconsin Pollutant Discharge Elimination SystemWSWwest-southwest yd.yardyryear Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-1Rev. 0CHAPTER 1919.3DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT19.3.1LAND USE AND VISUAL RESOURCESThis subsection describes the characteristics of the land use of the SHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. (SHINE) site and the region. In addition, a description of the visual resources of the site is provided. The land use for the site and region is analyzed using the National Land Cover Database 2006 (NLCD2006) (Fry, et al., 2011) land use/land cover (LU/LC) database. | |||
This provides a more recent and unified database than use of both the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) Wisconsin Initiative for Statewide Cooperation on Landscape Analysis and Data (WISCLAND) database and the Illinois Department of Agriculture (IDOA) Land Cover of Illinois database. The visual resources are rated using the U.S. Department of the Interior (USDOI) - Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Visual Resource Management System.19.3.1.1Land Use19.3.1.1.1SiteThe SHINE site consists of a 91.27-acre (ac.) (36.9hectare [ha]) parcel located south of the City of Janesville in Rock County, Wisconsin (Figure19.3.1-1). Given the undeveloped nature of the site, there are no existing structures or infrastructure located within the site boundary. The approximate limits of the proposed restricted area are located near the center of the site as shown on Figure 19.3.1-1. Due to the nature of the facility, there are no exclusion areas on either the proposed site or adjacent properties. Facilities proposed to be located on the developed SHINE site are described in Section 19.2 and illustrated in Figure19.2.1-1LU/LC as mapped by the National Land Cover Database (Fry, et al., 2011) within the property site consists almost entirely of undeveloped cultivated crop lands (Figure 19.3.1-2). Table 19.3.1-1 presents the acreage and percent coverage of the 15 mapped land uses within the site and region. LU/LC on-site consists of 99.8percent cultivated agricultural land and 0.2 percent developed/open space. U.S. Highway(US) 51 borders the western boundary of the SHINE site, and the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (SWRA) is located immediately to the west of US51 (Figure19.3.1-1). 19.3.1.1.2RegionThe "region" of the SHINE site is defined as the area within a 5-mile (mi.) (8-kilometer[km]) radius of the site centerpoint (Figure 19.3.1-3). The entire region is contained within Rock County, Wisconsin. Major land uses within the region are listed in Table 19.3.1-1 and depicted in Figure 19.3.1-2. The dominant land use in the region is agricultural/crops (50.2percent). Pasture/hay fields (11.7percent), low intensity developed lands (11.7percent), deciduous forest areas (6.6percent), and open space developed lands (6.1percent) make up the other major land uses. The remaining land uses within the region include open water, medium intensity developed lands, high intensity developed lands, barren lands, evergreen forest, mixed forest, shrub/scrub, grassland, woody wetlands, and emergent herbaceous wetlands. The City of Janesville is located directly to the north and is within the region. The northern limits of the City of Beloit are located approximately 3.7 mi. (6.0km) to the south of the site. | This provides a more recent and unified database than use of both the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) Wisconsin Initiative for Statewide Cooperation on Landscape Analysis and Data (WISCLAND) database and the Illinois Department of Agriculture (IDOA) Land Cover of Illinois database. The visual resources are rated using the U.S. Department of the Interior (USDOI) - Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Visual Resource Management System.19.3.1.1Land Use19.3.1.1.1SiteThe SHINE site consists of a 91.27-acre (ac.) (36.9hectare [ha]) parcel located south of the City of Janesville in Rock County, Wisconsin (Figure19.3.1-1). Given the undeveloped nature of the site, there are no existing structures or infrastructure located within the site boundary. The approximate limits of the proposed restricted area are located near the center of the site as shown on Figure 19.3.1-1. Due to the nature of the facility, there are no exclusion areas on either the proposed site or adjacent properties. Facilities proposed to be located on the developed SHINE site are described in Section 19.2 and illustrated in Figure19.2.1-1LU/LC as mapped by the National Land Cover Database (Fry, et al., 2011) within the property site consists almost entirely of undeveloped cultivated crop lands (Figure 19.3.1-2). Table 19.3.1-1 presents the acreage and percent coverage of the 15 mapped land uses within the site and region. LU/LC on-site consists of 99.8percent cultivated agricultural land and 0.2 percent developed/open space. U.S. Highway(US) 51 borders the western boundary of the SHINE site, and the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (SWRA) is located immediately to the west of US51 (Figure19.3.1-1). 19.3.1.1.2RegionThe "region" of the SHINE site is defined as the area within a 5-mile (mi.) (8-kilometer[km]) radius of the site centerpoint (Figure 19.3.1-3). The entire region is contained within Rock County, Wisconsin. Major land uses within the region are listed in Table 19.3.1-1 and depicted in Figure 19.3.1-2. The dominant land use in the region is agricultural/crops (50.2percent). Pasture/hay fields (11.7percent), low intensity developed lands (11.7percent), deciduous forest areas (6.6percent), and open space developed lands (6.1percent) make up the other major land uses. The remaining land uses within the region include open water, medium intensity developed lands, high intensity developed lands, barren lands, evergreen forest, mixed forest, shrub/scrub, grassland, woody wetlands, and emergent herbaceous wetlands. The City of Janesville is located directly to the north and is within the region. The northern limits of the City of Beloit are located approximately 3.7 mi. (6.0km) to the south of the site. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-2Rev. 019.3.1.1.3Special Land UsesFederal and State special land use classification areas within the region are shown in Figure 19.3.1-4. According to the USDOI-Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) (2012) there is no federal land held in trust for an American Indian tribe within the 5 mi. (8 km) region. The WDNR manages two parcels of land in the region, both located southwest of the site. Located south of the airport and 1.9 mi. (3.0 km) from the site is a 112 ac. (45.3 ha) parcel that was gifted to the WDNR, but has no designated use. Rock River Prairie is a 37 ac. (15.0 ha) State Natural Area located 3.5 mi. (5.6 km) from the SHINE site and is accessed from US 51. There are no military reservations, federal designated wild and scenic rivers, national parks, national forests or federal designated coastal zone areas within the region.19.3.1.1.4Agricultural Resources and Facilities As is illustrated in Figure 19.3.1-5, both prime farmland and farmland of statewide importance occur within the site boundaries. Warsaw silt loam is the prime farmland soil type, whereas Lorenzo loam is the soil type of state-wide importance. Prime farmland and farmland of state-wide importance located within the region are shown in Figure 19.3.1-6. Approximately 41,950ac. (16,977ha) of the area within the region are lands having soils classified as prime farmland or farmland of statewide importance. The principal agricultural products produced within the area, as estimated by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), consist of corn, oats, winter wheat, soybeans, and corn silage (USDA, 2011). The potential relative value of the 91.27 ac. (36.9ha) of farmland acquired for the site would be 13,771 bushels (Bu.) of grain corn or 3947 bushels (Bu.) of soybeans annually (Table 19.3.1-2). These values are based on the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) crop production estimates for Rock County, WI during the period from 2001-2010.Other agricultural resources in the immediate area of the SHINE site include farms that are used for dairy production, beef production, and other livestock production (Figure 19.3.1-7). There are also commercial game harvest farms in the region of the site, which are owned by MacFarlane Pheasants, Inc. MacFarlane Pheasants Inc. is the largest pheasant farm in North America and has been in operation since 1929. The company specializes in the production of a variety of game birds including pheasants and Hungarian partridge (MacFarlane Pheasants, Inc., 2012). Hormel Foods has a food processing plant located in Beloit, WI, just outside of the region (Hormel, 2013).19.3.1.1.5Mineral ResourcesAccording to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Western Ecology Division's Ecoregions of Wisconsin (USEPA, 201 2a), the SHINE site is part of the Rock River Drift Plain Level IV ecoregion, which is located within the Southeastern Wisconsin Till Plains Level III ecoregion. The Rock River Drift Plain has generally steeper topography than surrounding ecoregions, with broad glacial drift outwash plains characterized by loamy deposits over sandy and gravelly soils with moderate to very rapid permeability. The most important mineral resources in this ecoregion are sand, gravel, and crushed stone (Zaporozec, Alexander, 1982). There are no gravel or sand mining operations on-site, however two sand and gravel operations occur within the region (Find the Data, 2012). No other mineral resources are known to be present in the region. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-3Rev. 019.3.1.1.6Major Population Centers and InfrastructurePopulation centers and the major infrastructure of Rock County are shown on Figure19.3.1-8. The only major population centers (> 25,000 residents) located within Rock County are Janesville and Beloit. Subsection 19.3.7 provides a description of the demographics of these centers and their community characteristics. The major transportation corridors within Rock County include Interstate Highways 39 (I-39) and 90 (I-90), US 14 and 51, and State Highway (SH) 11. Major rail lines or rail systems within the county are owned by Chicago and Northwestern Railroad and Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul, and Pacific Railroad. The only public airport located within the county is the SWRA in Janesville, Wisconsin. No major transportation waterways occur within the region.19.3.1.1.7Land Use PlansCurrent and future land use plans for the area immediately adjacent to the SHINE site and region are represented by the comprehensive plans for the City of Janesville (Vandewalle & Associates, 2009a and 2009b.) | ||
Land uses within the City of Janesville are characterized in the City's comprehensive plan (Vandewalle & Associates, 2009a). Land use categories included in the Janesville Comprehensive Plan include the following:*Residential, Exurban - generally single-family residential development on private well and on-site waste treatment systems, generally at densities between one dwelling unit per acre (0.4 ha) and one dwelling unit per 35 ac. (14.2ha).*Residential, Single-Family Urban - publicly sewered | Land uses within the City of Janesville are characterized in the City's comprehensive plan (Vandewalle & Associates, 2009a). Land use categories included in the Janesville Comprehensive Plan include the following: | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical | *Residential, Exurban - generally single-family residential development on private well and on-site waste treatment systems, generally at densities between one dwelling unit per acre (0.4 ha) and one dwelling unit per 35 ac. (14.2ha). | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical | *Residential, Single-Family Urban - publicly sewered singl e family residential development. | ||
*Residential, Two-Family/Townhouse - attached single family, two-family, and walk-up townhouse residential development. | |||
*Residential, Multi-Family - a variety of residential units focused in particular on multiple family housing (3+ units per building). | |||
*Office - Office, institutional, research, and office-support land uses. | |||
*Commercial - indoor commercial, retail, institutional and service uses with moderate landscaping and signage. | |||
*Light Industrial - indoor industrial land uses and controlled outdoor storage areas with moderate landscaping and signage. | |||
*Heavy Industrial - carefully controlled heavy industrial, storage, and disposal land uses, with limited landscaping and signage. | |||
*Community Facilities - large-scale public buildings, hospitals, youth and elderly service facilities, and special-care facilities. Small community facilities uses may be located in lands designated as other land use categories. | |||
*Parks and Open Space - park and public open space facilities devoted to playgrounds, play fields, trails, picnic areas, and related recreational activities, and conservation areas. | |||
*Extraction - quarries, gravel pits, clay extraction, peat extraction, and extraction-related land uses. | |||
*Vacant - undeveloped land within the City limits. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-4Rev. 0*Agriculture - agricultural and related uses, including cropland, farmsteads, operations, and single family residential development with maximum development densities of one dwelling unit per 35 ac. (14.2 ha). | |||
*Surface Water - lakes, rivers, creeks, and perennial streams. | |||
*Rights-of-Way - publicly owned land for roads, highways, and railroads.The total acreage of lands within the 2007 city limits that are classified in each of the land use categories are summarized in Table 19.3.1-3. Dominant land use categories include single family residential (24percent), rights of way (17percent), vacant lands (16percent), community facilities (11percent), and parks and open space (11percent) (Vandewalle & Associates, 2009a). Subsection 19.3.7.2 provides additional information regarding major employers (including industrial and commercial) in Janesville.The lands containing the SHINE site and its immediate environs to the east and south are listed as being agricultural lands on the existing land use map (Vandewalle & Associates, 2009a). The adjacent airport and associated lands west of US 51 are identified as "community facilities," and lands immediately to the northeast of the site are listed as "vacant." These "vacant" lands correspond to the parcels included as part of a Tax Increment Financing district proposed for development. However, according to the future land use plan of the City of Janesville, the site and its environs east of US 51 are proposed for development as light industrial land uses (Vandewalle & Associates, 2009b).19.3.1.2Visual Resources The visual setting of the area affected by the construction of the new SHINE facility is represented by agricultural viewsheds to the north and east that consist of predominately flat or a slightly rolling terrain dominated by cultivated fields (Figure 19.3.1-9). The site itself is composed completely of land used for agricultural purposes and has no established structures. The viewshed to the south of the SHINE site consists of both agricultural fields with some light development. Immediately adjacent to the southern border of the site are two large warehouses that support local agricultural operations and provide storage for large farming equipment. The viewshed to the west of the site is a light industrial development landscape that consists of the SWRA and its associated facilities. Specific elements of this landscape include the airport control tower, associated runways, and several large warehouses and hangers. The SWRA supports approximately 50,000 flight operations annually, and the site is in view of the persons utilizing the airport and visitors traveling to the area (Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, 2012a). The new SHINE facility is described and illustrated in Section 19.4.1.2 and is visible to motorists traveling to and from Janesville, WI, on US 51. The new facility is also visible from Airport Park, which is located northwest of the site across US 51. Residential neighborhoods are located north and northwest of the site, but presently there are trees and other vegetation bordering these neighborhoods that obstruct the view of the site.The visual resources and scenic quality of the existing site are rated using the USDOI-BLM Visual Resource Management System (USDOI-BLM, 1984). The Scenic Quality Classification is the rating of the visual appeal of the land designated for the site and is based on an evaluation of seven key factors: landform, vegetation, water, color, adjacent scenery, scarcity, and cultural modifications. The Scenic Quality is classified as either an "A," "B," or "C," with "A" as a high quality visual classification and "C" as a low quality visual rating. The site rates as a "C" classification for low Scenic Quality due to a lack of notable features, uniform landform, low vegetation diversity, an absence of water, mute colors, cultural modifications to adjacent Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-5Rev. 0scenery, and a commonality within the physiographic province. The Sensitivity Level, a measurement of the public concern for scenic quality, was also analyzed using six different indicators of public concern: types of users, amount of use, public interest, adjacent land uses, special areas, and other factors. The Sensitivity Level of the public concern for scenic quality is rated on a High (H), Moderate (M), or Low (L) scale. The site has an L sensitivity rating, as an area with low scenic values resulting from a low sensitivity to changes in visual quality by the type of users in the area, a low amount of use by viewers, low public interest in changes to the visual quality of the site, and a lack of special natural and wilderness areas. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-6Rev. 0Table 19.3.1-1 Summary of 2006 Land Use/Land Cover within SHINE Site and Regiona) Total may add up to more or less than 100 percent due to rounding. | |||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
Fry, et al., 2011. NLCD2006 Land Cover | Fry, et al., 2011. NLCD2006 Land Cover Class SHINE Site Regionac.haPercentac.haPercentOpen Water7963221.6%Developed, Open Space0.180.070.2%304312316.1%Developed, Low Intensity5858237111.7%Developed, Medium Intensity19687963.9%Developed, High Intensity9924012.0% | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical | Barren43170.1%Deciduous Forest329813356.6%Evergreen Forest68280.1%Mixed Forest100.0%Shrub/Scrub5052041.0% | ||
Grassland10494252.1%Pasture/Hay5896238611.7%Cultivated Crops91.0936.8699.8%25,23610,21350.2% | |||
Woody Wetlands7222921.4%Emergent Herbaceous Wetland7873181.6% | |||
Total(a)91.2736.94100.0%50,26220,339100.0% | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-7Rev. 0Table 19.3.1-2 Crop Production Estimates for SHINE Site and Rock County, Wisconsin YearPlantedHarvestedProductionYieldac.haac.haBu.Bu./ac. | |||
Corn2001140,60056,901128,00051,80217,920,0001402002160,50064,954149,70060,58417,664,6001182003151,50061,312140,80056,98219,571,2001392004155,00062,729141,00057,06323,124,0001642005166,00067,180150,00060,70522,200,0001482006152,00061,514141,00057,06322,419,0001592007174,00070,418165,00066,77625,740,0001562008161,00065,157152,00061,51422,192,0001462009162,00065,561153,00061,91925,245,0001652010158,50064,145142,00057,46724,679,600173.8Ten Year Avg., Rock County, WI158,11063,987146,25059,18722,075,540150.9Site Avg.91.2736.9491.2736.9413,771150.9Soybeans2001106,30043,020104,30042,2104,484,90043200299,20040,14697,90039,6203,524,400362003101,70041,158101,40041,0372,535,00025200487,60035,45286,90035,1683,736,70043200588,60035,85687,40035,3714,020,40046200689,20036,09989,00036,0184,539,00051200771,90029,09871,70029,0173,369,90047200881,10032,82181,00032,7812,956,50036.5200980,00032,37679,90032,3363,875,15048.5201086,00034,80485,50034,6024,822,20056.4Ten Year Avg., Rock County, WI89,16036,08388,50035,8163,786,41543.2Site Avg.91.2736.9491.2736.94394743.2 | |||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
USDA, 2011 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical | USDA, 2011 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-8Rev. 0Table 19.3.1-3 City of Janesville Land UseLand Use CategoryPercentResidential-Single Family Urban24% | ||
Residential-Two-Family/Townhouse2%Residential-Multi-Family2%Office1% | Residential-Two-Family/Townhouse2%Residential-Multi-Family2%Office1% | ||
Commercial4%Office1%Light Industrial4% | Commercial4%Office1%Light Industrial4% | ||
| Line 117: | Line 216: | ||
Extraction2% | Extraction2% | ||
Vacant16%Agricultural0%Surface Water2% | Vacant16%Agricultural0%Surface Water2% | ||
Right of Way17%Total(a)100%a) Total may add up to more or less than 100 percent due to rounding. | Right of Way17% | ||
Total(a)100%a) Total may add up to more or less than 100 percent due to rounding. | |||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
Vandewalle & Associates, 2009a. | Vandewalle & Associates, 2009a. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-9Rev. 019.3.2 AIR QUALITY AND NOISE19.3.2.1Regional Climatology19.3.2.1.1IntroductionClimate is a statistical description of the weather conditions that occur during a long period of time, usually several decades. Weather refers to short-term variations (minutes to months) in the atmosphere.Sources of data typically used to analyze the climate at a site include weather maps (depictions of areal weather phenomena at one instant of time), atlas maps summarizing long-term climate, records of weather at specific monitoring stations at single instants of time, and long-term climatic statistics at specific monitoring stations.The purpose of analysis of regional climate is to understand the local climate at the SHINE site in the context of the climate of the surrounding area. Climate phenomena are then analyzed at progressively smaller scales and within progressively smaller areas. As the area being analyzed decreases, some monitoring stations that are considered initially in the broad analysis are excluded because these stations are found to be unrepresentative of the site climate. The end result is a documented, systematic approach that defines local climate within a context that includes a broad surrounding region.19.3.2.1.2Regional ClimateThe SHINE site is located in south-central Wisconsin. The following discussion summarizes a variety of information that describes the general region in which the SHINE site is located. Because the information is derived from a variety of sources, the geographic area implied by the term "region" is somewhat variable in this introductory discussion. Subsection 19.3.2.1.3 defines a more specific region considered to have a climate representative of the SHINE site, and the subsequent subsections present detailed climatological data for that specific region. The SHINE site is located in a region with the Kppen classification "Daf", which is a humid continental climate with warm summers, snowy winters, and humid conditions (Trewartha, 1954). The climate features a large annual temperature range and frequent short duration temperature changes (NCDC, 2011a). Although there are no pronounced dry seasons, most precipitation occurs during the warmer months. During the autumn, winter, and spring, strong synoptic-scale surface cyclones and anticyclones frequently move across the site region. During the summer, synoptic-scale cyclones are usually weaker and pass north of the site region. Most air masses that affect the site region are generally of polar origin. However, air masses occasionally originate from arctic regions, or the Gulf of Mexico. Air masses originating from the Gulf of Mexico generally do not reach the site region during winter months. There are occasional episodes of extreme heat or high humidity during the summer. The windiest months generally occur during the spring and autumn. The annual average number of days with thunderstorms varies from approximately 45 at the southwest corner of the state of Wisconsin, to approximately 35 at the northeast corner of the state (Moran, J.M. and E.J. Hopkins, 2002). Hail is most frequent in the southwestern and west-central portions of the state, and is most common during summer months, peaking in late July. Tornadoes are relatively infrequent. Winter storms that affect the region generally follow one of three tracks shown in Figure19.3.2-1: Alberta, Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-10Rev. 0Panhandle, and Gulf Coast tracks. During an average winter, the ground is covered with snow about 60 percent of the time (NCDC, 2011a). Regional land use is primarily cropland (corn and beans) and dairy (Rand McNally, 1982 and 2005). The natural vegetation includes broadleaf deciduous trees (oak and hickory), evergreen trees, and medium height prairie grass. There are also several urban areas. The soil at the SHINE site is well-drained silt loam.The landforms of Wisconsin are described by the five physiographic provinces plotted on the map in Figure 19.3.2-2. Details of vegetation, topography, and elevations for those provinces are described in Table19.3.2-1 (Moran, J.M. and E.J. Hopkins, 2002). Most of the surface water impoundments in Wisconsin are located in the Northern Highland and Eastern Ridges and Lowlands physiographic provinces. Water also flows through extensive wetlands in the form of marshes and swamps. The Northern Highland province has the highest elevations, from which water drains northward to Lake Superior; eastward to Lake Michigan via the Menominee and Wolf Rivers; and westward to the Mississippi River via the St. Croix, Chippewa, Black, and Wisconsin Rivers. The Western Uplands province, which comprises most of the western border of the state with Minnesota, escaped recent glaciation. This allowed streams and rivers to form deeply incised valleys over geologic time. Portions of the uplands are referred to as the "driftless area" due to the lack of glacial debris, or "drift".Lake breeze phenomena occur near the shorelines of large bodies of water, such as Lake Michigan, which borders Wisconsin on the east (Moran, J.M. and E.J. Hopkins, 2002). These phenomena feature a circulation system in which air rises over the land and descends over the water, flows from the water toward the land near the ground surface, and flows from land toward the lake aloft. At the surface, the lake breeze appears as a relatively cool and humid wind that sweeps inland. The leading edge of a lake breeze is a miniature cold front and is referred to as the lake breeze front. As the lake breeze front moves inland, it lifts warmer air upward, sometimes causing clouds, or showers. The inland penetration of the lake breeze front varies from a few hundred yards to as much as 25 mi. (40.2 km) (Moran, J.M. and E.J. Hopkins, 2002). Since the SHINE site is located approximately 60 mi. (96.6 km) west of Lake Michigan, it is located too far from the lake be affected by lake breezes. Inland lakes that are located in the SHINE site region are too small to be associated with lake breeze circulations. Therefore, lake breeze circulations are not expected to affect the SHINE site.The local radiation balance and winds determine temperatures across the state. Movement of air masses, synoptic-scale fronts, and synoptic-scale cyclones and anticyclones strongly influence local temperature and precipitation. Seasonal changes in the intensity and movements of air masses and synoptic-scale weather systems, plus changes in radiation exposure at the ground bring about seasonal changes in temperature and precipitation. North and northwest winds generally bring cold, dry air. South and southeast winds typically bring warm, humid air. Calm wind conditions allow pooling of colder, denser air at locations with lower elevations such as valleys. Unequal rates of diurnal heating of the ground cause some local valley and hillside | ||
airflows.Maps of monthly mean dry bulb temperatures in Wisconsin are presented in Figures19.3.2-3 through 19.3.2-6 (Moran, J.M. and E.J. Hopkins, 2002). Mean monthly temperatures for winter (Figure19.3.2-3) show cooler temperatures at the northern end of the state, warmer temperatures near Lake Michigan, and slightly warmer temperatures near Lake Superior. Figure19.3.2-4 presents mean monthly temperatures in the spring. The springtime monthly Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-11Rev. 0temperature pattern in Figure19.3.2-4 is similar to the wintertime temperature pattern in Figure19.3.2-3, with colder temperatures in the north. The counties that border the Great Lakes have cooler temperatures during spring, since the water warms at a slower rate than the land and thereby cools the air near the shorelines.Mean monthly temperatures for summer (Figure 19.3.2-5) show a pattern similar to springtime monthly mean temperatures in Figure 19.3.2-4, with warmer interior temperatures in the south. Counties adjacent to Lakes Michigan and Superior are slightly cooler because the lake surfaces are relatively cooler than the land during the summer.Mean monthly temperatures for autumn (Figure 19.3.2-6) show warmer conditions in the southern interior. The temperatures show a pattern similar to those in the winter, with warmer temperatures at counties near the lake, since the land cools more quickly than the water.Wisconsin counties that border Lakes Michigan and Superior experience somewhat cooler summers, milder winters, and longer agricultural growing seasons than those counties at greater distances from the lakes. The lakes also occasionally produce lake effect snow during late autumn through winter.Maps of monthly mean water-equivalent precipitation in Wisconsin are presented in Figures 19.3.2-7 through 19.3.2-10 (Moran, J.M. and E.J. Hopkins, 2002). Generally, the average annual precipitation is higher in southern portions of the Midwest due to the proximity of the Gulf of Mexico, which is a major source of moisture (EDS, 1968). That same general pattern is observed over the state of Wisconsin. Superimposed over that general pattern is a local pattern of periodic lake-effect precipitation. During lake-effect precipitation events, Lakes Superior and Michigan are local sources of moisture that can cause precipitation adjacent to and downwind of the lake shorelines. Those periods of precipitation enhancement tend to occur when the lake water is warmer than the air, which generally occurs during winter. For example, the winter month precipitation in Figure 19.3.2-7 shows higher monthly water equivalent precipitation totals (approximately 1.2 to 2.2 inches [in.]) (3.0 to 5.6 centimeters [cm]) near the north and east boundary counties, caused by lake-effect snow from Lakes Michigan and Superior.The Madison, Wisconsin and Rockford, Illinois National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) weather observing stations (NCDC, 201 1a, NCDC, 2011c) are th e closest first-order weather stations, and are located approximately 40 mi. (64.4 km) north-northwest and 30 mi. (48.3 km) south-southwest of the SHINE site, respectively. "First-order" stations are defined as those on a 24-hour per day, year-round observing schedule with trained, certified observers.Climatic statistics for Madison presented in Table19.3.2-2 (NCDC, 2011a) show that monthly mean wind speeds range from 6.7 miles per hour (mph) (3.0 meters per second [m/s]) during the month of August to 10.1 mph (4.5 m/s) during the month of April. Annual mean wind speed is 8.5mph (3.8 m/s). Monthly prevailing wind directions are from the s outh-southwest during all months except the winter months of December through February, when the monthly prevailing winds are all from the northwest. Annual prevailing wind is from the south-southwest.Climatic statistics for Rockford presented in Table19.3.2-3 (NCDC, 2011c) show that monthly mean wind speeds are similar to those for Madison, and range from 7.0 mph (3.1 m/s) during the month of August, to 11.3 mph (5.1 m/s) during the month of April. Annual mean wind speed is 9.3mph (4.2 m/s). Monthly prevailing wind directions are similar to Madison, and blow from the south-southwest direction during all months except the period January through March, when the Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-12Rev. 0monthly prevailing winds are all from the northwest. Annual prevailing wind is from the south-southwest.Monthly mean relative humidities for Madison range from 66 percent during April and May, to 78percent during December (Table19.3.2-2). Rockford monthly mean relative humidities presented are similar to those from Madison, ranging from 66 percent during April and May, to 80percent during December (Table19.3.2-3).Mean monthly water equivalent precipitation and snowfall for Madison and Rockford (Table19.3.2-2 and Table19.3.2-3) are similar. Water equivalent precipitation ranges from minima of 1.25 in. (3.18 cm) during January in Madison and 1.34 in. (3.40 cm) during February in Rockford, to maxima during August of 4.33 in. (11.00 cm) at Madison, and during June of 4.80in. (12.19 cm) in Rockford. Mean monthly snowfall is limited to the months October through May, and ranges from a minimum of 0.1 in. (0.25 cm) at Madison and Rockford to a maximum of 12.9in. (32.77 cm) during January at Madison. Annual snowfall is 49.9 in. (126.75 cm) at Madison and 38.7 in. (98.30 cm) at Rockford.Table19.3.2-4 presents the mean numbers of days per month and per year of rain or drizzle, freezing rain or drizzle, snow, and hail or sleet at Madison and Rockford. Those parameters have very similar values for the two stations.Annual values of rain or drizzle days are 138 and 139 days for Madison and Rockford. For both Madison and Rockford, rain and drizzle days range from a minimum of 5 or 6 days during January, to a maximum of 16 days during May.Annual values of freezing rain or drizzle days are two for both Madison and Rockford. For both Madison and Rockford, freezing rain and drizzle days are zero during the months of May through September, and are a maximum of 1 day during the months of December and January.Snow typically occurs during 75 days per year at Madison, and 68 days per year at Rockford. Hail or sleet typically occurs during 2 days per year at both Madison and Rockford. Freezing rain or drizzle typically occurs during 2 days per year at both Madison and Rockford.19.3.2.1.3Identification of Region with Climate Representative of the SHINE SiteThe process of comparison of local (site) and regional climates requires a determination of which region is considered "representative" of climate at the SHINE site. That determination is described in this subsection.The SHINE site is located in central Rock County, Wisconsin which is at the south central edge of the state. It is located near the boundary of two Wisconsin physiographic provinces as presented in Figure 19.3.2-2, the Western Uplands and the Eastern Ridges and Lowlands. It is located in NOAA Cooperative Observer Network (COOP) Climate Division 8 South Central (Figure 19.3.2-11). The finished site grade elevation is approximately 827 feet (ft.) | |||
(252meters[m]) North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88). The land use in the site area is rural. | (252meters[m]) North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88). The land use in the site area is rural. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-13Rev. 0Summarizing, the site location is defined by the followi ng characteristics: a.Located in south-central Wisconsin, on rural prairie silt-loam soil.b.Located within till plains glacial deposits on the Central Lowland Province of the Interior Plains Division of the United States. It is on the border between the state of Wisconsin Eastern Ridge/Lowland and Western Upland Terrain, and most like the ridge/lowland to the east because the local topography is relatively gently rolling.c.Located outside the zone of influence of Lake Michigan lake breeze circulation systems.d.Located within the zone of influence of Lake Michigan effects on temperature and precipitation, including the following: added local warmth during winter and autumn, cooling during summer and spring, and additional local precipitation during winter, spring, and autumn.Based on the above summary characteristics, the perimeter of a surrounding geographic region, which is characterized as having the same climate as the site, is plotted on the regional map in Figure 19.3.2-12. That perimeter is bounded as follows:a.Bounded on the east by the 25-mi. (40.2 km) distance of maximum inland penetration of lake breeze circulations from Lake Michigan.b.Bounded on the south by the approximate southward limit of Lake Michigan's effects on the local climate of north-central Illinois, as presented in the mean precipitation and snowfall patterns in Figure 19.3.2-13 and Figure 19.3.2-14 and as described by local climatological data summaries for major Illinois monitoring stations. Annual isohyets and lines of equal snowfall are oriented northwest to southeast at the northeast corner of Illinois as shown in Figure 19.3.2-13 and Figure 19.3.2-14, illustrating the effects of Lake Michigan (Figure 19.3.2-15) on northern Illinois precipitation. Increased clouds and cooling effects due to Lake Michigan are des cribed in the climatological summary for Rockford, Illinois (NCDC, 2011c), but are not des cribed in the climat ological summaries for Springfield, Illinois farther to the south (NCDC, 2011d), or Mo line, Illinois farther to the southwest (NCDC, 2011b).c.Bounded on the west by the approximate westward limit of Lake Michigan's effects on the local climate of southern Wisconsin, as presented in the mean monthly temperature and precipitation, maps in Figure 19.3.2-3 through Figure 19.3.2-10.d.Bounded on the north by the approximate northward limit of Lake Michigan's effects on the local climate of central Wisconsin, as presented in the mean temperature and precipitation maps in Figure 19.3.2-3 through Figure 19.3.2-10. e.Bounded on the north by the approximate mean southern boundary of the Wisconsin Central Plain, as presented in Figure 19.3.2-2.This site climate region is then used to identify regional weather monitoring stations and Wisconsin and Illinois counties that can be used for comparisons in the analysis of local and regional climate. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-14Rev. 019.3.2.1.4Regional Data Sources The site climate region is identified in Subsection 19.3.2.1.3. Meteorological parameters from weather stations in the site climate region are available from a number of published data sources. Those data sources are described below.*Climatography of the United States No. 20 (Clim-20) statistical summaries from the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC).Clim-20 publications are typically available for COOP daily weather monitoring stations located within the site climate region. Those publications are of particular interest to agriculture, industry, and engineering applications. The publications include a variety of climate statistics useful for regional climate analysis. Those parameters include dry bulb temperature, daily precipitation, and snow fall. Descriptive statistics of those parameters include: mean, extremes, and mean number of days exceeding threshold values.COOP stations do not generally record humidity-related parameters, such as relative humidity, dew point or wet bulb temperatures. Therefore, wet bulb temperatures that are coincident with extreme dry bulb temperatures - which are of interest in regional climate analysis - are generally not available for COOP stations. Therefore, for COOP stations, it is often necessary to estimate coincident wet bulb temperatures using wet bulb temperatures recorded at other stations.*Climatological statistics available from Local Climatological Data (LCD) summaries published by NCDC. LCD annual summaries are typically available for meteorological stations located at major airports. Those summaries include climatic normals, averages and extremes. Thirty-year monthly histories are provided for the following parameters: mean temperature, total precipitation, total snowfall, and heating/cooling degree days. The summaries also include a narrative description of the local climate.*Statistical summaries available from the International Station Meteorological Climate Summary (ISMCS) (NCDC, 1996b).Those summaries are available for many domestic and international airports and military installations. The summaries include tabulations of statistics for several parameters of interest in regional climate analysis. The summaries also include a narrative description of local climate. Particularly useful and unique statistics available in the ISMCS are joint-frequency tables of dry bulb, and wet bulb temperature depression, and single-parameter frequency distributions of dry bulb and wet bulb temperatures.*Statistical summaries published by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc. (ASHRAE) (ASHRAE, 2009).ASHRAE climatic percentile information is available for worldwide locations including many U.S. airports with hourly surface weather observing stations. Parameters include dry bulb, wet bulb and dew point temperatures. Also included are: statistical design Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-15Rev. 0values of dry bulb with mean coincident wet bulb temperature, design wet bulb temperature with mean coincident dry bulb temperature, and design dew point with mean coincident dry bulb temperature.*Statistical summaries published by the U.S. Air Force Combat Climatology Center (AFCCC) (AFCCC, 1999). The AFCCC statisti cal summaries include values for dry and wet bulb temperatures.*American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) structural design standards for the site climate region (ASCE, 2006).The ASCE standards provide minimum load requirements for the design of buildings and other structures that are subject to building code requirements. Particularly useful and unique statistics of interest for climate analysis are values of basic wind speed on a map of the U.S. The basic speed is required by standards for determination of design wind loads. Also included are various adjustments and supplementary information dependent on site and structure characteristics. ASCE also provides maps of 50-year return interval snow pack and a methodology for converting 50-year values extracted from the maps to other return intervals (ASCE, 2006).*48-hour probable maximum precipitation (PMP).The 48-hour PMP is available from a study published by the U.S. Department of Commerce (USDOC) (USDOC, 1978). USDOC contains maps of estimated maximum probable precipitation amounts for a number of time periods (USDOC, 1978).*Tornado, waterspout, and other weather event statistics for counties in the site climate region from the NCDC online Storm Events Database (NCDC, 2011g) and "Storm Data" publications.The Storm Events Database contains a chronological listing, by state, of climate statistics of interest for climate analysis. Those statistics include: tornadoes, thunderstorms, hail, lightning, high winds, snow, temperature extremes, and other weather phenomena. Also included are statistics on personal injuries and property damage estimates.The "Storm Data" publications are monthly summaries of severe weather events published by NCDC. These publications provide supplemental information about specific severe weather events.*Maps of climatological parameters from the Climate Atlas of the United States (NCDC, 2002).This digital atlas provides color maps of climatic elements for the U.S., such as: temperature, precipitation, snow, wind, and pressure. The period of record for most maps is 1961-1990. The user extracts data from the atlas by selecting a parameter (e.g., dry bulb temperature), a statistical measure (e.g., mean), and a state.*Hourly meteorological data files in digital TD3505 (NCDC, 2006; NCDC, 2011j; NCDC, 2011k) and TD3280 (NCDC, 2005a; NCDC, 2011h; NCDC, 2011i) formats. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-16Rev. 0TD3280 is an older data file format that has recently been replaced by the TD3505 format. Hourly meteorological data files are available in TD3280 format through December, 2009. Data files for 2010 and 2011 are available in TD3505 format. Digital data files are available for worldwide locations from NCDC. These data sets contain hourly values of dry bulb temperature, humidity, wind speed/direction, and cloud cover. These data sets allow analysis of coincident meteorological conditions.19.3.2.1.5Identification and Selection for Analysis of Weather Monitoring Stations Located within the Site Climate RegionFigure 19.3.2-16 and Figure 19.3.2-17 present maps of the site climate region (identified in Figure 19.3.2-12), with additional annotations of locations within that region of NOAA Automated Surface Observing Stations (ASOS stations) (Figure 19.3.2-16), and NOAA COOP stations (Figure 19.3.2-17) for which NOAA "Clim-20" summaries have been published by NCDC. Table19.3.2-5 and Table19.3.2-6 present lists of the ASOS and COOP stations that are identified in Figure 19.3.2-16 and Figure 19.3.2-17. It should be noted that the ground elevations shown in Table19.3.2-5 and Table19.3.2-6 are given in ft. MSL (above Mean Sea Level) because that is the terminology used by NOAA in describing the ASOS and COOP stations (NCDC, 2001a; NCDC, 2001b; NCDC, 2001c; NCD C, 2001d; NCDC, 2001e; NCDC, 2001f; NCDC, 2001g; NCDC, 2001h; NCDC, 2001i; NCDC, 2001j; NCDC, 2001k; NCDC, 2001l; NCDC, 2001m; NCDC, 2001n; NCDC, 2001o; NCDC, 2001p; NCDC, 2001q; NCDC, 2001r; NCDC, 2001s; NCDC, 2001t; NCDC, 2001u; NCDC, 2001v; NCDC, 2001w; NCDC, 2001x; NCDC, 2012b). However, the MSL elevations are functionally equivalent to the NAVD 88 elevations used elsewhere in this subsection.A subset of the ASOS stations presented in Figure 19.3.2-16 is selected for analysis. The following criteria were used to select that subset of stations. The two first order stations Rockford and Madison are selected because of the extra statistical summaries in the form of NOAA annual summary LCD publications available for them. They also represent the geographical center of the site climate region. Four additional stations located approximately near the four corners of the site climate region are also selected to geographically bracket that region and avoid duplicate representation of similar areas. Those four additional stations are: Baraboo (at the northwest corner of the region), Fond du Lac (at the northeast corner of the region), Freeport (at the southwest corner of the region), and DuPage County (at the southeast corner of the region).All of the COOP stations presented in Figure 19.3.2-17 and Table19.3.2-6 are analyzed. Input information for that analysis includes statistics in the NOAA Clim-20 document for each station, that summarize climatic conditions during the 30 year period 1971 through 2000, and ten annual climatological data summaries for each of the states Wisconsin and Illinois, which summarize climatic conditions for each of the 10 years 2001 through 2010. Total years summarized for each of the COOP stations is, therefore, 40 years.19.3.2.2Regional Air QualityThe SHINE site is located in Rock County, Wisconsin which is part of the Rockford-Janesville- Beloit Interstate Air Quality Control Region (WDNR, 2011a). This air quality control region combines agricultural activities with the Beloit-Janesville, Wisconsin and Rockford, Illinois urban-industrial areas. The Wisconsin portion of the air quality control region, Rock County, is mostly flat to gently rolling farmland. Industry in the region includes manufacturing, foundry operations and electrical power plants (WDNR, 2011a). Rock County is currently in attainment for all criteria Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-17Rev. 0pollutants (ozone, particulate matter, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, and lead) (WDNR, 2011a, USEPA, 2011).Maintenance areas are those geographic areas that have a history of non-attainment but are currently in compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. In April 2004, the USEPA designated the following 10 counties in eastern Wisconsin as being in non-attainment with the 8-hour ozone air quality standard: Door, Kewaunee, Manitowoc, Sheyboygan, Washington, Ozaukee, Waukesha, Milwaukee, Racine, and Kenosha. However, in 2007, eight of the ten counties (Kewuanee, Manitowoc, Washington, Ozaukee, Waukesha, Milwaukee, Racine, and Kenosha) were re-designated as being in attainment with the 8-hour ozone standard | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | |||
(WDNR, 2012a). The resulting eight-county maintenance area and the two counties currently out of attainment with the 8-hour ozone air quality standard (Door and Sheyboygan counties) are situated to the northeast of the Rockford-Janesville-Beloit Interstate Air Quality Control Region, along the western shore of Lake Michigan. These are the closest non-attainment areas to the SHINE site.USEPA guidance (USEPA, 1990) states that a Class I visibility impact analysis is necessary for a major source locating within 100 km (160.9 mi.) of a Class I area. Class I areas are national parks and wilderness areas that are potentially sensitive to visibility impairment. Table19.3.2-7 lists the nearest Federal Class I areas to the SHINE site (NPS, 2011). The table shows that the closest Federal Class I area is the Rainbow Lake Wilderness Area, which is located approximately 455 km (approximately 283 miles) northwest of the SHINE site in far northern | |||
Wisconsin.Causes of regional air quality problems are generally due to a combination of factors. Typically, major factors include the following (Korshover, J., 1967): stagnating surface high pressure systems characterized by low surface wind speeds that linger over a region for several days, concentration of heavy industries and their air pollution emissions in relatively congested areas, and atmospheric mixing depths that limit the volume of air within which pollutants dilute (Holzworth, G.C., 1972). Additional factors can be involved for specific pollutants. For example, ozone air pollution is affected by not only the factors of stagnation, low wind speed, and limited mixing, but also requires the presence of additional factors that support the photochemical reactions in the atmosphere, including: intense sunlight, high temperature, and the presence of precursor chemical pollutants (Stern, A.C., 1973).19.3.2.3Severe Weather19.3.2.3.1Extreme Wind A statistic known as the "basic" wind speed is used for design and operating bases. Basic wind speeds are 50 year recurrence interval "nominal design 3-second gust wind speeds (mph) at 33ft. (10.1 m) above ground for Exposure C category", as defined in Figures 6-1 and 6-1C of ASCE, 2006.Several sources are considered to determine the wind speeds for the SHINE site. The basic wind speed for the SHINE site is 90 mph (40.2 m/s), based on the plot of basic wind speeds in Figure6-1C of ASCE, 2006. Basic wind speeds reported in AFCCC, 1999 for hourly weather stations in the site climate region are as follows: 90 mph (40.2 m/s) for Madison, Wisconsin, and 90 mph (40.2 m/s) for DuPage County Airport, West Chicago, Illinois. Consistency of the three values is the basis for selecting a value of 90 mph (40.2 m/s) for the SHINE site. That value Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-18Rev. 0applies to a recurrence interval of 50 years. Section C6.5.5 of ASCE, 2006 provides a method to calculate wind speeds for other recurrence intervals. Based on that method, a 100-year return-period value is calculated by multiplying the 50-year return-period value by a factor of 1.07. That approach produces a 100-year return-period three second gust wind speed for the SHINE site area of 96.3 mph (43.0 m/s).19.3.2.3.2Tornadoes and Waterspouts The NCDC Storm Events Database (NCDC, 2011g) provides information on historic storm events on a county basis. To use that database, 28 regional counties that are at least partially included within the site climate region are selected and presented on the map in Figure 19.3.2-18. Those counties approximate the representative climate region defined above in Subsection 19.3.2.1.3. The 28 counties are listed in Table19.3.2-8 (USCB, 2011). The NCDC Storm Events Database (NCDC, 2011g) was accessed to extract statistics on regional tornadoes and waterspouts. Information is extracted for the 28 regional counties. Those tornado and waterspout statistics, for the 62-year period May 1950 through July 2011, are presented in Table19.3.2-8. Strongest tornadoes in the database for Rock County (in which the SHINE site is located) are reviewed and are found to be of intensity F2. Table19.3.2-9 provides additional details on the most intense Rock County tornadoes. The strongest tornadoes found in the database for the seven counties adjacent to Rock County: Dane, Jefferson, Walworth, Boone, Winnebago, Stephenson, and Green counties, were reviewed and found to be F3 and F4 storms in Boone County, Illinois, and F3 storms in Dane County and Jefferson County, Wisconsin. Table19.3.2-10 presents additional details on the strongest tornadoes in counties adjacent to Rock County. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) guidance for siting research reactors (IAEA, 1987) was reviewed. This guidance requires design tornado information to be based on the maximum historical intensity within a radius of about 100 km (62 mi.) from the SHINE site. For the SHINE site, a 100 km (62 mi.) radius partially extends outside of the representative site climate region included within the 28 county region described above. An F5 intensity tornado was recorded on 8 June 1984 in Iowa County, Wisconsin, at the town of Barneveld, which is located approximately 49.7 mi. (80 km) in a west-northwest direction from the SHINE site.Regulatory Guide 1.76 specifies design-basis tornado characteristics for nuclear power reactors. Therefore, this guidance is not specifically applicable to an isotope production facility and Regulatory Guide 1.76 is used as a technical reference only. Wisconsin is located in Region I in Regulatory Guide 1.76 Figure 1. The design-basis tornado characteristics applicable to Region I are listed below: a.Maximum wind speed: 230 mph (103 m/s) b.Translational speed: 46 mph (21 m/s) c.Maximum rotational speed: 184 mph (82 m/s)d.Radius of maximum rotational speed: 150 ft (45.7 m/s)e.Pressure drop: 1.2 psi (83 millibars) f.Rate of pressure drop: 0.5 psi/s (37 millibars) | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-19Rev. 019.3.2.3.3Water Equivalent Precipitation Extremes This subsection examines and compares water equivalent precipitation extremes within the site climate region, and locally near the SHINE site. Daily total water equivalent precipitation is measured at the local NOAA COOP monitoring station at Beloit, Wisconsin, and several regional COOP stations within the site climate region.A PMP value for the SHINE site is presented in Subsection 19.3.2.3.6.Table19.3.2-11 presents maximum recorded 24-hour and monthly water equivalent precipitation values for the local COOP station at Beloit, and for the 18 regional COOP stations located within the site climate region defined in the map in Figure 19.3.2-17.Overall historic maximum recorded 24-hour water-equivalent precipitation from records for either the local Beloit station or for regional stations is 8.09 in. (20.55 cm) at DeKalb, Illinois. That event occurred on 18 July 1996. It was due to thunderstorms in a warm, moist tropical air mass streaming north from the Gulf of Mexico and into the warm sector southeast of a synoptic low pressure center located over northern Minnesota (NCDC, 1996a). Flash flooding was widespread over north-central and northeast Illinois due to record breaking rainfall during the 17-18 July period (NCDC, 1997).Overall historic maximum monthly water-equivalent precipitation from records for either the local Beloit station or for regional stations is 16.09 in. (40.87 cm) at Portage, Wisconsin. That month was August, 1980 (NCDC, 2001s).19.3.2.3.4Hail, Snowstorms and Ice Storms The mean hail or sleet frequencies during winter, spring, summer, autumn, and annual periods for Rockford and Madison are listed in Table19.3.2-12. Mean hail frequencies are less than one day per season at both stations. Statistics are very similar at Rockford and Madison, verifying some consistency across the site climate region.Hail events that are either severe (with hail size exceeding 0.75 in. (1.91 cm) in diameter) or large (with hail exceeding one inch in diameter) are reported to have occurred in Rock County, Wisconsin on 11 occasions during the period 1961-1990, or with a frequency of approximately 0.37 occurrences per year (NCDC, 2002). The largest hailstones t hat Rock County has experienced are as follows: of diameter 3.00 in. (7.62 cm) on one occasion during June 1930, of diameter 2.50 in. (6.35 cm) on one occasion during August 2006, and of diameter 2.00 in. (5.08cm) on one occasion during June 1975 and one occasion during June 1998 (NCDC,2011g).Daily total snowfall amounts are measured at the local NOAA COOP monitoring station at Beloit, Wisconsin, as well as at several regional COOP stations within the site climate region.Maximum recorded 24-hour snowfall from records for either the local Beloit station or for regional stations is 21.0 in. (53.34 cm) at Dalton, Wisconsin. That event occurred on 2 January 1999. It was due to a major winter synoptic cyclone (the "Blizzard of 1999") that developed in Colorado, curved northeast through the Great Lakes, then entered Canada (NCDC, 1999 and NCDC,2000). On 2 January 1999 the synoptic surf ace low was centered at the south tip of Illinois. A warm maritime tropical air mass with temperatures in the 80s°F was present to the Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-20Rev. 0south, and a continental arctic air mass with temperatures primarily in the teens °F was present to the north. An area of heavy snow covered the site climate region. This blizzard paralyzed south central and southeast Wisconsin. Ten to 21 in. (25.40 to 53.34 cm) of snow were deposited and wind gusts of 45 to 63 mph (20.1 to 28.2 m/s) occurred. Nearly all cities and villages declared snow emergencies, and airports were closed. Visibility in blowing snow was typically 0.5mi. (0.8 km). Structural damage to buildings and power lines was reported.Overall historic maximum monthly snowfall from records for either the local Beloit station, or for regional stations, is 50.4 in. (128.0 cm) at Watertown, Wisconsin. That month was January, 1979 (NCDC, 2001w). Overall, extreme snowfall conditions recorded at the local station at Beloit, Wisconsin are bracketed by conditions recorded at stations within the site climate region, supporting conclusions regarding climate region representativeness. | |||
A snow pack value for the SHINE site is presented in Subsection 19.3.2.3.6. | A snow pack value for the SHINE site is presented in Subsection 19.3.2.3.6. | ||
The mean number of days with freezing rain or drizzle is 2 days per year at both Madison, Wisconsin and Rockford, Illinois (Table19.3.2-4). A summary of 14 ice storms that affected Rock County, Wisconsin during the period 1995-2011 is presented in Table19.3.2-13 (NCDC, 2011g). That summary indicates the following.a.Several ice storms, as many as two or three, can occur per year. | The mean number of days with freezing rain or drizzle is 2 days per year at both Madison, Wisconsin and Rockford, Illinois (Table19.3.2-4). A summary of 14 ice storms that affected Rock County, Wisconsin during the period 1995-2011 is presented in Table19.3.2-13 (NCDC, 2011g). That summary indicates the following.a.Several ice storms, as many as two or three, can occur per year. | ||
b.Ice can accumulate periodically or during a consecutive period of anywhere from approximately two hours to 11 hours.c.Ice accumulations typically range | |||
Weathering and erosion have reduced terrain to nearly a plain. | Weathering and erosion have reduced terrain to nearly a plain. | ||
Scattered hills of resistant bedrock remain. | Scattered hills of resistant bedrock remain. | ||
Lake and swamp terrain.Relatively flat or gently rolling topography with occasional sandstone mesas, buttes, pinnacles.Numerous glacial landforms, lowest elevations of Wisconsin. Lake Winnebago is remnant of a larger glacial lake. Niagara cuesta is a rock ridge in the northeast in Door and Waukesha Counties.Escaped recent glaciation, allowing streams and rivers to form steep valleys. | Lake and swamp | ||
Portions of the uplands are referred to as the "driftless area" due to the lack of glacial debris, or "drift" ElevationsSeveral hundred feet above elevation of the Great Lakes1,400 to 1,650 ft. | |||
NAVD 88750 to 850 ft. | terrain.Relatively flat or | ||
NAVD 88Topographic relief of 100 to 200 feet above the elevation of Lake Michigan (mean lake elevation is approximately 600 ft. NAVD 88).Approximately 1,000 to 1,200 ft. NAVD 88, including some topographic relief approaching 500 feet. Rock bluffs, mounds (highest approximately 1,716 ft. NAVD 88). | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-32Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-2 Madison, Wisconsin Climatic Means and Extremes(Sheet 1 of 2)Table extracted from NCDC, 2011a. "POR" refers to the period of record (years). Refer to that reference for explanatory notes. | gently rolling topography with occasional sandstone mesas, buttes, pinnacles.Numerous | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-33Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-2 Madison, Wisconsin Climatic Means and Extremes(Sheet 2 of 2) Table extracted from NCDC, 2011a. "POR" refers to the period of record (years). Refer to that reference for explanatory notes. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-34Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-3 Rockford, Illinois Climatic Means and Extremes(Sheet 1 of 2) Table extracted from NCDC, 2011c. "POR" refers to the period of record (years). Refer to that reference for explanatory notes. | glacial landforms, lowest elevations of Wisconsin. Lake Winnebago is remnant of a larger glacial lake. Niagara cuesta is a rock ridge in the northeast in Door and Waukesha | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-35Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-3 Rockford, Illinois Climatic Means and Extremes(Sheet 2 of 2)Table extracted from NCDC, 2011c. "POR" refers to the period of record (years). Refer to that reference for explanatory notes. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | Counties.Escaped recent glaciation, allowing streams and rivers to form steep valleys. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | Portions of the uplands are referred to as the "driftless area" due to the lack of glacial debris, or | ||
Period of Record(years)(temp precip)Arboretum Univ of WIWIDane43 289 2686541 41Arlington Univ FarmWIColumbia43 1889 20108049 49BarabooWISauk43 2889 4482358 73Beaver DamWIDodge43 2788 5184062 74 BeloitWIRock42 3089 2780121 162BrodheadWIGreen42 3789 23790115 115 Charmany FarmWIDane43 489 2991049 49DaltonWIGreen Lake43 3989 12860n/aDe KalbILDe Kalb41 5688 47873119 130 Fond du LacWIFond du Lac43 4888 27760126 126Ft AtkinsonWIJefferson42 5488 5280070 70 Hartford 2 WWIWashington43 2088 2598067 73 HoriconWIDodge43 2688 38880109 109 Lake GenevaWIWalworth42 3688 26880n/a Lake MillsWIJefferson43 588 54817119 121 Madison Dane Co APWIDane43 889 2186679 79MarengoILMcHenry42 1888 39815156 156OconomowocWIWaukesha43 688 3085673 73 PortageWIColumbia43 3289 26775119 123 Prairie du SacWISauk43 1989 44780n/a Rockford APILWinnebago42 1289 673061 61StoughtonWIDane42 3789 45840n/a WatertownWIJefferson43 1088 44825121 121 Wisconsin DellsWIColumbia43 3789 4683589 89 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | |||
There was 1 injury.F21 Nov 19713.00100250,000A small tornado moved northeast in a mostly residential area along a line from 1.5 mi. (2.4 km) NNW to about 4 mi NNE of downtown Beloit. Several homes and garages were severely damaged. There was 1 injury.F28 May 198827.00173250,000Tornado affected Rock, Dane, and Jefferson counties. Many farm buildings and two homes were damaged.F227 Mar 19917.004402.5 millionTornado affected Green, Rock, Dane, and Jefferson counties. There were 5 injuries and 1 fatality.F225 Jun 19982.50100845,000Tornado moved from 2.3 mi. (3.7 km) WNW of Leyden to 1 mi. (1.6 km) NNE of Leyden. | "drift" ElevationsSeveral hundred feet above elevation of the | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | Great Lakes1,400 to 1,650 ft. | ||
NAVD 88750 to 850 ft. | |||
NAVD 88Topographic relief of 100 to 200 feet above the elevation of | |||
Lake Michigan (mean lake elevation is approximately 600 ft. NAVD 88).Approximately 1,000 to 1,200 ft. NAVD 88, | |||
including some topographic | |||
relief approaching 500 feet. Rock bluffs, mounds (highest approximately 1,716 ft. NAVD 88). | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-32Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-2 Madison, Wisconsin Climatic Means and Extremes(Sheet 1 of 2)Table extracted from NCDC, 2011a. "POR" refers to the period of record (years). Refer to that reference for explanatory notes | |||
. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-33Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-2 Madison, Wisconsin Climatic Means and Extremes(Sheet 2 of 2) | |||
Table extracted from NCDC, 2011a. "POR" refers to the period of record (years). Refer to that reference for explanatory notes | |||
. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-34Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-3 Rockford, Illinois Climatic Means and Extremes (Sheet 1 of 2) | |||
Table extracted from NCDC, 2011c. "POR" refers to the period of record (years). Refer to that reference for explanatory notes | |||
. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-35Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-3 Rockford, Illinois Climatic Means and Extremes(Sheet 2 of 2)Table extracted from NCDC, 2011c. "POR" refers to the period of record (years). Refer to that reference for explanatory notes | |||
. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-36Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-4 Madison, Wisconsin and Rockford, Illinois Additional Climatic Means and Extremes(Sheet 1 of 2) (a)a)Based on NCDC, 1996b. Period of record for Rockford is 1951-1995 and 1948-1995 for Madison.ParameterPeriodMadison, Wisconsin Rockford, IllinoisMean number of days with rain or drizzle(NCDC, 1996b)January56February55 March1011 | |||
April1515May1616June1514July1514August1413 September1313 October1313 November1011 December78 Annual138139Mean number of days with freezing rain or drizzle(NCDC, 1996b)January11February< 0.5< 0.5 March< 0.5< 0.5 April< 0.5< 0.5 | |||
May00June00July00August00 September00 October< 0.50 November< 0.5< 0.5 December11 Annual22 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-37Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-4 Madison, Wisconsin and Rockford, Illinois Additional Climatic Means and Extremes(Sheet 2 of 2)ParameterPeriodMadison, Wisconsin Rockford, IllinoisMean number of days with snow(NCDC, 1996b)January1817February1413 March1311 April43 May< 0.5< 0.5 June00 July00 August00 September< 0.50 October11 November98 December1615 Annual7568Mean number of days with hail or sleet(NCDC, 1996b)January0< 0.5February0< 0.5 March< 0.5< 0.5 April< 0.5< 0.5 May< 0.5< 0.5 June< 0.5< 0.5 July< 0.5< 0.5 August< 0.5< 0.5 September< 0.5< 0.5 October< 0.5< 0.5 November< 0.5< 0.5 December< 0.50 Annual22 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-38Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-5 List of NOAA ASOS Stations Located within the Site Climate Region(a,b,c)a) The site climate region and station locations are defined via the map in Figure 19.3.2-16.b) Extracted from NCDC, 2012b.c) MSL elevations are functionally equivalent to the NAVD 88 elevations in this table.NameUSAFIDNo.WBANIDNo.St.County NorthLatitude(deg min sec)West Longitude (deg min sec)GroundElev.(ft. MSL)ApproximateAvailable DS 3505 Digital Database Period of Record (years)Baraboo72650354833WISauk43 31 1989 46 159781997-2011 (15)Burlington7220594866WIRacine42 41 2388 18 147791948-2011 (64)De Kalb TaylorMunicipal Airport72207504871WIDe Kalb41 55 5588 42 289151973-2011 (39)Juneau Dodge County72650904898WIDodge43 25 3388 42 109361997-2011 (15)Du Page County72530594892ILDu Page41 54 5088 14 567581973-2011 (39)Fond du Lac CountyAirport72650604840WIFond du Lac43 46 1288 29 98071997-2011 (14)Freeport Albertus Airport72208204876ILStephen-son42 14 4589 34 558592004-2011 (8) | |||
Janesville SouthernWisconsinRegional72641594854WIRock42 37 189 1 588081973-2011 (39)Madison Dane County TruaxField72641014837WIDane43 8 2789 20 418661948-2011 (64) | |||
Middleton | |||
Municipal Morey Field720656n/aWIDane43 7 189 31 589282009-2011 (3)Monroe Municipal72641404873WIGreen42 36 5489 35 2710852001-2011 (10)Rochelle Municipal | |||
AirportKoritzField72218204890IL Ogle41 53 3489 4 407812004-2011 (8)Chicago Rockford IntlAirport72543094822 ILWinne-bago42 11 3489 5 347431973-2011 (39)WatertownM unicipalAirport72646454834WIJefferson43 10 188 43 18331995-2011 (17) | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-39Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-6 List of NOAA COOP Stations in the Site Climate Region for which Clim-20 Summaries are Available(a,b)a)The site climate region and station locations are defined via the map in Figure 19.3.2-17.b)MSL elevations are functionally equivalent to the NAVD 88 elevations in this table.NameSt.County NorthLatitude (deg min)West Longitude (deg min)GroundElev.(ft. MSL) | |||
Approx. | |||
Period of Record(years)(temp precip)Arboretum Univ of WIWIDane43 289 2686541 41Arlington Univ FarmWIColumbia43 1889 20108049 49BarabooWISauk43 2889 4482358 73Beaver DamWIDodge43 2788 5184062 74 | |||
BeloitWIRock42 3089 2780121 162BrodheadWIGreen42 3789 23790115 115 Charmany FarmWIDane43 489 2991049 49DaltonWIGreen Lake43 3989 12860n/aDe KalbILDe Kalb41 5688 47873119 130 Fond du LacWIFond du Lac43 4888 27760126 126Ft AtkinsonWIJefferson42 5488 5280070 70 Hartford 2 WWIWashington43 2088 2598067 73 HoriconWIDodge43 2688 38880109 109 Lake GenevaWIWalworth42 3688 26880n/a Lake MillsWIJefferson43 588 54817119 121 | |||
Madison Dane Co APWIDane43 889 2186679 79MarengoILMcHenry42 1888 39815156 156OconomowocWIWaukesha43 688 3085673 73 PortageWIColumbia43 3289 26775119 123 Prairie du SacWISauk43 1989 44780n/a Rockford APILWinnebago42 1289 673061 61StoughtonWIDane42 3789 45840n/a WatertownWIJefferson43 1088 44825121 121 Wisconsin DellsWIColumbia43 3789 4683589 89 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-40Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-7 Nearest Federal Class I Areas to the SHINE Site (a)a) Extracted from NPS, 2011.Class I AreaDistance from SHINE Site (km)Distance from SHINE Site (mi.)Direction from SHINE SiteRainbow Lake Wilderness Area, WI455283NorthwestSeney Wilderness Area, MI475295North-northeastIsle Royale National Park , MI610379North Mammoth Cave National Park, KY630391South-southeastBoundary Waters Canoe Area, MN640398North-northwestMingo Wilderness Area, MO645401SouthVoyageurs National Park MN730454North Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-41Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-8 Regional Tornadoes and Waterspouts(a,b,c)a)Period of record is May, 1950 through July, 2011.b)Based on NCDC, 2011g.c)Additionally, an F5 tornado occurred on 8 June 1984 in Iowa County, Wisconsin, at the town of Barneveld, which is located approximately 50 mi. (80 km) west-northwest of the SHINE site.StateCountyArea (mi. | |||
2)Number of Tornadoes Number of Waterspout sILBoone28280ILCarroll 466140ILCook1635510ILDe Kalb 635110ILDu Page 337240ILKane524190ILLake1368161ILLee729220ILMcHenry611 150ILOgle763190ILStephenson565 130ILWhiteside697 190WIAdams689170WIColumbia796 340WIDane1238560WIDodge907580WIFond du Lac766 430WIGreen585180WIGreen Lake380 300WIJefferson583 330WIJuneau804230WIKenosha 75491WIMarquette456 70WIRacine792201WISauk848230WIWalworth577 230WIWashington436 170WIWaukesha580 280 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-42Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-9 Details of Strongest Tornadoes in Rock County, Wisconsin(a,b,c)a) The SHINE site is located in Rock County, Wisconsin.b) Period of record is May, 1950 through July, 2011.c) Based on NCDC, 1960; NCDC, 1961; NCDC, 1970; NCDC, 1971; NCDC, 1988; NCDC, 1991; NCDC,1998, and NCDC, 2011g.Tornado IntensityDate Path Length (mi.) | |||
Path Width (yd.)Property Damage($)Additional DescriptionF215 Nov 19603.00672,500Occurred 1.5 mi. (2.4 km) south of Union, Wisconsin. Damage occurred to farm buildings, an abandoned restaurant, and a school roof.F222 Sep 19613.6022025,000Occurred 1 mi. (1.6 km) south of Whitewater, Wisconsin. Damage occurred to at least 15 farms. There was 1 injury.F29 Oct 197011.1050250,000The tornado moved NNW from the banks of the Rock River just north of Riverside Park (NW of Janesville) and 5 mi. (8.0 km) west of Edgerton toward Stoughton. An outbuilding was damaged. | |||
There was 1 injury.F21 Nov 19713.00100250,000A small tornado moved northeast in a mostly residential area along a line from 1.5 mi. (2.4 km) NNW to about 4 mi NNE of downtown Beloit. Several homes and | |||
garages were severely damaged. There was 1 injury.F28 May 198827.00173250,000Tornado affected Rock, Dane, and Jefferson counties. Many farm buildings and two homes were damaged.F227 Mar 19917.004402.5 millionTornado affected Green, Rock, Dane, and Jefferson counties. There were 5 injuries and 1 fatality.F225 Jun 19982.50100845,000Tornado moved from 2.3 mi. (3.7 km) WNW of Leyden to 1 mi. (1.6 km) NNE of Leyden. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-43Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-10 Details of Strongest Tornadoes in Surrounding CountiesAdjacent to Rock County, Wisconsin(Sheet 1 of 2)(a,b,c,d,e,f)Tornado IntensityDateCounty Path Length (mi.)Path Width (yd.)Property Damage($)Additional DescriptionF421 Apr 1967Boone11.501200250,000Tornado moved near 50 mph (22.4 m/s) towards ENE to E, from 2 mi. (3.2 km) SE of Cherry Valley to two mi. north of Woodstock. Numerous reports of multiple funnel sightings were substantiated by damage. Almost complete destruction directly in path with major wind damage on either side. Many farm homes completely destroyed. Woods were stripped with large trees uprooted or snapped off. About 5 percent of the path was through an urban area, which was the SE corner of Belvidere, where a high school was hit. There were 450 injuries and 24 fatalities.F37 Jan 2008Boone7.001002.0 millionTornado traveled from about 1.2 mi. (1.9 km) N of Poplar Grove in Boone County, to about 3.2 mi (5.1 km) NE of Harvard in McHenry County. A large barn and farmhouse were destroyed, and other buildings severely damaged. Damage also occurred to power lines. Large trees were snapped, uprooted, and stripped of branches. There were 4 injuries.F32 Aug 1967Danen/an/a25,000Tornado moved SE on the N shore of Lake Mendota in the town of Westport, about 100 yards (0.1 km) inland. Three cottages were destroyed and several homes slightly damaged. There were 5 injuries and 2 fatalities. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-44Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-10 Details of Strongest Tornadoes in Surrounding CountiesAdjacent to Rock County, Wisconsin(Sheet 2 of 2)a) The SHINE site is located in Rock County, WI.b) Counties adjacent to Rock County include: Green (WI), Dane (WI), Jefferson (WI), Walworth (WI), Boone (IL), Winnebago (IL), and Stephenson (IL).c) Period of record is May, 1950 through July, 2011. | |||
d) "n/a" means information not available. | d) "n/a" means information not available. | ||
e) Based on data in references NCDC, 1967a; NCDC, 1967b; NCDC, 1975; NCDC, 1980; NCDC, 1992; NCDC, 2005b; NCDC, 2008; and NCDC, 2011g.f) Additionally, an F5 tornado occurred on 8 June 1984 in Iowa County, Wisconsin, at the town of Barneveld, which is located approximately 50 mi. (80 km) west-northwest of the SHINE site.Tornado IntensityDateCounty Path Length (mi.)Path Width (yd.)Property Damage($)Additional DescriptionF34 Jun 1975Dane2.303325,000Tornado touched down three miles north of Sun Prairie and moved towards the east. Two farms had extensive damage and one home was destroyed.F317 Jun 1992Dane16.0040025.0 millionTornado occurred 2 mi. | e) Based on data in references NCDC, 1967a; NCDC, 1967b; NCDC, 1975; NCDC, 1980; NCDC, 1992; NCDC, 2005b; NCDC, 2008; and NCDC, 2011g.f) Additionally, an F5 tornado occurred on 8 June 1984 in Iowa County, Wisconsin, at the town of Barneveld, which is located approximately 50 mi. (80 km) west-northwest of the SHINE site.Tornado IntensityDateCounty Path Length (mi.)Path Width (yd.)Property Damage($)Additional DescriptionF34 Jun 1975Dane2.303325,000Tornado touched down three miles north of Sun Prairie and moved towards the east. Two farms had extensive damage and one home was destroyed.F317 Jun 1992Dane16.0040025.0 millionTornado occurred 2 mi. | ||
(3.2 km) north of Belleville. | (3.2 km) north of Belleville. | ||
There were 30 injuries.F318 Aug 2005Dane17.0060034.3 millionStrong and destructive tornado started about 2.8 mi. (4.5 km) SE of Fitchburg and moved slowly ESE to the southern edge of Lake Kegonsa through residential neighborhoods including Dunn, Pleasant Springs, and Stoughton. There was extensive damage to homes, businesses, farm buildings, vehicles, power lines, and trees. There were 23 injuries and 1 fatality.F35 Jun 1980Jefferson4.00n/a25,000Tornado formed near Rock River at 0.25 mi. (0.4 km) E of Watertown, lifted and moved SE where it touched down a second time 1 mi. (1.6 km) SE of Pipersville. | There were 30 injuries.F318 Aug 2005Dane17.0060034.3 millionStrong and destructive tornado started about 2.8 mi. (4.5 km) SE of Fitchburg and moved slowly ESE to the southern edge of Lake Kegonsa through residential neighborhoods including Dunn, Pleasant Springs, and Stoughton. There was extensive damage to homes, businesses, farm buildings, vehicles, power lines, and trees. There were 23 injuries and 1 | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | |||
fatality.F35 Jun 1980Jefferson4.00n/a25,000Tornado formed near Rock River at 0.25 mi. (0.4 km) E of Watertown, lifted and moved SE where it touched down a second time 1 mi. (1.6 km) SE of | |||
Pipersville. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-45Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-11 Precipitation Extremes at Local and Regional NOAA COOP Meteorological Monitoring Stations within the Site Climate Region (a,b,c)a) The site climate region and station locations are defined in Figure 19.3.2-17.b) Based on 1971-2000 da ta in NCDC, 2001a-x.c) Madison and Rockford statistics were updated through the year 2010 from NCDC, 2011a and NCDC,2011c.Station NameStateCountyMaximum Recorded24-HourRainfall(in.)Maximum RecordedMonthlyRainfall(in.)Maximum Recorded24-HourSnowfall(in.)Maximum Recorded MonthlySnowfall(in.)Arboretum Univ of | |||
WIWIDane6.0012.0712.025.5Arlington Univ FarmWIColumbia5.1012.9214.028.0BarabooWISauk7.7814.7912.035.2Beaver DamWIDodge4.4115.0513.030.0 BeloitWIRock5.7714.3911.022.0BrodheadWIGreen6.6213.1110.031.1Charmany FarmWIDane5.8511.4713.020.5DaltonWIGreen Lake4.6913.7721.025.5DeKalbILDe Kalb8.0914.2315.634.5Fond du LacWIFond du Lac6.8312.7014.025.1 | |||
Ft AtkinsonWIJefferson4.479.0514.039.0Hartford 2 WWIWashington5.2011.2312.033.0 HoriconWIDodge5.9414.7216.040.0Lake GenevaWIWalworth3.8811.3013.238.5 Lake MillsWIJefferson4.9311.3111.031.0Madison Dane Co APWIDane5.2815.1817.340.4MarengoILMcHenry5.1511.7012.021.0OconomowocWIWaukesha5.3811.3911.528.7PortageWIColumbia6.2916.0912.534.0Prairie du SacWISauk5.7311.4111.623.5Rockford APILWinnebago6.4213.9811.430.2StoughtonWIDane5.058.8612.035.5WatertownWIJefferson6.6510.4713.050.4Wisconsin DellsWIColumbia7.6714.1314.028.4 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-46Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-12 Mean Seasonal and Annual Hail or Sleet Frequencies at Rockford, Illinois and Madison, Wisconsin (a)a) Statistics from NCDC, 2011a and NCDC, 2011c.StationWinterSpringSummerAutumnAnnualRockford<0.3<0.5<0.5<0.5<0.5Madison<0.2<0.5<0.5<0.5<0.7 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-47Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-13 Ice Storms that have Affected Rock County, Wisconsin (a)a) Based on 1995 - 2011 data in NCDC, 2011g.Date of StormDescription of Ice Storm26 Feb 1995Freezing rain and freezing drizzle. Coating of ice up to one-quarter inch.26 Nov 1995Two to six hour period of sleet and/or freezing rain glazed road surfaces.13 Dec 1995Ice accumulations of one-quarter to one-half inch on top of one to five inches of snow. A glazing of less than one-quarter inch of freezing rain or freezing drizzle.4 Feb 1997Several hours of freezing rain, accumulated to one quarter inch. Sheets of ice on roads and sidewalks, especially rural.3 Feb 2003Periodic light freezing drizzle of light freezing rain glazed roads and sidewalks.7 Apr 2003Freezing drizzle left crusty layers. | |||
16 Jan 2004Freezing rain caused road surfaces to become very slippery due to initial ice glazing of 1/16 to 1/8 inch.7 Mar 2004Freezing drizzle/rain generated a thin layer of ice on road surfaces. | 16 Jan 2004Freezing rain caused road surfaces to become very slippery due to initial ice glazing of 1/16 to 1/8 inch.7 Mar 2004Freezing drizzle/rain generated a thin layer of ice on road surfaces. | ||
18 Dec 2004Light freezing drizzle coated roads and bridges during morning hours.1 Jan 2005Pockets of freezing rain or drizzle resulted in a light glaze of ice on many road surfaces and sidewalks.17 Feb 2008Ice storm affected a 25 to 30 mile wide area stretching from Janesville to Ft. Atkinson to Delafield to Wes Bend to Port Washington, with about 11 hours of freezing rain. Ice accumulations ranged from one quarter to one half inch. Roads were icy. 8 Dec 2008Freezing rain produced ice accumulations of 1/10 to 2/10 inch near the Illinois border.28 Mar 2009Mixture of sleet, rain, freezing rain and snow caused very hazardous driving conditions. Ice accumulations were 0.10 inch.23 Dec 2009Freezing rain during afternoon hours resulted in a low-end ice storm with ice accumulations of one quarter to one half inch. Trees and power lines were coated, causing them to break. | 18 Dec 2004Light freezing drizzle coated roads and bridges during morning hours.1 Jan 2005Pockets of freezing rain or drizzle resulted in a light glaze of ice on many road surfaces and sidewalks.17 Feb 2008Ice storm affected a 25 to 30 mile wide area stretching from Janesville to Ft. Atkinson to Delafield to Wes Bend to Port Washington, with about 11 hours of freezing rain. Ice accumulations ranged from one quarter to one half inch. Roads were icy. 8 Dec 2008Freezing rain produced ice accumulations of 1/10 to 2/10 inch near the Illinois border.28 Mar 2009Mixture of sleet, rain, freezing rain and snow caused very hazardous driving conditions. Ice accumulations were 0.10 inch.23 Dec 2009Freezing rain during afternoon hours resulted in a low-end ice storm with ice accumulations of one quarter to one half inch. Trees and power lines were coated, causing them to break. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-48Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-14 Mean Seasonal Thunderstorm Frequencies at Rockford, Illinois and Madison, Wisconsin (a)a) Statistics from NCDC, 2011a and NCDC, 2011c. | ||
StationWinter(days)Spring(days)Summer(days)Autumn(days)Rockford0.34.07.42.7Madison0.23.67.12.3 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-49Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-15 Design Wet and Dry Bulb Temperatures (a)a) 0.4%, 1% and 2% temperatures from ASHRAE, 2009. 5% temperatures from NCDC, 1996bStatisticBounding Value (°F)Maximum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 0.4 percent91.5 (Rockford)Mean coincident WBT (MCWB) at the 0.4 percent DBT75.0 (Rockford) | |||
Maximum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 2.0 percent85.8 (Rockford)Mean coincident WBT (MCWB) at the 2.0 percent DBT72.0 (Rockford)Minimum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 0.4 percent-9.1 (Madison)Minimum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 1.0 percent-2.9 (Madison)Maximum WBT with annual exceedance probability of 0.4 percent78.3 (Du Page County Airport)Maximum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 5 percent81 (Rockford)Minimum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 5 percent9 (Madison) | Maximum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 2.0 percent85.8 (Rockford)Mean coincident WBT (MCWB) at the 2.0 percent DBT72.0 (Rockford)Minimum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 0.4 percent-9.1 (Madison)Minimum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 1.0 percent-2.9 (Madison)Maximum WBT with annual exceedance probability of 0.4 percent78.3 (Du Page County Airport)Maximum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 5 percent81 (Rockford)Minimum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 5 percent9 (Madison) | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-50Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-16 Estimated 100-Year Return Maximum and Minimum DBT, MCWB coincident with the 100-Year Return Maximum DBT, Historic Maximum WBT and Estimated 100-Year Annual Maximum Return WBT StationEstimated 100-yr maximum DBT (°F)MCWB coincident with 100-yr maximum DBT (°F)HistoricmaximumWBT (°F)Estimated 100-yrmaximumWBT (°F)Estimated 100-yr minimumDBT (°F)Rockford104.88083.685.9-35.1Madison104.37585.086.0-33.4Bounding value104.88085.086.0-35.1 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-51Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-17 Dry Bulb Temperature Extremes at Local and Regional NOAA COOP Meteorological Monitoring Stations within the Site Climate Region(a,b,c,d)a) The site climate region and station locations are defined in Figure 19.3.2-17.b) Based on 1971-2000 data in NCDC, 2001a-x. | ||
c) Rockford and Madison statistics were updated through the year 2010 from NCDC. 2011a and NCDC, 2011c.d) The highest and lowest dry bulb temperatures in the region are in bold font. | c) Rockford and Madison statistics were updated through the year 2010 from NCDC. 2011a and NCDC, 2011c.d) The highest and lowest dry bulb temperatures in the region are in bold font. | ||
(-35° - +55°C) 1°F RMSE over entire range with maximum error of 2°F 1° Ftime constant 2 minRelative humidity5 - 100 percent 5 percent 1 percenttime constant < 2 minWind speed2 - 85 knotsa) +/- 2 knots up to 40 knotsb) RMSE +/- 5 percent above 40 knots1 knota) distance constant < 10 mb) 2 knot | StationNameStateCounty Maximum RecordedDry BulbTemperature | ||
(°F)MinimumRecordedDry Bulb Temperature | |||
(°F)Arboretum Univ. of WIWIDane108-38Arlington Univ. FarmWIColumbia102-36 BarabooWISauk102-45Beaver DamWIDodge100-36BeloitWIRock102-26BrodheadWIGreen102-36Charmany FarmWIDane102-34DaltonWIGreen Lake103-39 De KalbILDe Kalb103-27Fond du LacWIFond du Lac103-41Ft AtkinsonWIJefferson102-39Hartford 2 WWIWashington105-35 HoriconWIDodge101-36Lake GenevaWIWalworth106-27 Lake MillsWIJefferson104-33Madison Dane Co APWIDane104-37MarengoILMcHenry109-29 OconomowocWIWaukesha101-33 PortageWIColumbia103-35 Prairie du SacWISauk103-42Rockford APILWinnebago104-27StoughtonWIDane103-35WatertownWIJefferson103-33Wisconsin DellsWIColumbia102-43 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-52Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-18 FAA Specifications for Automated Weather Observing Stations(a)a) From FAA, 2011ParameterRangeAccuracyResolutionOtherDry bulb temperature-30° - +130°F | |||
(-35° - +55°C) 1°F RMSE over entire range with maximum error of 2°F 1° Ftime constant 2 minRelative humidity5 - 100 percent 5 percent 1 percenttime constant < 2 minWind speed2 - 85 knotsa) +/- 2 knots up to 40 knotsb) RMSE +/- 5 percent above 40 knots1 knota) distance constant < 10 mb) 2 knot threshold Wind direction1°- 360° azimuth+/- 5 percent RMSE1°a) time constant < 2 secondsb) 2 knot thresholdPressure17.58 - 31.53 in. Hga) +/- 0.02 in. Hg RMSE; b) maximum error 0.02 in. Hg 0.001 in. Hg drift 0.02 in. Hg for period not less than 6 monthsVisibility< 1/4 - 10 mi.a) 1/4 1/4 mi.: +/- 1/4 mi. b) 1-1/2 3/4 mi.: + 1/4 , -1/2 mi. | |||
c) 2 1/2 mi.: +/- 1/2 mi. | c) 2 1/2 mi.: +/- 1/2 mi. | ||
d) 3 1/2 mi.: +1/2, -1 mi. | d) 3 1/2 mi.: +1/2, -1 mi. | ||
e) 4 mi.: +/- 1 mi.< 1/4, 1/4, 1/2, 3/4, 1, 1-1/4, 1-1/2, 2, 2-1/2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 10 and > 10 mi.time constant 3 minPrecipitation0.01 - 5 in/hr0.002 in/hr RMSE or 4 percent, which ever is greater0.01 in.Cloud height 0 to 12,500 ft 100 ft. or 5 percent, which ever is greatera) 0 - 5,500 ft.: 50 ft. | |||
e) 4 mi.: +/- 1 mi.< 1/4, 1/4, 1/2, 3/4, 1, 1-1/4, 1-1/2, 2, 2-1/2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 10 and > 10 | |||
mi.time constant 3 minPrecipitation0.01 - 5 in/hr0.002 in/hr RMSE or 4 percent, which ever is greater0.01 in.Cloud height 0 to 12,500 ft 100 ft. or 5 percent, which ever is greatera) 0 - 5,500 ft.: 50 ft. | |||
b) 5,501 -10,000 ft.: 250 ft. | b) 5,501 -10,000 ft.: 250 ft. | ||
c) > 10,000 ft.: 500 ft.a) sampling rate at least once every 30 seconds b) at least three cloud layers when visibility 1/4 mi.Time0000 - 2359 UTCwithin 15 seconds each month1 second Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | c) > 10,000 ft.: 500 ft.a) sampling rate at least once every 30 seconds b) at least three cloud layers when visibility 1/4 mi.Time0000 - 2359 UTCwithin 15 seconds each month1 second Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-53Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-19 Annual Data Recovery Rates (in Percent) of Dry Bulb Temperatures, Relative Humidity, Wind Speed, and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport for 2005-2010 (a)a) From NCDC, 2011lYearDry Bulb Temperature Relative HumidityWind SpeedWind Direction200595.995.894.094.0200693.092.991.191.1200787.787.687.387.3 200892.692.691.291.2200993.993.692.792.6201093.893.792.492.4 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-54Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-20 Historical Dry Bulb Temperatures, Relative Humidity, and Wind Speed from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport for 2005-2010 (a)a) From NCDC, 2011lDry Bulb Temperature (°F) | ||
Relative Humidity(percent)Wind Speed (mph)MonthMaximum Minimum AverageAverageMaximum AverageJanuary61-2022.679.2359.2February59-1724.276.0498.7 March77736.872.7338.9April841949.763.24010.4May933059.265.5318.8 June934369.071.3487.0July974671.974.7316.1August934571.973.3385.8 September953464.072.8306.5October902351.572.4388.0November771240.173.1339.2 December55-824.082.4448.6Average811848.773.1388.1 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-55Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-21 Annual Joint Data Recovery Rates of Wind Speed, Wind Direction, and Computed Pasquill Stability Class from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (a)a) From NCDC, 2011l YearJoint Data Recovery(percent)200593.6200690.5200786.0 200890.6200991.7201091.7 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-56Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-22 Pasquill Stability Class Frequency Distributions from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (Percent) 2005-2010(a)a) From NCDC, 2011lFrequency of Occurrence (Percent)Pasquill Class2005200620072008200920102005-2010 A0.780.670.860.681.181.160.89 B5.003.433.613.645.245.394.40C11.8811.3110.1511.1810.6711.9811.21D52.9056.4556.6755.4454.0050.1954.24 E8.838.248.157.417.317.087.83F10.1010.2810.359.699.5910.4810.08G10.519.6210.2111.9612.0113.7211.35Total100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-57Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-23 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class A) | |||
(a)a)From NCDC, 2011l Speed (m/s)N NNENEENEEESESESSESSSWSWWSWWWNWNWNNW TotalCalm3230.00 < WS < 1.00 00000010000000001 1.00 < WS < 2.00 00112102000020009 2.00 < WS < 3.00 623957969553955492 3.00 < WS < 4.00 00000000000000000 4.00 < WS < 5.00 00000000000000000 5.00 < WS < 6.00 00000000000000000 6.00 < WS < 8.00 000000000000000008.00 < WS < 10.00 00000000000000000> 10.00 00000000000000000Totals6241078108955311554425 Speed (m/s)Calm0.680.00 < WS < 1.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 1.00 < WS < 2.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.02 2.00 < WS < 3.00 0.010.000.010.020.010.010.020.010.020.010.010.010.020.010.010.010.19 3.00 < WS < 4.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 4.00 < WS < 5.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 5.00 < WS < 6.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 6.00 < WS < 8.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.008.00 < WS < 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00> 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00Totals0.010.000.010.020.010.020.020.020.020.010.010.010.020.010.010.010.89 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-58Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-24 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class B) | |||
(a)a) From NCDC, 2011l Speed (m/s)N NNENEENEEESESESSESSSWSWWSWWWNWNWNNW TotalCalm6970.00 < WS < 1.00 00000000000000000 1.00 < WS < 2.00 51012811115481387125134136 2.00 < WS < 3.00 31252723292321222128402735332319427 3.00 < WS < 4.00 47393429383137474556614362613137698 4.00 < WS < 5.00 359106253132185191289138 5.00 < WS < 6.00 00000000000000000 6.00 < WS < 8.00 000000000000000008.00 < WS < 10.00 00000000000000000> 10.00 00000000000000000Totals8679827084676876871181178212811175692096 Speed (m/s)Calm1.460.00 < WS < 1.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 1.00 < WS < 2.00 0.010.020.030.020.020.020.010.010.020.030.020.010.030.010.030.010.29 2.00 < WS < 3.00 0.070.050.060.050.060.050.040.050.040.060.080.060.070.070.050.040.90 3.00 < WS < 4.00 0.100.080.070.060.080.070.080.100.090.120.130.090.130.130.070.081.46 4.00 < WS < 5.00 0.010.010.020.020.010.000.010.010.030.040.020.010.040.030.020.020.29 5.00 < WS < 6.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 6.00 < WS < 8.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.008.00 < WS < 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00> 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00Totals0.180.170.170.150.180.140.140.160.180.250.250.170.270.230.160.144.40 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-59Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-25 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class C) | |||
(a)a) From NCDC, 2011l Speed (m/s)N NNENEENEEESESESSESSSWSWWSWWWNWNWNNW TotalCalm11180.00 < WS < 1.00 00000000000000000 1.00 < WS < 2.00 152571567315151661814149167 2.00 < WS < 3.00 34242734251925283738573559535830583 3.00 < WS < 4.00 523939392439245665837272105946059922 4.00 < WS < 5.00 71724957544545811111361481141591501201011513 5.00 < WS < 6.00 422931273626174581105876561915356852 6.00 < WS < 8.00 05564565121221182381021428.00 < WS < 10.00 0001300043631110032> 10.00 000011022030501015Totals2141711561711621411242203273924103134414113162575344 Speed (m/s)Calm2.350.00 < WS < 1.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 1.00 < WS < 2.00 0.030.000.010.010.030.010.010.010.030.030.030.010.040.030.030.020.35 2.00 < WS < 3.00 0.070.050.060.070.050.040.050.060.080.080.120.070.120.110.120.061.22 3.00 < WS < 4.00 0.110.080.080.080.050.080.050.120.140.170.150.150.220.200.130.121.93 4.00 < WS < 5.00 0.150.150.100.120.110.090.090.170.230.290.310.240.330.310.250.213.17 5.00 < WS < 6.00 0.090.060.070.060.080.050.040.090.170.220.180.140.130.190.110.121.79 6.00 < WS < 8.00 0.000.010.010.010.010.010.010.010.030.030.040.040.050.020.020.000.308.00 < WS < 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.010.000.000.000.010.010.010.010.020.000.000.000.07> 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.010.000.010.000.000.000.03Totals0.450.360.330.360.340.300.260.460.690.820.860.660.930.860.660.5411.21 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-60Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-26 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class D) | |||
(a)a) From NCDC, 2011l Speed (m/s)N NNENEENEEESESESSESSSWSWWSWWWNWNWNNW TotalCalm13530.00 < WS < 1.00 000000000000000001.00 < WS < 2.00 393140364532251831272430473528405282.00 < WS < 3.00 24116816515820416415413718318518014025420121215028963.00 < WS < 4.00 32320520522427122020321334228223724033123926023640314.00 < WS < 5.00 32618918620027419016120238225018220331923526724138075.00 < WS < 6.00 37422924826329720519425646847632125348634438132651216.00 < WS < 8.00 25915120129134621817422761748838133460544847137955908.00 < WS < 10.00 632861901485931531391701121122391441661151730> 10.00 2768276825142172678196120745539800Totals16521007111412891653111395611272234194515181408240117201840152625856 Speed (m/s)Calm2.840.00 < WS < 1.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.001.00 < WS < 2.00 0.080.070.080.080.090.070.050.040.070.060.050.060.100.070.060.081.112.00 < WS < 3.00 0.510.350.350.330.430.340.320.290.380.390.380.290.530.420.440.316.073.00 < WS < 4.00 0.680.430.430.470.570.460.430.450.720.590.500.500.690.500.550.508.464.00 < WS < 5.00 0.680.400.390.420.570.400.340.420.800.520.380.430.670.490.560.517.995.00 < WS < 6.00 0.780.480.520.550.620.430.410.540.981.000.670.531.020.720.800.6810.746.00 < WS < 8.00 0.540.320.420.610.730.460.370.481.291.020.800.701.270.940.990.8011.738.00 < WS < 10.00 0.130.060.130.190.310.120.070.110.290.360.230.230.500.300.350.243.63> 10.00 0.060.010.020.060.140.050.030.040.150.140.170.200.250.160.120.081.68Totals3.472.112.342.703.472.332.012.364.694.083.182.955.043.613.863.2054.24 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-61Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-27 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class E) | |||
(a)From NCDC, 2011l Speed (m/s)N NNENEENEEESESESSESSSWSWWSWWWNWNWNNW TotalCalm00.00 < WS < 1.00 00000000000000000 1.00 < WS < 2.00 00000000000000000 2.00 < WS < 3.00 593548497782767091857544755053381007 3.00 < WS < 4.00 513554529084829416711568611368173361279 4.00 < WS < 5.00 422137326431185815012773541267676541039 5.00 < WS < 6.00 239111617166306544162662232719410 6.00 < WS < 8.00 000000000000000008.00 < WS < 10.00 00000000000000000> 10.00 00000000000000000Totals1751001501492482131822524733712321853992302291473735 Speed (m/s)Calm0.000.00 < WS < 1.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 1.00 < WS < 2.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 2.00 < WS < 3.00 0.120.070.100.100.160.170.160.150.190.180.160.090.160.100.110.082.11 3.00 < WS < 4.00 0.110.070.110.110.190.180.170.200.350.240.140.130.290.170.150.082.68 4.00 < WS < 5.00 0.090.040.080.070.130.070.040.120.310.270.150.110.260.160.160.112.18 5.00 < WS < 6.00 0.050.020.020.030.040.030.010.060.140.090.030.050.130.050.060.040.86 6.00 < WS < 8.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.008.00 < WS < 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00> 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00Totals0.370.210.310.310.520.450.380.530.990.780.490.390.840.480.480.317.83 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-62Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-28 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class F) | |||
(a)a) From NCDC, 2011l Speed (m/s)N NNENEENEEESESESSESSSWSWWSWWWNWNWNNW TotalCalm9750.00 < WS < 1.00 00000000000000000 1.00 < WS < 2.00 26142118413121192832182636152319388 2.00 < WS < 3.00 11774901111581531481641961761641312651922041012444 3.00 < WS < 4.00 3726533251495082100858460109717138998 4.00 < WS < 5.00 00000000000000000 5.00 < WS < 6.00 00000000000000000 6.00 < WS < 8.00 000000000000000008.00 < WS < 10.00 00000000000000000> 10.00 00000000000000000Totals1801141641612502332192653242932662174102782981584805 Speed (m/s)Calm2.050.00 < WS < 1.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 1.00 < WS < 2.00 0.050.030.040.040.090.070.040.040.060.070.040.050.080.030.050.040.81 2.00 < WS < 3.00 0.250.160.190.230.330.320.310.340.410.370.340.270.560.400.430.215.13 3.00 < WS < 4.00 0.080.050.110.070.110.100.100.170.210.180.180.130.230.150.150.082.09 4.00 < WS < 5.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 5.00 < WS < 6.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 6.00 < WS < 8.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.008.00 < WS < 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00> 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00Totals0.380.240.340.340.520.490.460.560.680.610.560.460.860.580.630.3310.08 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-63Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-29 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class G) | |||
(a)a) From NCDC, 2011lSpeed (m/s)N NNENEENEEESESESSESSSWSWWSWWWNWNWNNW TotalCalm40530.00 < WS < 1.00 00000000000000000 1.00 < WS < 2.00 77353862113106956110174557218312692671357 2.00 < WS < 3.00 00000000000000000 3.00 < WS < 4.00 00000000000000000 4.00 < WS < 5.00 00000000000000000 5.00 < WS < 6.00 00000000000000000 6.00 < WS < 8.00 000000000000000008.00 < WS < 10.00 00000000000000000> 10.00 00000000000000000Totals77353862113106956110174557218312692675410 Speed (m/s)Calm8.500.00 < WS < 1.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 1.00 < WS < 2.00 0.160.070.080.130.240.220.200.130.210.160.120.150.380.260.190.142.85 2.00 < WS < 3.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 3.00 < WS < 4.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 4.00 < WS < 5.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 5.00 < WS < 6.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 6.00 < WS < 8.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.008.00 < WS < 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00> 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00Totals0.160.070.080.130.240.220.200.130.210.160.120.150.380.260.190.1411.35 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-64Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-30 Representative Environmental Noise Levels (a)a) | |||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
California Department of Transportation, 1998Common Outdoor ActivitiesNoise Level (dBA)Common Indoor Activities--110--Rock BandJet Fly-over at 1000 feet--100--Gas Lawnmower at 3 feet--90--Food Blender at 3 feetDiesel Truck going 50 mph at 50feet--80--Garbage Disposal at 3 feetNoisy Urban Area during DaytimeGas Lawnmower at 100 feet--70--Vacuum Cleaner at 10 feetCommercial AreaNormal Speech at 3 feetHeavy Traffic at 300 feet--60--Large Business OfficeQuiet Urban Area during Daytime--50--Dishwater in Next RoomQuiet Urban Area during Nighttime--40--Theater, Large Conference Room (background)Quiet Suburban Area duringNighttime--30--LibraryQuiet Rural Area during NighttimeBedroom at Night, Concert Hall (background)--20--Broadcast/ Recording Studio--10--Lowest Threshold of HumanHearing--0--Lowest Threshold of Human Hearing Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewGeologic EnvironmentSHINE Medical | California Department of Transportation, 1998Common Outdoor ActivitiesNoise Level (dBA)Common Indoor Activities--110--Rock BandJet Fly-over at 1000 feet--100--Gas Lawnmower at 3 feet | ||
--90--Food Blender at 3 feetDiesel Truck going 50 mph at 50feet--80--Garbage Disposal at 3 feetNoisy Urban Area during DaytimeGas Lawnmower at 100 feet--70--Vacuum Cleaner at 10 feetCommercial AreaNormal Speech at 3 feetHeavy Traffic at 300 feet--60--Large Business OfficeQuiet Urban Area during Daytime--50--Dishwater in Next RoomQuiet Urban Area during Nighttime--40--Theater, Large Conference Room (background)Quiet Suburban Area duringNighttime--30--LibraryQuiet Rural Area during NighttimeBedroom at Night, Concert Hall (background) | |||
--20--Broadcast/ Recording Studio | |||
--10--Lowest Threshold of HumanHearing--0--Lowest Threshold of Human Hearing Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewGeologic EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-65Rev. 019.3.3GEOLOGIC ENVIRONMENTThis subsection provides a description of the geology, soils, and seismology of the site and region.19.3.3.1Summary of On-Site Geotechnical InvestigationsSHINE conducted a geotechnical investigation at the Janesville site during the fourth quarter of 2011. The investigation included the installation of 15 soil borings, with four of the borings converted to groundwater monitoring wells and one boring used solely for seismic profile testing (Figure 19.3.3-1). The geotechnical investigation methods and results are detailed in three reports:*Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report, Janesville, Wisconsin: August 3, 2012.*Preliminary Hydrological Analyses, Janesville, Wisconsin: August 3, 2012.*Seismic Hazard Assessment Report, Janesville, Wisconsin: August 3, 2012.The geotechnical report includes descriptions of soils encountered to a maximum boring depth of 221 ft. (67m) below ground surface, the results of vertical seismic profiling, depth to groundwater, engineering properties of the soils encountered at the site, an assessment of geologic hazards at the site or nearby, and the suitability of materials at the site for the construction of the proposed facility.The hydrological analyses report utilizes data gathered during the geotechnical investigation to assess the hydrologic regime at the site, including the flood risks from nearby surface waters, stormwater and runoff management risks, and groundwater flow and transport. The seismic hazard report summarizes the geologic history of the region and makes an assessment of hazards associated with seismic events based on the vertical seismic profiling and a review of published and on-line data. Results from each of these reports are used in the following subsections to further characterize the geological environment at the SHINE site. 19.3.3.2Bedrock Formations The SHINE site lies within the Central Lowlands physiographic province of the United States (Fenneman, Nevin Melancthon, 1946) in an area where thick sections of sedimentary rock overlie crystalline rock of Precambrian age (Olcott, Perry G., 1968). The sedimentary rock consists of Cambrian and Ordovician sandstone, dolomite, and shale (Figure 19.3.3-2). The sedimentary rock formations include the Mount Simon and Eau Claire s andstones and the Prairie du Chien group of Cambrian age, and the St. Peter sandstone, and Platteville, Decorah, and Galena formations of Ordovician age (Figure 19.3.3-3). According to Zaporozec (Zaporozec, Alexander, 1982), the "most significant feature of the bedrock surface (in Rock County) is the ancestral Rock River valley more than 300ft. (91m) deep, subsequently filled with outwash and other fluvial deposits."The Central Lowlands province is located within the middle of the relatively stable North American craton. The North American craton is the portion of the North American continental Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewGeologic EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-66Rev. 0plate that has been least affected by collisions with other plates or tectonic activity. The regional geologic structures within the basement rock that have been mapped include the Sandwich and Plum River fault zones (inactive); the La Salle anticlinorium, and the Wisconsin and Kankakee Arches (Figure19.3.3-4).Between 1.0 and 1.2 billion years ago, a rift zone identified as the Mid-Continent Rift was active from Wisconsin through Mississippi. After the Mid-Continent Rift had ceased being an active rift zone, subsequent cooling of the crust and regional subsidence associated with the Appalachian Orogeny to the east are the probable causes of the regional geologic structures.Overlying the sedimentary bedrock units are unconsolidated quaternary deposits of glacial till and outwash, consisting of well-sorted sand and gravel. The till and outwash deposits were deposited as the continental ice sheets advanced and retreated during the latter portion of the Pleistocene Epoch, between approximately 10,000 and 30,000 years ago. These outwash deposits are good sources of water, with single well yields of over 5000 gallons per minute (gpm) (1.89x104 liters per minute [lpm]) (Olcott, Perry G., 1968). The stratigraphy of the bedrock units that underlie the site (see Figure 19.3.3-3) from youngest to oldest is:*Galena Formation | |||
*Decorah Formation | *Decorah Formation | ||
*Platteville Formation*St. Peter sandstone*Prairie du Chien Group | *Platteville Formation*St. Peter sandstone*Prairie du Chien Group | ||
*Trempealeau Group*Tunnel City Group*Wonewoc Formation | *Trempealeau Group*Tunnel City Group*Wonewoc Formation | ||
*Eau Claire Formation*Mount Simon Formation*Precambrian basement rockThe bedrock units within Rock County are described in greater detail based on Zaporozec, Alexander, 1982.The Cambrian-Ordovician sedimentary rocks were deposited in shallow seas on an uneven and arched surface of igneous and metamorphic (basement) rocks of Precambrian age. Both the Precambrian surface and the sedimentary rocks dip gently to the south and southeast. The sedimentary units thicken in the direction of dip from about 1000ft. (305 m) in the northwestern corner of Rock County to over 1500ft. (457m) in the southeastern corner of the county. The oldest formations of Cambrian age in Rock County are, in ascending order, the Mt.Simon sandstone, Eau Claire sandstone, Wonewoc (also known as the Galesville Formation) sandstone, Tunnel City Group (formerly Franconia sandstone), and Trempealeau Formation, consisting of the Jordan sandstone and St. Lawrence dolomite. In the Rock River valley, these rocks of Cambrian age are overlain primarily by unconsolidated Quaternary deposits, with much of the younger Ordovician sequence having been removed by erosion. | *Eau Claire Formation*Mount Simon Formation*Precambrian basement rockThe bedrock units within Rock County are described in greater detail based on Zaporozec, Alexander, 1982.The Cambrian-Ordovician sedimentary rocks were deposited in shallow seas on an uneven and arched surface of igneous and metamorphic (basement) rocks of Precambrian age. Both the Precambrian surface and the sedimentary rocks dip gently to the south and southeast. The sedimentary units thicken in the direction of dip from about 1000ft. (305 m) in the northwestern corner of Rock County to over 1500ft. (457m) in the southeastern corner of the county. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewGeologic EnvironmentSHINE Medical | The oldest formations of Cambrian age in Rock County are, in ascending order, the Mt.Simon sandstone, Eau Claire sandstone, Wonewoc (also known as the Galesville Formation) sandstone, Tunnel City Group (formerly Franconia sandstone), and Trempealeau Formation, consisting of the Jordan sandstone and St. Lawrence dolomite. In the Rock River valley, these rocks of Cambrian age are overlain primarily by unconsolidated Quaternary deposits, with much of the younger Ordovician sequence having been removed by erosion. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewGeologic EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-67Rev. 0Rock formations of Ordovician age include, in ascending order, the Prairie du Chien Group (dolomite), the St. Peter Formation (sandstone), and the Platteville-Galena Formation - also called the Sinnipee Group - consisting of carbonate rocks (limestone and dolomite). The Prairie du Chien Group was greatly thinned by erosion or completely eroded before deposition of the St.Peter sandstone when the land was elevated above sea level. In many areas of Rock County, the Prairie du Chien group is absent, and the St. Peter Formation rests directly on sandstones of Cambrian age. Because it was laid down on an uneven erosional surface, the St.Peter Formation varies considerably in thickness. The bedrock surface in the western part of the county is formed primarily by the St. Peter sandstone. Bedrock east of the Rock River valley and the ridge tops west of the valley are formed by the Platteville-Galena unit.After the deposition of the sedimentary rocks, erosion over a long period of time produced a bedrock surface having a maximum relief of 1000ft. (305m) in Rock County. The most significant feature of the bedrock surface is the ancestral Rock River valley, which reaches depths of greater than 300 ft (91m) (see Figure 19.3.3-2) and was subsequently filled with outwash and other fluvial deposits. East of the buried valley the bedrock has a flat, relatively undissected surface. West of the valley the bedrock surface is rugged and dissected.19.3.3.3Bedrock OverburdenThe site has been influenced strongly by Pleistocene glacial erosion and deposition, and subsequent post-glacial erosional and depositional processes. The site is covered by a mantle of well-drained loamy soils underlain by stratified sand and gravel. These sands and gravels represent late Wisconsin to possibly Holocene age glaciofluvial outwash deposits, transported from the Wisconsin-age glacial moraines related to the Green Bay Ice lobe of the Laurentide Ice Sheet to the north. Depth to bedrock at the SHINE site may be as deep as 300 ft. (91m), supported by geotechnical boreholes for this investigation completed to 221-ft. (67m) depths without encountering bedrock (Figure 19.3.3-5).Lab testing showed the soils to be primarily clean sandy soils with occasional gravel layers, with the density of the sand increasing with depth. A hard clayey silt layer was observed at approximately 180 ft. (55m) below ground surface, and groundwater was observed at a depth of 50 to 65 ft. (15.3 to 19.8m) below ground surface.19.3.3.4Soils On-Site Soil TypesThe soils were formed primarily from glacial processes which occurred in the region. Glacial till and outwash are the primary parent materials for the soil, in addition to reworked loess, decomposed vegetation, and deposits from the dolomite and sandstone bedrock in the area. Most of the glacial outwash in the area consists of stratified sand and gravel, deposited by water flowing from the glacier as it melted and receded. A layer of finer-grained material, which overlies the outwash, eventually weathered to form the silt loam and loam present at the site (USDA-SCS, 1974).The soils at the site are classified by the USDA Soil Conservation Service Soil Survey of Rock County, Wisconsin as two types, the Warsaw silt loam and the Lorenzo loam (USDA-SCS, 1974) (see Figure 19.3.1-5). The Warsaw silt loam, the primary soil at the site, is characteristic of outwash plains and terraces, with the surface layer either a silt loam or loam. The Warsaw silt Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewGeologic EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-68Rev. 0loam typically has slow runoff and is well-suited for farm and crop production. Soils in the Warsaw series consist of level to sloping loamy soils which are underlain by stratified sand and gravel. Permeability is typically moderate in the subsoil, with underlying sand and gravel typically found at depths ranging from 24 to 40 in. (61 to 102cm) (USDA-SCS, 1974).A secondary soil found at the site is the Lorenzo loam. The Lorenzo loam is also typically found on outwash plains and terraces. The surface layer of the Lorenzo loam is a black loam. The Lorenzo loam is well-drained and is moderately susceptible to erosion. The soils of the Lorenzo series are moderately suited to agriculture, with slow runoff. Permeability is typically moderate in the subsoil, with the underlying stratified sand and gravel found at a depth ranging from 12 to 20in. (30 to 51cm) (USDA-SCS, 1974).Prime FarmlandThe Warsaw silt loam with less than 2percent slope is classified as a prime farmland soil by the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, indicating that the soil has the best combination of physical and chemical characteristics for producing crops suitable for the area. Additional factors in the prime farmland designation include favorable climate, adequate and dependable water supply, acceptable soil pH, acceptable salt/sodium content, and the soil is not excessively eroded or saturated with water. Criteria for defining and delineating these lands are determined by the appropriate state or local agencies in cooperation with USDA. The significant difference between farmland of statewide importance and USDA designated prime farmland is that although the criteria used to designate both types of soils are not appropriate outside the state or local area, these lands which are designated as farmland of statewide importance approach the productivity of lands in their area that meet criteria for prime farmland and unique farmland.The Lorenzo silt loam present on the site is classified as farmland of statewide importance. Farmland of statewide importance approaches the productivity of prime farmland, but the soil does not meet the criteria for designation as prime farmland. The prime farmland on the site is shown on Figure 19.3.1-5. Approximately 41,950 ac. (16,977ha) of the area within the region are lands having soils classified as prime farmland or farmland of statewide importance. | |||
Soil ErodibilityThe Warsaw and Lorenzo soils, when found on slopes greater than 2percent, are described by the USDA SCS (USDA-SCS, 1974) as slightly-to-moderately-erodible soil units. The soils found on slopes less than 2percent are not considered erodible. The erodibility of the soil units is a factor of the soil type, the amount of rainfall and runoff, wind speed, and the length and steepness of the ground slope. No soils present on the site or within the area of the site are listed as highly erodible land by the USDA NRCS (USDA NRCS, 2012a). Current erosion control practices observed at the site include the use of conservation or minimum tillage measures, the use of vegetated swales, and contoured cultivation. Conservation tillage is minimally disturbing the stubble from the preceding crop prior to planting of the next crop so that the root system serves to anchor the topsoil. Vegetated swales slow the rate of runoff, reducing the amount of sediment carried in the water, and sediment is trapped in place. Contoured cultivation parallels the contours of the land surface, allowing stormwater to be detained within the furrows, leading to increased infiltration. | Soil ErodibilityThe Warsaw and Lorenzo soils, when found on slopes greater than 2percent, are described by the USDA SCS (USDA-SCS, 1974) as slightly-to-moderately-erodible soil units. The soils found on slopes less than 2percent are not considered erodible. The erodibility of the soil units is a factor of the soil type, the amount of rainfall and runoff, wind speed, and the length and steepness of the ground slope. No soils present on the site or within the area of the site are listed as highly erodible land by the USDA NRCS (USDA NRCS, 2012a). Current erosion control practices observed at the site include the use of conservation or minimum tillage measures, the use of vegetated swales, and contoured cultivation. Conservation tillage is minimally disturbing the stubble from the preceding crop prior to planting of the next crop so that the root system serves to anchor the topsoil. Vegetated swales slow the rate of runoff, reducing the amount of sediment carried in the water, and sediment is trapped in place. Contoured cultivation parallels the contours of the land surface, allowing stormwater to be detained within the furrows, leading to increased infiltration. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewGeologic EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-69Rev. 0Soil Shrink/Swell PotentialThe shrink/ | |||
Water conservation programs will also be developed for other water use sectors. | Water conservation programs will also be developed for other water use sectors. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-79Rev. 0The City is currently planning to install a new water distribution line along the northern boundary of the project property. This distribution line would serve the properties in the vicinity of the SHINE site as well as the facility. Water uses in the vicinity of the project include agricultural irrigation and potable water supply. | ||
Near the site, the SWRA uses the public water supply system. These uses are both supplied by groundwater resources. There are no apparent, or known, surface water uses near the SHINE site.19.3.4.2.2Groundwater All public water supplies in Rock County are from groundwater. Table 19.3.7-14 lists the nine major municipal water suppliers that each serve communities in Rock County. Six of the nine municipal water systems in Rock County have a wellhead protection plan including Clinton, Evansville, Footville, Janesville, Milton, and Orfordville. Wellhead protection ordinances are in place for only Evansville and Janesville (USGS, 2012c). Janesville and Evansville have both a wellhead protection plan and a wellhead protection ordinance.The water systems serving the largest populations are those in Beloit and Janesville. In addition to the public water systems, numerous private wells provide drinking water to residents not connected to municipal water supplies. The Janesville Water Utility provides water supply for both public drinking water and for fire protection utilizing eight wells. The water supply system for the city of Janesville includes three booster stations, two water storage reservoirs, and a water tower. According to the city of Janesville, the total pumping capacity of its eight groundwater wells is 29 Mgd (109.8 Mld). | |||
Average water usage is about 11 Mgd (41.6 Mld). Accordingly, the excess capacity of the Janesville water supply system is approximately 18 Mgd (68.1 Mld).Public water supplies within Wisconsin are monitored to ensure public health protection, whereas individual well owners are responsible for monitoring and testing private wells. The public water use index for Rock County is 80 (Table 19.3.7-15), which estimates how many people are served by public water supplies. A number greater than 50 means more people are served by public water versus private wells.The Janesville water supply is disinfected with chlorine treatment and fluoride added at each pumping station and pumped directly into the distribution system. There are two earth-covered reservoirs for storage as well as a 500,000-gallon (1,892,706-liter) water tower completed in 2007. The wells include four deep wells, approximately 1150 ft. (350m) deep, and four sand and gravel wells that are 100 to 200 ft. (30.5 to 61m) deep. The shallow wells have nitrate concentrations that are controlled by blending with water from the deep wells.In addition to the municipal water utility, groundwater is also withdrawn for agricultural irrigation. The USGS estimates that agricultural crop irrigation is the largest user of groundwater in Rock County, with an estimated usage of 16.2 Mgd (61.3Mld) (Buchwald, Cheryl A., 2011). | Average water usage is about 11 Mgd (41.6 Mld). Accordingly, the excess capacity of the Janesville water supply system is approximately 18 Mgd (68.1 Mld).Public water supplies within Wisconsin are monitored to ensure public health protection, whereas individual well owners are responsible for monitoring and testing private wells. The public water use index for Rock County is 80 (Table 19.3.7-15), which estimates how many people are served by public water supplies. A number greater than 50 means more people are served by public water versus private wells.The Janesville water supply is disinfected with chlorine treatment and fluoride added at each pumping station and pumped directly into the distribution system. There are two earth-covered reservoirs for storage as well as a 500,000-gallon (1,892,706-liter) water tower completed in 2007. The wells include four deep wells, approximately 1150 ft. (350m) deep, and four sand and gravel wells that are 100 to 200 ft. (30.5 to 61m) deep. The shallow wells have nitrate concentrations that are controlled by blending with water from the deep wells.In addition to the municipal water utility, groundwater is also withdrawn for agricultural irrigation. The USGS estimates that agricultural crop irrigation is the largest user of groundwater in Rock County, with an estimated usage of 16.2 Mgd (61.3Mld) (Buchwald, Cheryl A., 2011). | ||
19.3.4.2.3Facility Water Use Water use by the SHINE facility is described in Subsection 19.2.3 and is entirely supplied by groundwater from the City of Janesville water supply wells. | 19.3.4.2.3Facility Water Use Water use by the SHINE facility is described in Subsection 19.2.3 and is entirely supplied by groundwater from the City of Janesville water supply wells. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-80Rev. 019.3.4.3Water Quality19.3.4.3.1Surface WaterStream water quality generally reflects groundwater characteristics as a result of the groundwater discharge conditions that exist in much of Rock County (Olcott, Perry G., 1968). Surface water management activities conducted in accordance with Section 305(b) of the Clean Water Act and the Total Daily Maximum Load (TMDL) program provide water quality characterization and are described below. 19.3.4.3.1.1Water Quality19.3.4.3.1.1.1Impaired Waters and Total Maximum Daily LoadThe SHINE site is located in the watershed of an unnamed stream located within the Lower Rock River Basin. The unnamed tributary flows into the most downstream segment of the Rock River identified by WDNR for purposes of water quality monitoring and reporting. The Rock River segment extends from the Illinois state boundary upstream approximately 12.4 river mi. (20riverkm) to the Janesville wastewater treatment plant. This segment of the Rock River is considered to be impaired due to total suspended solids and total phosphorous (The CADMUS Group, 2011). This segment of the Rock River (Illinois state line to the Janesville wastewater treatment plant) has previously been impaired as a result of mercury and polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) pollutants; however, those have since been removed. The specific impairments listed for this reach of the Rock River are low dissolved oxygen and degraded habitat. The SHINE site drains into the Rock River through the project area watershed at a point approximately 8.3mi. (13.4km) upstream from the Illinois state line.On a regional and state-wide basis, Wisconsin has identified phosphorus and suspended solids as parameters of concern due to the ability of particulates to adsorb and transport phosphorus. State regulations include specific numerical criteria directed at the control of discharge of phosphorus and suspended solids from development sites. The State's 303d list of impaired streams developed and updated as required by the Clean Water Act has identified only the Rock River in the vicinity of the SHINE site as an impaired water body. The TMDL states that industrial facilities operating under a general WPDES permit will be screened to determine if additional requirements might be needed to ensure that the permitted activity is consistent with TMDL goals. Individual permits, if issued, will include limits consistent with approved TMDL wasteload allocations (The CADMUS Group, 2011).19.3.4.3.1.1.2Other Water Body Designations The Lower Rock River is a state-designated Area of Special Natural Resource Interest as a result of it being Natural Heritage Inventory (NHI) water. The NHI program was created by the Wisconsin legislature in 1985.Bass Creek and Turtle Creek, two tributaries to the Rock River in the vicinity of the site, are designated as Exceptional Resource Waters (Rock County Planning, Economic & Community Development Agency, 2009). An Exceptional Resource Water is defined as a stream or lake that has excellent water quality, high recreational and aesthetic value, high quality fishing, but that Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-81Rev. 0does not rise to the designation of outstanding resource water because it may be impacted by point source pollution or that it may have the potential for future discharge from a small community sewer system. (NR102.11 (1)(d)28).19.3.4.3.1.2Project Surface Water MonitoringSurface water quality monitoring was completed monthly from October 2011 through September 2012. The later part of this period occurred during a widely-recognized severe drought condition in south-central Wisconsin. As a result of these conditions, surface water samples were only collectable at location SW-02 on the unnamed tributary south of the SHINE site. The other two locations were established as opportunistic sampling locations and were observed to be dry on all twelve sampling events during the monitoring period. Laboratory results for samples collected at monitoring location SW-02 (Figure 19.3.4-4) are presented in Table 19.3.4-7 and field-measured parameters are provided in Table 19.3.4-8. Water was consistently present in the unnamed stream at location SW-02, although it was shallow and slow-flowing. It is believed that the flow was dominated in each sample by base flow contributed from groundwater seepage.Total phosphorus is a constituent of primary regional concern in surface waters. The phosphorus concentration at SW-02 was generally less than the detection limit (<0.2 mg/L). Field-measured parameters are summarized in Table 19.3.4-8. No remarkable measurements were documented. As noted above, physical conditions for sampling were less than ideal due to shallow water depth.19.3.4.3.2Groundwater19.3.4.3.2.1Groundwater Quality Groundwater quality monitoring was completed in four groundwater wells on a monthly basis from October 2011 through September 2012. The later part of this period occurred during a widely recognized severe drought condition in south-central Wisconsin. Laboratory results for samples collected at m onitoring location SM-GW1A, SM-GW2A, SM-GW3A, and SM-GW4A (Figure 19.3.4-4) are presented in Table 19.3.4-9 and field measured parameters are provided in Table 19.3.4-10. The groundwater elevations were also measured during the sampling events and are summarized in Table 19.3.4-6. Figures 19.3.4-5 through 19.3.4-8 provide groundwater isopleths for the first month of each quarterly monitoring period.Nitrate impact is a concern in agricultural areas due to the use of fertilizers and the presence of livestock. The nitrate concentrations were consistently above the drinking water standard of 10mg/l, with all samples found to contain nitrates. The minimum nitrate concentration detected was 13.5 mg/l and the maximum detection of 19.3 mg/l. Fecal coliform and Escherichia coli (E-coli) are common bacterial contaminants, often found in groundwater under the influence of surface water which has come into contact with human or animal waste. The groundwater samples were not found to contain E. coli above the detection limit. Fecal coliform was present in 3 of the 53 samples analyzed, with a maximum detection of 7 colony-forming units per 100 mL (CFU/100mL). Salinity and specific conductance are field parameters used to determine the stability of the groundwater prior to collection of the samples. During the May field effort, these Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-82Rev. 0parameters were elevated over previous months, but returned to earlier levels during the June field event.19.3.4.3.3Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Actions Subsection 19.4.13 provides an analysis of the cumulative effects of the SHINE project in consideration of other past, present and reasonably foreseeable future actions. On-going agricultural uses will place continuing demand on the groundwater supply in the vicinity of the SHINE site. With respect to other potential uses of water resources, SHINE identified one key off-site activity representing a potential additional demand on water supplies, wastewater treatment, and pollutant loading. Specifically, the lands immediately to the northeast of the SHINE site are zoned for future light industrial development. While designs and devel opment plans have not been prepared for this development area, it is expected that such uses will place additional demands on the City's water supply and water treatment system. Additionally, construction of these areas will represent a potential additional source of pollutant loading associated with runoff from construction sites.There are no other identified domestic, municipal, industrial, mining, recreation, navigation, or hydroelectric power uses of any bodies of water or aquifers at distances close enough to affect or be adversely affected by the facilities. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewWater ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-83Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-1 Rockford, Illinois Climatic Means and Extremes(Sheet 1 of 2) | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewWater ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-83Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-1 Rockford, Illinois Climatic Means and Extremes(Sheet 1 of 2) | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewWater ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-84Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-1 Rockford, Illinois Climatic Means and Extremes(Sheet 2 of 2)Table extracted from NCDC, 2011c. "POR" refers to the period of record (years). Refer to that source for explanatory notes. | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewWater ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-84Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-1 Rockford, Illinois Climatic Means and Extremes(Sheet 2 of 2)Table extracted from NCDC, 2011c. "POR" refers to the period of record (years). Refer to that source for explanatory notes. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-85Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-2 Rainfall Depth-Duration-Frequency Data for Janesville Vicinity DurationRainfall (inches) for Given Recurrence Interval (years)0.51251025501005-min0.220.270.330.420.500.620.730.8510-min0.380.470.580.740.881.091.271.48 15-min0.490.610.750.951.131.401.641.9130-min0.670.831.031.311.551.922.242.611-hour0.861.061.311.661.972.432.853.32 2-hour1.051.301.612.052.443.003.514.093-hour1.171.441.782.262.693.323.884.526-hour1.171.692.092.653.153.884.555.30 12-hour1.371.962.423.073.654.515.276.1424-hour1.822.252.783.534.25.186.067.0648-hour1.972.463.073.964.685.796.757.8272-hour2.162.703.384.345.166.347.348.4710-day2.973.714.725.936.868.219.3310.6 | ||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
Huff, Floyd A. and James R. Angel, 1992 Chapter 19 - Environmental | Huff, Floyd A. and James R. Angel, 1992 Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-86Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-3 USGS Streamflow Monitoring Stations in Rock County, WisconsinStation Name Station NumberDrainage Area(sq. mi.)Period of RecordRock River at Newville, WI54275302560October 2009-presentRock River at Indianford, WI54275702630May 1975-2011Yahara River near Edgerton, WI5430000430October 1916-Nov 1917Badfish Creek near Cooksville, WI543015082.6July 1977-present Yahara River near Fulton, WI5430175518 (481.4) | ||
(a)July 1977-presentFischer Creek Tributary at Janesville, WI54304031.42August 1980-November 1984Markham Creek at O Leary Road near Janesville, WI54304469.32June 2004-November 2005Rock River at Afton, WI54305003340January 1914-presentStevens Creek near Footville, WI543054013.9May 2004-November 2005Turtle Creek at Carvers Rock Road near Clinton, WI5431486199 (196.67) (a)September 1939-presentTurtle Creek near Clinton, WI5431500202September 1939-December 1979a) Contributing drainage area. | |||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
USGS, 2012b Chapter 19 - Environmental | USGS, 2012b Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-87Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-4 Flood Discharge Frequency Data - Rock River at Afton, WisconsinRecordPeriodDischarge (cfs) for Indicated Recurrence Interval2-yrs.5-yrs.10-yrs.25-yrs.50-yrs.100-yrs.500-yrs.1914 - 20006,3508,73010,20011,90013,00014,100NA1914 - 20116,4606,01010,61012,53013,90015,22018,150 | ||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
Flynn et al., 2006 Chapter 19 - Environmental | Flynn et al., 2006 Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-88Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-5 Annual Minimum Low Flows - Rock River at Afton | ||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
USGS, 2012b30-Day Average Low Flow7-Day Average Low FlowYearFlowRankYearFlowRank(cfs)(cfs) | USGS, 2012b30-Day Average Low Flow7-Day Average Low FlowYearFlowRankYearFlowRank (cfs)(cfs)1934174119341151193619321964149219641953193215231939202419361704195820351958171519322186195917961949252719391887193725781949204819592579194822591948275101946237 101963282111937238 111931288121953242 121946297131931243 131941308141963258 141953320151940260 151971328161941278 161957333171962278 171940342181957285 181955356191955288 191988361201971288 20 Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-89Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-6 Groundwater Monitoring Well Water Table Elevations(Sheet 1 of 2)Well IDDateTOC Elevation (ft) (a)Depth to Watera (ft - BTOC)Water Table Elevation(a)SM-1A10/26/2011828.0462.32765.72SM-2A10/26/2011821.4056.98764.42 SM-3A10/26/2011829.9664.52765.44SM-4A10/26/2011814.1549.51764.64SM-1A11/16/2011828.0462.44765.60 SM-2A11/16/2011821.4057.09764.31SM-3A11/16/2011829.9664.65765.31SM-4A11/16/2011814.1549.61764.54 SM-1A12/13/2011828.0462.58765.46SM-2A12/13/2011821.4057.18764.22SM-3A12/13/2011829.9664.77765.19 SM-4A12/13/2011814.1549.75764.40SM-1A1/9/2012828.0462.66765.38SM-2A1/9/2012821.4057.27764.13 SM-3A1/9/2012829.9664.86765.10SM-4A1/9/2012814.1549.85764.30SM-1A2/13/2012828.0462.86765.18 SM-2A2/13/2012821.4057.44763.96SM-3A2/13/2012829.9664.04765.92SM-4A2/13/2012814.1550.03764.12 SM-1A3/12/2012828.0462.97765.07SM-2A3/12/2012821.4057.55763.85SM-3A3/12/2012829.9665.15764.81 SM-4A3/12/2012814.1550.13764.02 SM-1A4/16/2012828.0463.11764.93SM-2A4/16/2012821.4057.67763.73SM-3A4/16/2012829.9665.32764.64 SM-4A4/16/2012814.1550.27763.88SM-1A5/22/2012828.0463.39764.65SM-2A5/22/2012821.4057.90763.50 SM-3A5/22/2012829.9665.62764.34SM-4A5/22/2012814.1550.42763.73SM-1A6/13/2012828.0463.62764.42 SM-2A6/13/2012821.4058.16763.24 Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-90Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-6 Groundwater Monitoring Well Water Table Elevations(Sheet 2 of 2)Well IDDateTOC Elevation (ft) (a)Depth to Water (ft - BTOC)Water Table Elevation(a)SM-3A6/13/2012829.9665.90764.06SM-4A6/13/2012814.1550.68763.47 SM-1A7/16/2012828.0464.30763.74SM-2A7/16/2012821.4058.93762.47SM-3A7/16/2012829.9666.77763.19 SM-4A7/16/2012814.1551.29762.86SM-1A8/15/2012828.0464.52763.52SM-2A8/15/2012821.4059.18762.22 SM-3A8/15/2012829.9666.84763.12SM-4A8/15/2012814.1551.62762.53SM-1A9/18/2012828.0464.81763.23 SM-2A9/18/2012821.4059.44761.96SM-3A9/18/2012829.9667.12762.84SM-4A9/18/2012814.1551.89762.26a) TOC: top of casing; BTOC: below top of casing; all vertical elevations are NAVD 88 Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-91Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-7 Surface Water Analytical Results ParameterUnitsMethod Detection LimitsNumberSamplesCollectedNumberDetectsMin.MaxAlkalinity, Bicarbonate (CaCO3)mg/L2.31717272301Alkalinity, Total As CaCO3mg/L101717278327Biochemical Oxygen Demand, 5 daymg/L2.0175ND10.4Carbon Dioxide mg/L5.015159.821Carbon Dioxide (Not Preserved - NP)mg/L5.0442022 Chemical Oxygen Demandmg/L11.3179ND43.8Chlorophyll A mg/m30.0841714ND27Coliform, FecalCFU/100mL11714ND1300 Coliform, TotalMPN/100mL1171765027200Escherichia ColiMPN/100mL117171649Kjeldahl Nitrogen, Totalmg/L0.351710ND2.6 Nitrate As Nitrogenmg/L1.017176.410.4Nitrite As Nitrogenmg/L0.1174ND0.26Nitrogen As Ammoniamg/L0.25170NDNDOrthophosphorusmg/L0.00317170.0160.062Pheophytin A mg/m30.0591710ND16Phosphorusmg/L0.088174ND0.42 Silicamg/L0.134171711.922.9 Total Dissolved Solids (TDS)mg/L8.71717378500Total Hardnessmg/L0.151717351414 Total Organic Nitrogenmg/L0.351710ND2.6 Total Suspended Solids (TSS)mg/L0.03117170.8238Calciummg/L6.6171779.294.6Chloridemg/L2.0171724.548.2 Cyanide, Totalmg/L0.0043173ND0.0071Ironmg/L0.004817170.03966.52Leadmg/L0.0013179ND0.0236 Magnesiummg/L0.0231171737.343.2Mercurymg/L0.0001170NDNDPotassiummg/L0.047317172.123.96 Sodiummg/L0.028517175.5716Sulfatemg/L2.0171725.434.6Zincmg/L0.0016177ND0.0322 mg/L - milligrams per literND - not detected above the detection limit mg/m3 - milligrams per cubic meterMPN/100ml - most probable number per 100 milliliters Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewWater ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-92Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-8 SHINE Medical Surface Water Field Data - JanesvilleSample IDDateTemp. (°C) pH(SU)Specific Conductivity(µS/cm)Dissolved Oxygen(mg/L)Turbidity(NTU)Salinity(%)ColorOdorWaterLevel(inches)CommentsSM-SW0110/27/2011 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSStream Dry SM-SW0210/27/2011 8.197.1860015.141.60.00ClearNo Odor6.0SM-SW0310/27/2011 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW0111/16/2011 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSStream Dry SM-SW0211/16/2011 10.896.5960010.780.00.00ClearNo Odor7.0SM-SW0311/16/2011 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW0112/13/2011 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSStream Dry SM-SW0212/13/2011 6.847.467547.723.40.37ClearNo Odor8.0SM-SW0312/13/2011 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW011/9/2012NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSStream Dry SM-SW021/9/20125.847.447707.80-1.60.38ClearNo Odor7.0SM-SW031/9/2012NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW012/13/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSStream Dry SM-SW022/13/2012 5.927.476007.932.60.29ClearNo Odor3 - 11SM-SW032/13/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW013/13/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSStream Dry SM-SW023/13/2012 8.877.417647.985.00.38ClearNo Odor4.0SM-SW033/13/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW014/16/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSStream Dry SM-SW024/16/2012 10.427.546457.141.30.32ClearNo Odor8.0SM-SW034/16/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW015/22/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSStream Dry SM-SW025/22/2012 11.557.4314968.0534.70.76*ClearNo Odor6.0SM-SW035/22/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW016/12/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSStream Dry SM-SW026/12/2012 15.677.537288.0221.90.36ClearNo Odor5.0SM-SW036/12/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW017/16/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSStream Dry SM-SW027/16/2012 21.696.797576.186.00.37ClearNo Odor6.0SM-SW037/16/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW018/15/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSStream Dry SM-SW028/15/2012 17.337.447484.7316.00.37ClearNo Odor7.0SM-SW038/15/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW019/18/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW029/18/2012 13.836.997977.312.00.39ClearNo Odor6.0SM-SW039/18/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewWater ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-93Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-9 Groundwater Analytical Results for Monitoring Wells Parameter UnitsMethod Detection LimitsNumberSamplesCollectedNumberDetectsMinimumMaximumAlkalinity, Bicarbonate (CaCO3)mg/L2.35353231302Alkalinity, Total As CaCO3mg/L105353248612Biochemical Oxygen Demand, 5 daymg/L2530NDNDCarbon Dioxide mg/L548481831Carbon Dioxide (Not Preserved - NP)mg/L510102030Chemical Oxygen Demandmg/L11.35315ND89.1Chlorophyll Amg/m30.084537ND1.6Coliform, FecalCFU/100mL 1533ND7Coliform, TotalMPN/100mL 15337ND2419Escherichia ColiMPN/100mL 1530NDNDKjeldahl Nitrogen, Totalmg/L0.35538ND0.46Nitrate As Nitrogenmg/L1535313.522.2Nitrite As Nitrogenmg/L0.1530NDNDNitrogen As Ammoniamg/L0.25531ND0.52Orthophosphorusmg/L0.0035338ND0.086Pheophytin Amg/m30.059537ND2.2Phosphorusmg/L0.088531ND0.26Silicamg/L134535313.918.8Total Dissolved Solids (TDS)mg/L8.75353340462Total Hardnessmg/L1505353330565Total Organic Nitrogenmg/L0.35536ND0.46Total Suspended Solids (TSS)mg/L0.03153531389Calciummg/L6.6535374.6126Chloridemg/L2535316.629.2Cyanide, Totalmg/L0.0061538ND0.018Ironmg/L4.853530.0443.04Leadmg/L1.35336ND0.0042Magnesiummg/L23.1535333.660.8Mercurymg/L0.0001530NDNDPotassiummg/L47.353530.4492.96Sodiummg/L28.553532.269.15Sulfatemg/L2535310.120.3Zincmg/L0.00165328ND0.0302 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewWater ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-94Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-10 SHINE Medical Groundwater Field Data - Janesville(Sheet 1 of 2)Sample IDDateWaterLevel(ft BTOC)Temp.(°C)pH(standard units)SpecificConductivity(µS/cm)DissolvedOxygen(mg/L)ORP(mV)Turbidity(NTU)Salinity(%)Color/Odor SM-GW1A10/26/201162.3810.707.3070510.70125.227.00.35Clear/No Odor SM-GW2A10/26/201157.0210.647.3067310.94134.75.70.33Clear/No Odor SM-GW3A10/27/201164.5911.607.2370310.14104.96.00.35Clear/No Odor SM-GW4A10/27/201149.5510.397.2172411.19107.98.90.36Clear/No Odor SM-GW1A11/16/201162.4510.117.2271110.44133.73.70.35Clear/No Odor SM-GW2A11/16/201157.0911.237.2067810.74116.48.90.33Clear/No Odor SM-GW3A11/17/201164.679.357.2470110.03122.5-0.80.34Clear/No Odor SM-GW4A11/17/201149.659.037.1574511.06135.6-0.80.37Clear/No Odor SM-GW1A12/13/201162.5910.437.2170010.44150.332.70.35Clear/No Odor SM-GW2A12/13/201157.2210.337.236989.78123.35.60.34Clear/No Odor SM-GW3A12/19/201164.8111.147.2273311.08120.65.00.36Clear/No Odor SM-GW4A12/19/201149.7810.177.1876311.73113.318.30.37Clear/No Odor SM-GW1A1/10/201262.698.197.2869311.60113.616.60.34Clear/No Odor SM-GW2A1/10/201257.298.507.3067411.72120.90.20.33Clear/No Odor SM-GW3A1/10/201264.929.667.2671911.25120.63.70.35Clear/No Odor SM-GW4A1/10/201249.857.697.1973711.45133.86.00.36Clear/No Odor SM-GW1A2/14/201262.888.417.2271111.70141.035.50.35Slightly Turbid/No Odor SM-GW2A2/14/201257.488.637.3067311.95112.80.70.33Clear/No Odor SM-GW3A2/14/201264.048.237.2472310.98144.44.60.35Clear/No Odor SM-GW4A2/14/201250.047.797.1772911.85180.26.50.36Clear/No Odor SM-GW1A3/12/201262.9611.547.1371410.02122.928.90.35Clear/No Odor SM-GW2A3/12/201257.5411.917.1968010.4399.71.50.33Clear/No Odor SM-GW3A3/12/201265.1612.257.117269.72107.50.30.36Clear/No Odor SM-GW4A3/12/201250.1311.807.0255610.16169.89.10.36Light Tan/No Odor SM-GW1A4/16/201263.1410.877.3558610.10121.532.60.29Light Brown/No Odor SM-GW2A4/16/201257.6810.547.4058010.62131.04.10.28Clear/No Odor SM-GW3A4/17/201263.3513.467.0672910.13155.4-2.30.36Clear/No Odor SM-GW4A4/17/201250.3114.487.017449.85198.5-4.10.37Clear/No Odor SM-GW1A5/23/201263.4415.976.62132010.03332.40.50.67(a)Clear/No Odor SM-GW2A5/23/201257.9018.006.66128210.09414.43.10.64(a)Clear/No Odor SM-GW3A5/22/201265.6614.776.20136910.07416.42.00.69(a)Clear/No Odor SM-GW4A5/22/201250.4413.916.73137010.47319.61.30.69(a)Clear/No Odor Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewWater ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-95Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-10 SHINE Medical Groundwater Field Data - Janesville(Sheet 2 of 2)Sample IDDateWaterLevel(ft BTOC)Temp.(°C)pH(standard units)SpecificConductivity(µS/cm)DissolvedOxygen(mg/L)ORP(mV)Turbidity(NTU)Salinity(%)Color/Odor SM-GW1A6/13/2012 63.6613.047.2164611.68202.66.60.32Clear/No Odor SM-GW2A6/12/2012 58.2214.147.2464711.68194.10.40.32Clear/No Odor SM-GW3A6/13/2012 65.9412.447.1768711.72200.00.00.34Clear/No Odor SM-GW4A6/12/2012 50.6713.007.1770011.55217.124.10.34Clear/No Odor SM-GW1A7/16/2012 64.3617.855.4265211.44618.5103.70.32Light Brown/No Odor SM-GW2A7/17/2012 58.9719.116.3177911.68549.5131.20.38Light Brown/No Odor SM-GW3A7/17/2012 66.7713.494.5274712.47574.410.70.37Light Brown/No Odor SM-GW4A7/16/2012 51.3020.336.0077113.39549.181.60.38Light Brown/No Odor SM-GW1A8/15/2012 64.5515.567.2963510.01122.33.90.31Clear/No Odor SM-GW2A8/16/2012 59.2014.797.3464510.48147.16.50.32Clear/No Odor SM-GW3A8/16/2012 66.8713.447.3370410.25147.13.70.35Clear/No Odor SM-GW4A8/15/2012 51.6514.007.2767210.35122.20.90.33Clear/No Odor SM-GW1A9/19/2012 64.8112.817.4071010.52201.07.70.35Clear/No Odor SM-GW2A9/18/2012 59.4614.115.7872111.01339.30.30.35Clear/No Odor SM-GW3A9/18/2012 67.1413.096.7180910.59212.30.30.40Clear/No Odor SM-GW4A9/19/2012 51.913.897.1678110.43260.17.40.38Clear/No Odora) meter malfunctioningµS/cm - micro Siemens per centimetermV - millivoltNTU - nephelometric turbidity unit Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-96Rev. 019.3.5ECOLOGICAL RESOURCESThis subsection provides a description and characterization of the terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems potentially affected by the construction and operation of the SHINE facility. | ||
Consultations with the WDNR (WDNR, 2012c) and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) (USFWS, 2012) were initiated for information regarding ecological resources near the SHINE site. This consultation process was used to obtain agency input regarding threatened and endangered species, sensitive habitats, commercial and recreational species, and other ecological characteristics for the site and near-site areas. Ecological resources described herein are based on recorded information provided by resource agencies and supplemental quarterly field surveys conducted in 2011 and 2012. 19.3.5.1Off-Site Areas Ecoregions are geographical areas within which the biotic and abiotic components of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems exhibit relatively homogenous patterns in comparison to that of other areas. Ecoregions serve as a spatial framework for the research, assessment, monitoring, and management of ecosystems and ecosystem components. Wisconsin contains 27 Level IV ecoregions nested within six larger Level III regions that also occupy portions of Illinois and other adjoining states (Omernik et al., 2008). Three Level III ecoregions have been identified and are further divided into several other Level IV ecoregions in southern Wisconsin and northern Illinois as depicted in Figure 19.3.5-1. The Rock River Drift Plain and the Southeastern Wisconsin Savannah and Till Plain are the only two ecoregions mapped within Rock County. The only ecoregion near the site (5-mi. [8-km] radius) is the Rock River Drift Plain as part of the larger Southeastern Wisconsin Till Plains ecoregion. Ecoregions are mapped by the USEPA (USEPA, 2012d) and are described in Wisconsin and Illinois by Omernik et al. (Omernik et al., 2008) and Woods et al. (Woods et al., 2006), respectively.The SHINE site is located within the Rock River Drift Plain as depicted in Figure 19.3.5-1. The Rock River Drift Plain is located in both southern Wisconsin and northern Illinois. This Level IV ecoregion is characterized by a landscape containing numerous small creeks, a greater stream density, and fewer lakes than in ecoregions to the north and east. Steeper topography and broad outwash plains with loamy and sandy soils characterize this ecoregion (Omernik et al., 2008). The soils of the Rock River Drift Plain have developed primarily from glacial till, outwash deposits, loess, or alluvium. Oak savanna, prairie, and to a lesser extent, forest (primarily on fire-protected dissected uplands and along water courses) were the predominant vegetative communities prior to European settlement. Today, more than half of the Rock River Drift Plain is cropland. Although forage crops and feed grains harvested to support dairy operations and livestock are most common, cash-grain farming is also important (Woods et al., 2006).19.3.5.2Site and Near Site Areas The SHINE site consists of a 91.27-ac. (36.94 ha) parcel located south of Janesville, Wisconsin, as depicted in Figure 19.3.1-1. Within the site boundary, 91.09 ac. (36.86 ha), or 99.8percent of the site, consists of agriculture/cultivated crops (see Table 19.3.1-1). The remaining 0.18ac. (0.07 ha) consists of developed open space as described in Subsection19.3.1. Because of continuous land disturbance associated with agricultural practices, the site is devoid of natural landscapes such as forest, | Consultations with the WDNR (WDNR, 2012c) and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) (USFWS, 2012) were initiated for information regarding ecological resources near the SHINE site. This consultation process was used to obtain agency input regarding threatened and endangered species, sensitive habitats, commercial and recreational species, and other ecological characteristics for the site and near-site areas. Ecological resources described herein are based on recorded information provided by resource agencies and supplemental quarterly field surveys conducted in 2011 and 2012. 19.3.5.1Off-Site Areas Ecoregions are geographical areas within which the biotic and abiotic components of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems exhibit relatively homogenous patterns in comparison to that of other areas. Ecoregions serve as a spatial framework for the research, assessment, monitoring, and management of ecosystems and ecosystem components. Wisconsin contains 27 Level IV ecoregions nested within six larger Level III regions that also occupy portions of Illinois and other adjoining states (Omernik et al., 2008). Three Level III ecoregions have been identified and are further divided into several other Level IV ecoregions in southern Wisconsin and northern Illinois as depicted in Figure 19.3.5-1. The Rock River Drift Plain and the Southeastern Wisconsin Savannah and Till Plain are the only two ecoregions mapped within Rock County. The only ecoregion near the site (5-mi. [8-km] radius) is the Rock River Drift Plain as part of the larger Southeastern Wisconsin Till Plains ecoregion. Ecoregions are mapped by the USEPA (USEPA, 2012d) and are described in Wisconsin and Illinois by Omernik et al. (Omernik et al., 2008) and Woods et al. (Woods et al., 2006), respectively.The SHINE site is located within the Rock River Drift Plain as depicted in Figure 19.3.5-1. The Rock River Drift Plain is located in both southern Wisconsin and northern Illinois. This Level IV ecoregion is characterized by a landscape containing numerous small creeks, a greater stream density, and fewer lakes than in ecoregions to the north and east. Steeper topography and broad outwash plains with loamy and sandy soils characterize this ecoregion (Omernik et al., 2008). The soils of the Rock River Drift Plain have developed primarily from glacial till, outwash deposits, loess, or alluvium. Oak savanna, prairie, and to a lesser extent, forest (primarily on fire-protected dissected uplands and along water courses) were the predominant vegetative communities prior to European settlement. Today, more than half of the Rock River Drift Plain is cropland. Although forage crops and feed grains harvested to support dairy operations and livestock are most common, cash-grain farming is also important (Woods et al., 2006).19.3.5.2Site and Near Site Areas The SHINE site consists of a 91.27-ac. (36.94 ha) parcel located south of Janesville, Wisconsin, as depicted in Figure 19.3.1-1. Within the site boundary, 91.09 ac. (36.86 ha), or 99.8percent of the site, consists of agriculture/cultivated crops (see Table 19.3.1-1). The remaining 0.18ac. (0.07 ha) consists of developed open space as described in Subsection19.3.1. Because of continuous land disturbance associated with agricultural practices, the site is devoid of natural landscapes such as forest, we tlands, grasslands, prairie, old field, and other natural plant communities. In addition, there are no ephemeral, intermittent, or perennial streams and associated riparian zones located within the boundaries of the SHINE site. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-97Rev. 0The entire 5-mi. (8-km) radius of the site center point is contained within the Rock River Drift Plain Level IV ecoregion as depicted in Figure 19.3.5-1. The Rock River Drift Plain LevelIV ecoregion is described in Subsection 19.3.5.1. Land cover near the site (5-mi. [8-km] radius) is illustrated in Figure 19.3.1-2 and summarized in Table 19.3.1-1. The vast majority of the area near the site is used for agricultural production (see Table19.3.1-1). Cultivated crops make up 25,236 ac. (10,213ha), or more than 50percent of the area near the site. Corn, soybeans, and winter wheat are commonly grown. An additional 5896 ac. (2386 ha), or approximately 12percent near the site, is used for pasture or hay production. Altogether, agricultural activities make up 61.9percent of the area near the site. Developed lands account for 11,861 ac. (4800 ha), or nearly 24percent near the site (see Table19.3.1-1). This includes developed lands mapped as open space, low intensity, medium intensity, and high intensity. Developed lands are further described in Subsection 19.3.1. Forested resources account for 3367 ac. (1363 ha), or less than 7percent, near the site (see Table 19.3.1-1). Forested resources primarily consist of deciduous forest but also include minor amounts of evergreen and mixed forest. Because most of the natural communities near the site have been converted to agriculture, forested resources are concentrated in riparian corridors along the Rock River and its associated tributary streams. Mapped wetland land cover is sparse near the SHINE site as indicated in Table 19.3.1-1. Wetlands mapped near the site include 722 ac. (292 ha) of woody wetlands and 787 ac. (318ha) of emergent herbaceous wetlands. Together, wetland cover types account for 3percent of the land cover near the site. A total of 796 ac. (322 ha), or close to 2percent, near the site is mapped as open water. Grassland resources account for 1049 ac. (425 ha), or just over 2percent, near the site. Shrub/scrub and barren lands each account for 1percent or less near the site (see Table19.3.1-1). | ||
19.3.5.3HistoryThe SHINE site is located within the Southeastern Wisconsin Till Plains where, at the time of European settlement, forests were common on moraines and along watercourses whereas prairie occurred on level to rolling uplands (Woods et al., 2006). According to Will-Wolf and Montague (Will-Wolf, S, and T.C. Montague, 1994), prairie covered approximately 50percent of southern Wisconsin prior to European settlement. However, given the intensity of agricultural land uses, a very small fraction of the original tallgrass prairie remains in Wisconsin (Higgins et al., 2001; Smith, Daryl D., 1990).Conversion of native plant communities to agriculture in the Midwest took place primarily in the 19th Century and was accelerated in 1837 by John Deere's invention of the self-scouring steel plow (Robertson, Ken, 2008). Conversion to agriculture not only changed the composition of plant communities, but also resulted in the draining of wetlands and the channelization of small streams to accommodate row crop production. Lands of the SHINE site have been in continuous agricultural production for several decades. | 19.3.5.3HistoryThe SHINE site is located within the Southeastern Wisconsin Till Plains where, at the time of European settlement, forests were common on moraines and along watercourses whereas prairie occurred on level to rolling uplands (Woods et al., 2006). According to Will-Wolf and Montague (Will-Wolf, S, and T.C. Montague, 1994), prairie covered approximately 50percent of southern Wisconsin prior to European settlement. However, given the intensity of agricultural land uses, a very small fraction of the original tallgrass prairie remains in Wisconsin (Higgins et al., 2001; Smith, Daryl D., 1990).Conversion of native plant communities to agriculture in the Midwest took place primarily in the 19th Century and was accelerated in 1837 by John Deere's invention of the self-scouring steel plow (Robertson, Ken, 2008). Conversion to agriculture not only changed the composition of plant communities, but also resulted in the draining of wetlands and the channelization of small streams to accommodate row crop production. Lands of the SHINE site have been in continuous agricultural production for several decades. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-98Rev. 019.3.5.4Places and Entities of Special InterestThis subsection provides information relative to the ecological resources of special interest near the SHINE site. The occurrence and characteristics of these features is developed as a result of quarterly field studies on and immediately surrounding the site, general field reconnaissance, and from agency correspondence.19.3.5.4.1Communities and Habitats of Special InterestEcological communities of special interest near the SHINE site include wetlands and terrestrial communities of special interest identified by WDNR. As described in Subsection 19.3.5.6, mapped wetland land cover is sparse near the SHINE site as indicated in Table 19.3.1-1. | ||
Wetlands mapped near the site include 722 ac. (292 ha) of woody wetlands and 787 ac. (318 ha) of emergent herbaceous wetlands. Together, wetland cover types account for 3percent of the land cover within the 5-mi. (8 km) radius. There are no wetlands on-site.As part of a WDNR endangered resources review letter, six communities of special interest were identified near the SHINE site (WDNR, 2012c): *Dry prairie, *Dry-mesic prairie, *Mesic prairie, *Southern dry-mesic forest, | Wetlands mapped near the site include 722 ac. (292 ha) of woody wetlands and 787 ac. (318 ha) of emergent herbaceous wetlands. Together, wetland cover types account for 3percent of the land cover within the 5-mi. (8 km) radius. There are no wetlands on-site.As part of a WDNR endangered resources review letter, six communities of special interest were identified near the SHINE site (WDNR, 2012c): *Dry prairie, *Dry-mesic prairie, *Mesic prairie, *Southern dry-mesic forest, | ||
*Southern mesic forest, and *Wet prairie. | |||
Dry Prairie. This dry grassland community usually occurs on steep south or west facing slopes or at the summits of river bluffs with sandstone or dolomite bedrock near the surface. Short to medium-sized prairie grasses such as little bluestem (Schizachyrium scoparium), side-oats grama (Bouteloua curtipendula), hairy grama (Bouteloua hirsuta), and prairie dropseed (Sporobolus heterolepis) are the dominants in this community. Common shrubs and forbs include lead | |||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
American Society of Mammologists, 2012 Chapter 19 - Environmental | American Society of Mammologists, 2012 Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-115Rev. 0Table 19.3.5-5 Avifaunal Species Potentially Occurring on or near the SHINE Site(Sheet 1 of 3)Scientific NameCommon Name FieldSurveysAbundance(a)Wisconsin Breeding Bird Atlas(b)Breeding Bird Survey(c)Actitis macularia Spotted sandpiper XAgelaius phoeniceus Red-winged blackbird A(d)XXAmmodramus savannarum Grasshopper sparrow RXAnas platyrhynchos MallardRXXAccipiter cooperii Cooper's hawk RArchilochus colubris Ruby-throated hummingbird XArdea herodiasGreat blue heron XXBaeolophus bicolorTufted titmouse OBombycilla cedrorum Cedar waxwing UXXBranta canadensis Canada goose O(d)XXBubo virginianusGreat horned owl XButeo jamaicensis Red-tailed hawk U(d)XXButorides virescens Green heron XCardinalis cardinalis Northern cardinal CXXCarduelis tristis American goldfinch CXXCarpodacus mexicanus House finch CXXCeryle alcyonBelted kingfisher XXChaetura pelagica Chimney swift XCharadrius vociferus KilldeerO(d)XXChordeiles minorCommon nighthawk RXCistothorus platensis Sedge wren XCoccyzus americanusYellow-billed cuckoo XCoccyzus erythropthalmusBlack-billed cuckoo XColaptes auratusNorthern flicker RXXColinus virginianus Northern bobwhite XColumba livia Rock dove UXXContopus virens Eastern wood pewee UXXCorvus brachyrhynchos American crow C(d)XXCyanocitta cristataBlue jayOXXDendroica petechiaYellow warbler RXXDolichonyx oryzivorusBobolinkXDumetella carolinensis Gray catbird UXXEmpidonax alnorumAlder flycatcher XEmpidonax minimus Least flycatcher RXEmpidonax spp.Willow/alder flycatcher XEmpidonax traillii Willow flycatcher XEremophila alpestris Horned lark C(d)XEuphagus cyanocephalus Brewer's blackbird UXFalco sparverius American kestrel XX Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-116Rev. 0Table 19.3.5-5 Avifaunal Species Potentially Occurring on or near the SHINE Site(Sheet 2 of 3)Scientific NameCommon Name Field Surveys Abundance(a)Wisconsin Breeding Bird Atlas(b)Breeding Bird Survey(c)Geothlypis triachasCommon yellowthroat RXXGrus canadensis Sandhill crane XXHirundo rustica Barn swallow UXXHylocichla mustelina Wood thrush XXIcterus galbula Baltimore oriole RXXIcterus spurius Orchard oriole RXJunco hyemalisDark-eyed junco OLarus delawarensis Ring-billed gull RXMelanerpes carolinus Red-bellied woodpecker OXXMelanerpes erythrocephalusRed-headed woodpecker XMeleagris gallopavo Wild turkey OXMelospiza melodia Song sparrow OXXMimus polyglottos Northern mockingbird OMolothrus ater Brown-headed cowbird OXXMyiarchus crinitus Great crested flycatcher RXXPasser domesticus House sparrow CXXPasserculus sandwichensis Savannah sparrow XPasserina cyanea Indigo bunting RXXPetrochelidon pyrrhonotaCliff swallow XXPhasianus colchicus Ring-necked pheasant XPheucticus ludovicianus Rose-breasted grosbeak XPicoides pubescensDowny woodpecker OXXPicoides villosus Hairy woodpecker XPipilo erythrophthalmus Eastern towhee UPoecile atricapillusBlack-capped chickadee OXXPolioptila caeruleaBlue-gray gnatcatcher RXXPooecetes gramineus Vesper sparrow XXProgne subisPurple martin RXQuiscalus quiscula Common grackle CXXRiparia riparia Bank swallow XSayornis phoebe Eastern phoebe OXXSialia sialis Eastern bluebird OXXSitta carolinensisWhite-breasted nuthatch OXXSpiza americanaDickcissel XSpizella arboreaAmerican tree sparrow RSpizella passerina Chipping sparrow OXXSpizella pusilla Field sparrow U(d)XXStelgidopteryx serripennis Northern rough-winged swallowRXX Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-117Rev. 0Table 19.3.5-5 Avifaunal Species Potentially Occurring on or near the SHINE Site(Sheet 3 of 3) | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Scientific Name Common Name FieldSurveysAbundance (a)Wisconsin Breeding Bird Atlas (b)Breeding Bird Survey(c)Sturnella magna Eastern meadowlark OXXSturnella neglecta Western meadowlark XSturnus vulgaris European starling AXXTachycineta bicolorTree swallow RXXToxostoma rufumBrown thrasher UXXTroglodytes aedon House wren XXTurdus migratoriusAmerican robin AXXTyrannus tyrannusEastern kingbird UXXVireo gilvus Warbling vireo XXVireo olivaceus Red-eyed vireo XXWilsonia catrina Hooded warbler XZenaida macrouraMourning dove UXXZonotrichia albicollis White-throated sparrow USpecies Richness 586174a)A=abundant; C=common; O=occasional; U=uncommon; R=rareb)WBBA, 2012c)USGS, 2012d d)Indicates species observed on-site. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-118Rev. 0Table 19.3.5-6 Reptiles and Amphibians Potentially Occurring on or near the SHINE SiteScientific NameCommon NameObserved during Field SurveyTurtlesApolone spinifera Spiny softshell turtleChrysemes pictaPainted turtleChelydra serpentinaCommon snapping turtle XEmydoidea blandingii Blanding's turtleGraptemys geographicaCommon map turtleGraptemys ouachitensisOuachita map turtleGraptemys pseudogeographica False map turtleSternotherus odoratus Common musk turtleSalamandersNecturus maculosaMudpuppyFrogs and ToadsBufo americanusAmerican toad XHyla chrysoscelis Copes gray treefrogHyla versicolorEastern gray treefrogPseudacris cruciferSpring peeper XPseudacris triseritataWestern chorus frogRana catesbianaBullfrogXRana clanitansGreen frog XRana pipiensNorthern leopard frog XRana sylvaticaWood frogSnakesColuber constictorBlue racerElaphe vulpina Fox snakeHeterodon platyrhinosEastern hog-nosed snakeLampropeltis triangulum Milk snakeNerodia sipedonNorthern water snakeOpheodrys vernalisSmooth green snakeSistrurus catenatusEastern massasaugaStoreria dekayiNorthern brown snakeStoreria occipitomaculataRed-bellied snakeThamnophis sirtalisEastern garter snake XLizardsCnemidophorus sexlineatusSix-lined racerunnerEumeces fasciatusFive-lined skink | |||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
WDNR, 2012f Chapter 19 - Environmental | WDNR, 2012f Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-119Rev. 0Table 19.3.5-7 Protected Species near the SHINE Site(a)Scientific NameCommon Name Status(a)FishAnguilla rostrataAmerican eelSpecies of special concern (S)Erimystax x-punctatusGravel chubEndangered (S)Lythrurus umbratilisRedfin ShinerThreatened (S)Moxostoma valenciennesiGreater redhorseThreatened (S)Notropis nubilusOzark MinnowThreatened (S)Mussels Alasmidonta marginataElktoeSpecies of special concern (S)Cyclonaias tuberculataPurple wartybackEndangered (S) | ||
Quadrula metanevra MonkeyfaceThreatened (S)Venustaconcha ellipsiformisEllipseThreatened (S)Villosa irisRainbow shellEndangered (S)Turtles Emydoidea blandingiiBlanding's turtleThreatened (S) | |||
PlantsAgastache nepetoides Yellow giant hyssopThreatened (S)Artemisa dracunculusDragon wormwoodSpecies of special concern (S)Asclepias lanuginosaWoolly milkweedThreatened (S)Asclepias purpurascensPurple milkweedEndangered (S)Besseya bulliiKitten tailsThreatened (S) | |||
Cacalia tuberosaPrairie Indian-plantainThreatened (S)Calylophus serrulatusYellow evening primroseSpecies of special concern (S)Camassia scilloidesWild hyancinthEndangered (S)Cirsium hilliiHill's thistleThreatened (S)Echinacea pallidaPale purple coneflowerThreatened (S)Euphorbia commutataWood spurgeSpecies of special concern (S)Lespedeza leptostachyaPrairie bush-cloverEndangered (S)Threatened (F)Melica nitensThree-flowered melic grassSpecies of special concern (S)Nothocalais cuspidataPrairie false-dandelionSpecies of special concern (S)Penstemon hirsutusHairy beardtongueSpecies of special concern (S)Polytaenia nuttalliiPrairie parsleyThreatened (S)Prenanthes asperaRough rattlesnake-rootEndangered (S)Ruellia humilisHairy wild-petuniaEndangered (S)Scutellaria parvulaSmall skullcapEndangered (S)Silene niveaSnowy campion Threatened (S)Thaspium trifoliatumPurple meadow-parsnipSpecies of special concern (S)Cypripedium candidumSmall white lady's-slipperThreatened (S)Hypericum sphaerocarpumRound-fruited St. John's-wortThreatened (S)Myosotis laxaSmall forget-me-notSpecies of special concern (S)Nuphar advenaYellow water lilySpecies of special concern (S)Plantanus occidentalisSycamoreSpecies of special concern (S)Polygala incarnata Pink milkwortEndangered (S)a) Protected species information was provided by USFWS and WDNR within a 6-mi (9.7 km) radius of the site b) State listed (S), Federally listed (F). | |||
==References:== | ==References:== | ||
USFWS, 2012 and WDNR, 2012c Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-120Rev. 019.3.6HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCESCultural resource studies were performed for the SHINE site that consisted of a geographical information system (GIS) analysis, a records level review of properties listed on the National Register of Historic Properties (NRHP), and | USFWS, 2012 and WDNR, 2012c Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-120Rev. 019.3.6HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCESCultural resource studies were performed for the SHINE site that consisted of a geographical information system (GIS) analysis, a records level review of properties listed on the National Register of Historic Properties (NRHP), and fi eld surveys. GIS analyses and records reviews were performed on an area within a 10-mi. (16-km) radius of the SHINE site. While this radius is not specified in the Final ISG Augmenting NUREG-15 37, the use of 10 mi. (16 km) is consistent with guidance of NUREG-1555 (Subsection 2.5.3) regarding the radius appropriate for the collection of sufficient data to describe historic properties within the area surrounding a proposed project. Field surveys and reviews consisted of a Phase I archaeological survey of the entirety of the SHINE site. This survey was conducted to ensure compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and other Federal and state cultural resources management regulations.19.3.6.1Cultural SettingGeneral information regarding the cultural setting in the vicinity of the SHINE site is summarized by Knopf and Krause (Knopf, Chad and Kari Krause, 2012) and is presented in this section. | ||
The prehistory of southern Wisconsin is divided into four broad periods describing Native American habitation and development: the Paleoindian, Archaic, Woodland, and Mississippian periods. Approximately 10,000 years ago, Paleoindians pushed northward into Wisconsin as the glaciers retreated. These hunter-gatherers exploited the new resource-rich environments and hunted woolly mammoth, mastodon, and bison. Small, mobile groups utilized fluted and unfluted projectile points/knives designed for hunting and butchering animals. Clovis and Folsom points have been recovered in southeastern Wisconsin.Along with the change in the climate to warmer and drier conditions that occurred around 8000years ago, came the shift from hunting Ice Age mammals to smaller modern animals such as deer and elk. This shift coincided with the Archaic Tradition, which is subdivided into the Early, Middle, and Late Archaic periods. The social organization during the Early and Middle Archaic periods continued with mobile groups of hunter-gatherers with an increasingly sedentary lifestyle during the Late Archaic period.Cultural changes that occurred during the Woodland period (approximately 3000 years ago) included the use of pottery and bow and arrow, construction of conical and effigy mounds, and the existence of large villages. The Early Woodland period is characterized by the appearance of flat bottomed vessels tempered with grit, Kramer and Waubesa projectile points, and conical mounds. Subsistence practices during the Middle Woodland period included hunting, gathering of nuts and wild rice, and cultivation of squash. The Late Woodland period is characterized by more intensive cultivation of corn and the use of pottery consisting of globular jars with cord or fabric impressed decorations. The Mississippian period began about 1000 years ago; Native American occupants of Rock County were the Koshkonong Oneota. These people lived in large villages, grew corn, beans, and squash, and maintained a large trade network that crossed the continent. The Oneota are considered the ancestors of the modern-day Ho Chunk (Winnebago) tribe. The Indian tribes present in the state when it was first visited by Jean Nicolet in 1634 included the Ho Chunk, Potawatomi, Menominee, and Chippewa Indians. With the influx of European fur traders, loggers and early settlers in the late 1600s, and the succeeding Native American and European wars, Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-121Rev. 0many tribes of southeastern Wisconsin either migrated (or were removed) west of the Mississippi River.Euro-American settlers moved into Wisconsin during the 1830s and 1840s to take control of the territory ceded by Native American groups. Throughout the | The prehistory of southern Wisconsin is divided into four broad periods describing Native American habitation and development: the Paleoindian, Archaic, Woodland, and Mississippian periods. Approximately 10,000 years ago, Paleoindians pushed northward into Wisconsin as the glaciers retreated. These hunter-gatherers exploited the new resource-rich environments and hunted woolly mammoth, mastodon, and bison. Small, mobile groups utilized fluted and unfluted projectile points/knives designed for hunting and butchering animals. Clovis and Folsom points have been recovered in southeastern Wisconsin.Along with the change in the climate to warmer and drier conditions that occurred around 8000years ago, came the shift from hunting Ice Age mammals to smaller modern animals such as deer and elk. This shift coincided with the Archaic Tradition, which is subdivided into the Early, Middle, and Late Archaic periods. The social organization during the Early and Middle Archaic periods continued with mobile groups of hunter-gatherers with an increasingly sedentary lifestyle during the Late Archaic period.Cultural changes that occurred during the Woodland period (approximately 3000 years ago) included the use of pottery and bow and arrow, construction of conical and effigy mounds, and the existence of large villages. The Early Woodland period is characterized by the appearance of flat bottomed vessels tempered with grit, Kramer and Waubesa projectile points, and conical mounds. Subsistence practices during the Middle Woodland period included hunting, gathering of nuts and wild rice, and cultivation of squash. The Late Woodland period is characterized by more intensive cultivation of corn and the use of pottery consisting of globular jars with cord or fabric impressed decorations. The Mississippian period began about 1000 years ago; Native American occupants of Rock County were the Koshkonong Oneota. These people lived in large villages, grew corn, beans, and squash, and maintained a large trade network that crossed the continent. The Oneota are considered the ancestors of the modern-day Ho Chunk (Winnebago) tribe. The Indian tribes present in the state when it was first visited by Jean Nicolet in 1634 included the Ho Chunk, Potawatomi, Menominee, and Chippewa Indians. With the influx of European fur traders, loggers and early settlers in the late 1600s, and the succeeding Native American and European wars, Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-121Rev. 0many tribes of southeastern Wisconsin either migrated (or were removed) west of the Mississippi River.Euro-American settlers moved into Wisconsin during the 1830s and 1840s to take control of the territory ceded by Native American groups. Throughout the 19 th and 20th centuries, Rock County was primarily an agricultural economy that utilized the power of the Rock River for mills and transportation of trade commodities. Despite burgeoning industrial development and population growth after the Civil War, the farming industry expanded as railroads and urban markets developed in veins along the rail lines throughout the state. Urban growth and the advancements in transportation spurred along the shift in Wisconsin agriculture to focus on commercial dairy production, which helped to extend the viability of traditional agriculture in the region. Manufacturing boomed in Rock County in the 20th century, as General Motors (GM) and other firms began producing tractors, machinery, paper, pens, and refined farm products such as snack foods. Though manufacturing gained a large market share, agriculture has remained an important factor in the regional economy.19.3.6.2Previous InvestigationsTo ensure that all potential impacts to known historic properties were addressed prior to construction, SHINE completed the background records review for the project at the Historic Preservation Office, Wisconsin Historical Society (WHS) in Madison, Wisconsin and at the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency (IHPA) in Springfield, Illinois; NRHP-listed properties were identified using the online NRHP database. This investigation covered a 10-mi. (16-km) radius surrounding the SHINE site. This radius encompasses all of Rock County, Wisconsin and portions of Winnebago and Boone counties, Illinois (Knopf, Chad and Kari Krause, 2012).19.3.6.2.1Previously Conducted Cultural Resources SurveysA total of 126 cultural resource surveys in Wisconsin and 17 surveys in Illinois were completed and recorded at the WHS and IHPA within a 10-mi. (16-km) radius surrounding the project area. These included 38 records reviews, 102 Phase I investigations, and two archaeological site excavations. Only seven surveys were conducted within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the SHINE site (Knopf and Krause, 2012) (Table 19.3.6-1). None of these investigations were located within the project boundary. Two reports could not be examined because they were either missing or never received by the WHS. The remaining five surveys were documented and the reports were on file at the WHS. The five documented surveys were associated with the construction along US 51, I-90, the installation of a sewer line, and upgrades at the SWRA. Two surveys were conducted at the SWRA. The SWRA is located immediately to the west of US 51. No archaeological sites were identified for any of these five projects, and no additional fieldwork was recommended.19.3.6.2.2Previously Recorded Archaeological SitesEligible or listed archaeological sites located within a 10-mi. (16-km) radius of the SHINE site were identified through a information request with the WHS and by a database search of Illinois Historic Preservation Agency (IHPA) records. There are 223 archaeological sites identified in Wisconsin, five sites identified in Illinois, and onesite that is bisected by the Wisconsin-Illinois state line (WHS, 2012a; IHPA, 2013). As is presented in Table 19.3.6-2, only one prehistoric site is listed on the NRHP, whereas a total of 87 sites are eligible for listing on the NRHP in Wisconsin; there are no eligible or listed sites in Illinois. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-122Rev. 0The majority of the 87 eligible sites consist of prehistoric burials or mounds (n=44), while one mound site is a listed NRHP property (the Strong Partridge Mound Group). The Strong Partridge Mound Group was listed on the NRHP on March1, 1994 and is located in Beloit, Wisconsin. It is a prehistoric effigy mound group from the Late Woodland period. The remaining eligible sites consist of 39 historic/modern period cemeteries and four archaeological sites. All cemeteries or burials/prehistoric mounds are protected under Wisconsin Statute 157.70. The Happy Hallow Cemetery is closest, located approximately 1.2 mi. (2.0 km) south of the SHINE site (Figure19.3.1-4).19.3.6.2.3Previously Recorded Historic Structures and Districts Table 19.3.6-3 lists historic structures and districts listed on the NRHP and located within a 10mi. (16-km) radius of the SHINE site. A total of 85NRHP-listed | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-122Rev. 0The majority of the 87 eligible sites consist of prehistoric burials or mounds (n=44), while one mound site is a listed NRHP property (the Strong Partridge Mound Group). The Strong Partridge Mound Group was listed on the NRHP on March1, 1994 and is located in Beloit, Wisconsin. It is a prehistoric effigy mound group from the Late Woodland period. The remaining eligible sites consist of 39 historic/modern period cemeteries and four archaeological sites. All cemeteries or burials/prehistoric mounds are protected under Wisconsin Statute 157.70. The Happy Hallow Cemetery is closest, located approximately 1.2 mi. (2.0 km) south of the SHINE site (Figure19.3.1-4).19.3.6.2.3Previously Recorded Historic Structures and Districts Table 19.3.6-3 lists historic structures and districts listed on the NRHP and located within a 10mi. (16-km) radius of the SHINE site. A total of 85NRHP-listed distri cts or properties are identified in Wisconsin as illustrated in Figure 19.3.6-1. However, no NRHP-listed properties are located in Illinois (IHPA, 2013).Recorded sites within Wisconsin summarized in Table 19.3.6-3 include districts and numerous individual properties located in Janesville and Be loit. Individually listed properties have also been identified in the communities of Bradford, Clinton, Footville, Turtle, and La Prairie. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-124Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-1 Previously Recorded Cultural Resources Surveys within 1-mi. (1.6-km) of the | Janesville contains 14 historic districts and 20 historic properties. The Benton Avenue, Bostwick Avenue, Columbus Circle, Conrad Cottages and the Look West Avenue Historic Districts contain domestic architecture of such styles as Colonial Revival, Tudor Revival, Mission Revival, Greek Revival, Italianate, Queen Anne, Late Victorian, and bungalow/craftsman. The remaining historic districts, including Courthouse Hill, East and West Milwaukee, Jefferson Avenue, North Main and South Main Historic Districts, are associated with the city's residences, commerce, industry, and government. The Old Fourth Ward and Prospect Hill Historic Districts are of Italianate or Queen Anne construction and contain residential dwellings, as well as educational and religious facilities. The remaining individual historic properties are primarily houses distributed throughout Janesville; additional properties include a business, educational facilities, an armory, and churches. The nearest listed NRHP property, the John and Martha Hugunin House, is located 1.1mi. (1.7 km) northeast of the SHINE site. The Hugunin House is Italianate in style, and is significant for its architectural design and relation to historic farming in the region. It was listed on the NRHP on June1, 2005.Three historic districts are located in the City of Beloit, located 3.7 mi. (6.0 km) south of the SHINE site. The Bluff Street Historic District contains domestic dwellings dating from 1847 to 1915 and is significant for its association with European exploration and settlement. The Merrill Avenue Historic District contains domestic dwellings dating from 1891 to 1942 and is composed of 19th to 20th century revival architectural styles. The Near East Side Historic District is composed of a mix of architectural styles dating from 1850 to 1932 and contains two prehistoric archaeological mound groups as contributing elements to the district. While the remaining 27individual historic properties are primarily houses distributed throughout the area, additional properties include an apartment complex, municipal facilities, a museum, college buildings, and churches. Constructed in 1917, Fairbanks Flats were built exclusively for African-American workers after World War I and played a prominent role in community planning during the twentieth century. The apartments are located 6.9 mi. (11.1 km) south of the SHINE site. Another 21 NRHP-listed historic properties are scattered within the 10-mi. (16-km) radius around the SHINE site (Figure 19.3.6-1). The community of Clinton, located 8.2 mi. (13.2 km) southeast Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-123Rev. 0of the SHINE site, contains examples of governmental and commerce architecture with the Clinton Village Hall, water tower, Citizens Bank, and the Crosby Block. The remaining NRHP-listed properties are residential dwellings dating from the late 19 th century constructed in Italianate, Queen Anne, and Greek Revival architectural styles. Two farmsteads in Bradford Township; two dwellings in Plymouth and LaPrairie Townships; a house, church, and an iron bridge in Turtle Township; and two stores, one bank, and one house in the Town of Footville comprise the last of the NRHP-listed properties within the 10-mi. (16-km) radius of the SHINE | ||
West00-0787Phase I archaeological survey at the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2000No sites identified; no additional fieldwork recommended0.6-mi. (1-km) West 93-2029Records review for proposed sewer and water main route 1993No sites identified; no additional fieldwork recommended0.3-mi. (0.5-km) West84-1001Phase I archaeological survey of Route 11 - pedestrian survey1985No sites identified; no additional fieldwork recommended0.8-mi. (1.3-km) | |||
North05-0607Phase I archaeological survey at Rock County Airport - shovel testing2005No sites identified; no additional fieldwork recommended0.6-mi. (1-km) West 97-1131Phase I archaeological survey of proposed Janesville bypass1997Not available0.8-mi. (1.3-km) North89-5527Records review1989Not available0.8-mi. (1.3-km) North | site.19.3.6.3Results of Phase I Cultural Resource Investigation A Phase I archeological survey was conducted on lands within the project boundary. The survey was supervised in the field by Mr. Chad Knopf while Ms. Kari Krause served as the Principal Investigator. Mr. Knopf has a Bachelor's degree in Anthropology and has over 2years of experience in historic and prehistoric archaeology. Kari Krause is a Registered Professional Archaeologist with a Master of Arts degree in Anthropology. Ms. Krause has over 17 years of experience conducting archaeological projects throughout the Midwestern United States. Fieldwork was performed following methodologies established by the WHS. The survey was completed utilizing a pedestrian survey at closely spaced transect intervals (less than 49 ft.[15m] between transects) that allowed crews to systematically inspect the ground surface of the tilled agricultural field. Three shovel test pits were judgmentally placed and excavated across the project area to provide an understanding of the soil stratigraphy. No archaeological sites or evidence of cultural resources were identified within the survey area, and no further archaeological investigations are recommended (Knopf, Chad and Kari Krause, 2012). The report was submitted to the WHS for review and comment. In a letter dated February 16, 2012 (WHS, 2012), the WHS indicated that they had reviewed the report and found it complete and concluded that consultation regarding the SHINE project was complete.19.3.6.4Native American and State Agency ConsultationSHINE initiated consultation with 13 tribes that are federally recognized in Wisconsin. A single response letter was received from the Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska who indicated that they have cultural properties of interest in the project area, but had no concerns regarding the project. However, they did indicate the desire to be contacted in the event burial sites or other cultural materials were discovered during construction. Follow-up calls were made to representatives of the remaining 12 tribes; however, no return calls to SHINE were received. Illinois currently does not have a federally recognized Nati ve American tribe. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-124Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-1 Previously Recorded Cultural Resources Surveys within 1-mi. (1.6-km) of the Site Report No.Survey TypeDateResultsDistance from Site (centerpoint)88-2033Interviews for planned project associated with US Highway 511988No sites identified; no additional fieldwork recommended0.2-mi. (0.3-km) | |||
West00-0787Phase I archaeological survey at the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2000No sites identified; no additional fieldwork recommended0.6-mi. (1-km) | |||
West 93-2029Records review for proposed sewer and water main route 1993No sites identified; no additional fieldwork recommended0.3-mi. (0.5-km) | |||
West84-1001Phase I archaeological survey of Route 11 - pedestrian survey1985No sites identified; no additional fieldwork recommended0.8-mi. (1.3-km) | |||
North05-0607Phase I archaeological survey at Rock County Airport - shovel testing2005No sites identified; no additional fieldwork recommended0.6-mi. (1-km) | |||
West 97-1131Phase I archaeological survey of proposed Janesville bypass1997Not available0.8-mi. (1.3-km) | |||
North89-5527Records review1989Not available0.8-mi. (1.3-km) | |||
North | |||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
Knopf, Chad and Kari Krause, 2012 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-125Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-2 Eligible or Listed Archaeological Sites within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site, Rock County, Wisconsin(Sheet 1 of 4)State NumberBurial NumberSite NameAgeNRHP StatusRO-0130BRO-0179Spring Brook Burial SiteUnknownEligibleRO-0286BRO-0127Morgan School EnclosureUnknownEligibleRO-0036BRO-0126McLenegan Group SouthUnknownEligible RO-0141BRO-0085McLenegan Group NorthUnknownEligibleRO-0138BRO-0111Pierce GroupUnknownEligibleRO-0136BRO-0110Baarz MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0097BRO-0147Chrispinsen MoundUnknownEligibleRO-0007BRO-0181Crystal and Hiawatha SpringsUnknownEligible RO-032490J-WUnknownEligibleRO-0009Riverside Park VillageUnknownEligibleRO-0076BRO-0176Riverbank Quarry BurialsUnknownEligible RO-032590J-XUnknownEligibleRO-0080BRO-0140McElroy TrioUnknownEligibleRO-0082BRO-0142Sutherland GravesUnknownEligible RO-0103BRO-0150Bailey MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0104BRO-0151Spring Brook MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0107BRO-0152Several Small TumuliUnknownEligible RO-0117BRO-0153Woodstock Mound GroupUnknownEligibleRO-0290BRO-0102Rockport Park MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0307 JonesUnknownEligibleRO-0126BRO-0107Afton Mound GroupUnknownEligibleRO-0122BRO-?InmanUnknownEligibleRO-0291BRO-0099Six House MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0125BRO-0155Reynolds GroupUnknownEligibleRO-0119BRO-0154Afton MillUnknownEligibleRO-0127BRO-0108Henbest MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0021BRO-0116Roth Mound GroupUnknownEligibleRO-0023BRO-0117Yost MoundUnknownEligibleRO-0030BRO-0122Weirick Mound GroupUnknownEligible Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-126Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-2 Eligible or Listed Archaeological Sites within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site, Rock County, Wisconsin(Sheet 2 of 4)State NumberBurial NumberSite NameAgeNRHP StatusRO-0027BRO-0119Henderson MoundUnknownEligibleRO-0031BRO-0123Adams - DuquyUnknownEligibleRO-0143BRO-0087Strong Partridge Mound GroupUnknownNRHPRO-0142BRO-0086Joint Switch GroupUnknownEligibleRO-0034BRO-0125Poe MoundUnknownEligibleRO-0144BRO-0088Whitfield CampsiteUnknownEligibleRO-0019BRO-0115Water Tower MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0038BRO-0128JonesUnknownEligible RO-0015BRO-0114Beloit College Mound Group300-600 A.D. (un-calibrated); Date most likely between 500-900 A.D.EligibleRO-0039/ WO-0460(a)BRO-0129State Line Mound Group800-1300 A.D.EligibleRO-0390BRO-?Henbest MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0083BRO-0141Duplicate of RO-0104 Spring Brook MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0028BRO-0120Baldwin MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0396BRO-0174Buells BearUnknownEligibleRO-0407BRO-0172Oakwood Cemetery MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0041BRO-0131HillcrestUnknownEligibleRO-0219BRO-0173Ho-Chunk Council HouseUnknownEligibleRO-0140BRO-0082Murphy GroupUnknownEligibleRO-0425BRO-0171Nyman-Inman BurialsUnknownEligibleRO-0426BRO-0050Dillenback CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0076Turtle Cemetery (aka Turtleville Cemetery)Currently activeEligible BRO-0078Shopiere Cemetery (aka Bethel Cemetery)Currently activeEligible BRO-0077Clinton Corners CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0167Jack Family CemeteryUnknownEligible Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-127Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-2 Eligible or Listed Archaeological Sites within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site, Rock County, Wisconsin(Sheet 3 of 4)State NumberBurial NumberSite NameAgeNRHP Status BRO-0168Murray Settlement CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0066Newark CemeteryCurrently activeEligible BRO-0067Unnamed CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0064Luther valley east CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0069Unnamed CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0070Plymouth Cemetery (aka Hanover Cemetery)Presently activeEligible BRO-0068Naugle Cemetery (aka Norwegian Cemetery; Baptist Church Cemetery)UnknownEligible BRO-0044Mount Zion Cemetery (Clarke)UnknownEligible BRO-0043Emerald Grove Cemetery1850-presentEligible BRO-0042Milton Lawn Memorial Park1932-presentEligible BRO-0053Mt. Pleasant CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0051Rock County Institution CemeteryUnknownEligibleBRO-0049Unnamed CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0048Mt. Olivet Cemetery1852Eligible BRO-0047Oak Hill Cemetery1851Eligible BRO-0046Unnamed CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0165Trinity Episcopal Church CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0045Unnamed cemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0081Indian CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0040Grove Cemetery1848Eligible BRO-0041Bethel Cemetery (aka Disciples Cemetery; Center Cemetery)1869-presentEligible BRO-0018Carver's Rock Burial1843Eligible BRO-0019Clinton Cemetery1860-presentEligibleBRO-0088Polander Mound GroupUnknownEligibleBRO-0122Haggerty Mound GroupUnknownEligible Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-128Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-2 Eligible or Listed Archaeological Sites within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site, Rock County, Wisconsin(Sheet 4 of 4)State NumberBurial NumberSite NameAgeNRHP Status BRO-0007Oakwood Cemetery (aka Beloit Cemetery)1840-presentEligible BRO-0006Calvary Catholic Cemetery1850sEligible BRO-0008East Lawn Cemetery1919-presentEligible BRO-0009Isolated GraveUnknownEligible BRO-0010Mt. Thabor Cemetery (aka Tabor Cemetery or Thabor Cemetery)1952Eligible BRO-0011Baldwin CemeteryPresently activeEligibleBRO-0129Nine Mile SwallowUnknownEligible BRO-0005Afton Cemetery (aka Town of Rock Cemetery)UnknownEligible BRO-0012Happy Hollow Cemetery (aka Gower or Rock Vale Cemetery)1850sEligibleBRO-0133Langford MoundUnknownEligiblea) Rock County, WI/Winnebago County, IL | Knopf, Chad and Kari Krause, 2012 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-125Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-2 Eligible or Listed Archaeological Sites within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site, Rock County, Wisconsin(Sheet 1 of 4) | ||
State NumberBurial NumberSite NameAgeNRHP StatusRO-0130BRO-0179Spring Brook Burial SiteUnknownEligibleRO-0286BRO-0127Morgan School EnclosureUnknownEligibleRO-0036BRO-0126McLenegan Group SouthUnknownEligible RO-0141BRO-0085McLenegan Group NorthUnknownEligibleRO-0138BRO-0111Pierce GroupUnknownEligibleRO-0136BRO-0110Baarz MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0097BRO-0147Chrispinsen MoundUnknownEligibleRO-0007BRO-0181Crystal and Hiawatha SpringsUnknownEligible RO-032490J-WUnknownEligibleRO-0009Riverside Park VillageUnknownEligibleRO-0076BRO-0176Riverbank Quarry BurialsUnknownEligible RO-032590J-XUnknownEligibleRO-0080BRO-0140McElroy TrioUnknownEligibleRO-0082BRO-0142Sutherland GravesUnknownEligible RO-0103BRO-0150Bailey MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0104BRO-0151Spring Brook MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0107BRO-0152Several Small TumuliUnknownEligible RO-0117BRO-0153Woodstock Mound GroupUnknownEligibleRO-0290BRO-0102Rockport Park MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0307 JonesUnknownEligibleRO-0126BRO-0107Afton Mound GroupUnknownEligibleRO-0122BRO-?InmanUnknownEligibleRO-0291BRO-0099Six House MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0125BRO-0155Reynolds GroupUnknownEligibleRO-0119BRO-0154Afton MillUnknownEligibleRO-0127BRO-0108Henbest MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0021BRO-0116Roth Mound GroupUnknownEligibleRO-0023BRO-0117Yost MoundUnknownEligibleRO-0030BRO-0122Weirick Mound GroupUnknownEligible Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-126Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-2 Eligible or Listed Archaeological Sites within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site, Rock County, Wisconsin(Sheet 2 of 4) | |||
State NumberBurial NumberSite NameAgeNRHP StatusRO-0027BRO-0119Henderson MoundUnknownEligibleRO-0031BRO-0123Adams - DuquyUnknownEligibleRO-0143BRO-0087Strong Partridge Mound GroupUnknownNRHPRO-0142BRO-0086Joint Switch GroupUnknownEligibleRO-0034BRO-0125Poe MoundUnknownEligibleRO-0144BRO-0088Whitfield CampsiteUnknownEligibleRO-0019BRO-0115Water Tower MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0038BRO-0128JonesUnknownEligible RO-0015BRO-0114Beloit College Mound Group300-600 A.D. (un-calibrated); Date most likely between 500-900 A.D.EligibleRO-0039/ | |||
WO-0460(a)BRO-0129State Line Mound Group800-1300 A.D.EligibleRO-0390BRO-?Henbest MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0083BRO-0141Duplicate of RO-0104 Spring Brook MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0028BRO-0120Baldwin MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0396BRO-0174Buells BearUnknownEligibleRO-0407BRO-0172Oakwood Cemetery MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0041BRO-0131HillcrestUnknownEligibleRO-0219BRO-0173Ho-Chunk Council HouseUnknownEligibleRO-0140BRO-0082Murphy GroupUnknownEligibleRO-0425BRO-0171Nyman-Inman BurialsUnknownEligibleRO-0426BRO-0050Dillenback CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0076Turtle Cemetery (aka Turtleville Cemetery)Currently activeEligible BRO-0078Shopiere Cemetery (aka Bethel Cemetery)Currently activeEligible BRO-0077Clinton Corners CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0167Jack Family CemeteryUnknownEligible Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-127Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-2 Eligible or Listed Archaeological Sites within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site, Rock County, Wisconsin(Sheet 3 of 4) | |||
State NumberBurial NumberSite NameAgeNRHP Status BRO-0168Murray Settlement CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0066Newark CemeteryCurrently activeEligible BRO-0067Unnamed CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0064Luther valley east CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0069Unnamed CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0070Plymouth Cemetery (aka Hanover Cemetery)Presently activeEligible BRO-0068Naugle Cemetery (aka Norwegian Cemetery; Baptist Church Cemetery)UnknownEligible BRO-0044Mount Zion Cemetery (Clarke)UnknownEligible BRO-0043Emerald Grove Cemetery1850-presentEligible BRO-0042Milton Lawn Memorial Park1932-presentEligible BRO-0053Mt. Pleasant CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0051Rock County Institution CemeteryUnknownEligibleBRO-0049Unnamed CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0048Mt. Olivet Cemetery1852Eligible BRO-0047Oak Hill Cemetery1851Eligible BRO-0046Unnamed CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0165Trinity Episcopal Church CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0045Unnamed cemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0081Indian CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0040Grove Cemetery1848Eligible BRO-0041Bethel Cemetery (aka Disciples Cemetery; Center Cemetery)1869-presentEligible BRO-0018Carver's Rock Burial1843Eligible BRO-0019Clinton Cemetery1860-presentEligibleBRO-0088Polander Mound GroupUnknownEligibleBRO-0122Haggerty Mound GroupUnknownEligible Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-128Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-2 Eligible or Listed Archaeological Sites within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site, Rock County, Wisconsin(Sheet 4 of 4) | |||
State NumberBurial NumberSite NameAgeNRHP Status BRO-0007Oakwood Cemetery (aka Beloit Cemetery)1840-presentEligible BRO-0006Calvary Catholic Cemetery1850sEligible BRO-0008East Lawn Cemetery1919-presentEligible BRO-0009Isolated GraveUnknownEligible BRO-0010Mt. Thabor Cemetery (aka Tabor Cemetery or Thabor Cemetery)1952Eligible BRO-0011Baldwin CemeteryPresently activeEligibleBRO-0129Nine Mile SwallowUnknownEligible BRO-0005Afton Cemetery (aka Town of Rock Cemetery)UnknownEligible BRO-0012Happy Hollow Cemetery (aka Gower or Rock Vale Cemetery)1850sEligibleBRO-0133Langford MoundUnknownEligiblea) Rock County, WI/Winnebago County, IL | |||
==References:== | ==References:== | ||
WHS, 2012a; IHPA, 2013 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-129Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-3 Historic Structures and Districts Listed on the NRHP within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site(Sheet 1 of 5)Historic NameCityDate State ListedNRHP Date ListedDistrict DescriptionArmory, TheJanesville1/1/198911/21/1978Bartlett Memorial Historical MuseumBeloit1/1/19894/11/1977Beloit Water TowerBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983Benton Avenue Historic DistrictJanesville4/25/19959/7/199684 contributing buildingsBlodgett, Selvy, HouseBeloit1/1/19895/23/1980Bluff Street Historic DistrictBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983109 contributing and 5 non-contributing buildings, 5 non-contributing archeological sitesBostwick Avenue Historic DistrictJanesville1/20/20064/24/20067 contributing buildings, 1contributing archeological siteBrasstown CottageBeloit1/1/19893/4/1983Church of St. Thomas the ApostleBeloit1/1/19891/7/ | WHS, 2012a; IHPA, 2013 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-129Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-3 Historic Structures and Districts Listed on the NRHP within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site(Sheet 1 of 5)Historic NameCityDate State ListedNRHP Date ListedDistrict DescriptionArmory, TheJanesville1/1/198911/21/1978Bartlett Memorial Historical MuseumBeloit1/1/19894/11/1977Beloit Water TowerBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983Benton Avenue Historic | ||
DistrictJanesville4/25/19959/7/199684 contributing buildingsBlodgett, Selvy, HouseBeloit1/1/19895/23/1980Bluff Street Historic DistrictBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983109 contributing and 5 non-contributing buildings, 5 non-contributing archeological sitesBostwick Avenue Historic | |||
DistrictJanesville1/20/20064/24/20067 contributing buildings, 1contributing archeological siteBrasstown CottageBeloit1/1/19893/4/1983Church of St. Thomas the | |||
ApostleBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983 Citizens BankClinton1/1/19898/1/1985City of Beloit Waterworks and Pump StationBeloit7/20/19909/13/1990 Clark-Brown HouseBeloit1/1/19899/13/1985Clinton Village HallClinton1/1/19898/1/1985Clinton Water TowerClinton1/1/19893/7/1985 Columbus Circle Historic | |||
DistrictJanesville10/15/20045/19/200564 contributing and 8 non-contributing buildingsConrad Cottages Historic | |||
DistrictJanesville2/3/19933/11/19937 contributing buildingsCourt Street Methodist ChurchJanesville1/1/198911/17/1977Courthouse Hill Historic DistrictJanesville1/1/19891/17/1986274 contributing and 72 non-contributing buildingsCrist, J. W., HouseBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-130Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-3 Historic Structures and Districts Listed on the NRHP within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site(Sheet 2 of 5)Historic NameCityDate State ListedNRHP Date ListedDistrict Description Crosby BlockClinton1/1/19898/1/19851 contributing buildingCrosby, James B., HouseJanesville4/25/199512/14/199810 contributing buildingsDean, Erastus, FarmsteadBradford (township)1/1/198912/4/1978DeLong, Homer B., HouseClinton1/1/19898/1/1985Dougan Round BarnBeloit1/1/19896/4/1979Dow, J.B., House and Carpenter Douglas BarnBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983East Milwaukee Street Historic | |||
DistrictJanesville1/1/19892/8/19807 contributing buildingsEmerson HallBeloit1/1/19899/20/1979Fairbanks FlatsBeloit1/1/19891/7/19834 contributing buildingsFirst Congregational ChurchBeloit1/1/19891/23/1975Footville CondenseryFootville1/1/19895/7/1982Footville State BankFootville1/1/19895/7/1982Fredendall BlockJanesville1/1/19893/25/1982 Hanchett BlockBeloit1/1/19893/20/1980 Hilton House HotelBeloit7/18/200311/7/2003Hugunin, John and Martha, | |||
HouseJanesville1/21/20056/1/2005Janesville Cotton MillJanesville1/1/19897/16/19802 contributing buildingsJanesville High SchoolJanesville1/15/19996/25/1999Janesville Public LibraryJanesville1/1/19897/1/1981Janesville Pumping StationJanesville1/1/19893/7/1985Jefferson Avenue Historic | |||
DistrictJanesville1/20/20064/19/200677 contributing and 7 non-contributing buildingsJones, John W., HouseJanesville7/20/20073/14/2008Lappin-Hayes BlockJanesville1/1/198911/7/1976 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-131Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-3 Historic Structures and Districts Listed on the NRHP within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site(Sheet 3 of 5)Historic NameCityDate State ListedNRHP Date ListedDistrict DescriptionLaPrairie Grange Hall No. 79LaPrairie (township)1/1/19894/11/1977Lathrop-Munn Cobblestone HouseBeloit1/1/19898/22/1977Look West Historic DistrictJanesville1/1/19893/26/1987547 contributing and 92 non-contributing buildings, 1contributing archeological | |||
siteLook West Historic District | |||
ExtensionJanesville12/11/199312/10/199371 contributing and 4 non-contributing buildingsLovejoy and Merrill-Nowlan | |||
HousesJanesville1/1/19891/21/19802 contributing buildingsMerrill Avenue Historic DistrictBeloit1/1/19892/19/19934 contributing buildingsMoran's SaloonBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983Murray-George HouseTurtle (township)1/1/19899/13/1985Myers-Newhoff HouseJanesville1/1/19895/18/1979Myers, Peter, Pork Packing Plant and Willard Coleman | |||
BuildingJanesville1/1/19897/7/19833 contributing buildingsNear East Side Historic | |||
DistrictBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983166 contributing and 14 non-contributing buildings, 2 contributing archeological sites, 1 contributing objectNeese, Elbert, HouseBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983North Main Street Historic DistrictJanesville1/1/19897/22/19834 contributing buildings Nye, Clark, HouseBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983Old Fourth Ward Historic DistrictJanesville2/7/19905/30/19901100 contributing and 443 non-contributing buildings, 1contributing and 1 non-contributing archeological | |||
siteOwen, William J., StoreFootville1/1/19895/7/1982 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-132Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-3 Historic Structures and Districts Listed on the NRHP within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site(Sheet 4 of 5)Historic NameCityDate State ListedNRHP Date ListedDistrict DescriptionPangborn, J. L., HouseClinton1/1/19898/1/1985Payne-Craig HouseJanesville1/1/19897/2/1987Pearsons Hall of ScienceBeloit1/1/19896/30/1980Prospect Hill Historic DistrictJanesville7/22/199211/5/1992115 contributing and 12 non-contributing buildingsRandall, Brewster, HouseJanesville1/1/19893/1/1984Rasey HouseBeloit1/1/198912/27/1974Rau, Charles, HouseBeloit1/1/19898/13/1976Richardson-Brinkman Cobblestone HouseClinton1/1/19897/28/1977Richardson, Hamilton, HouseJanesville1/1/19897/17/1978Rindfleisch BuildingBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983Shopiere Congregational | |||
ChurchTurtle (township)1/1/19898/13/1976Slaymaker, Stephen, HouseBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983Smiley, Samuel, HousePlymouth (township)1/1/198910/21/1982Smith, John, HouseClinton1/1/19898/1/1985South Main Street Historic DistrictJanesville4/19/19906/1/199014 contributing buildingsSt. Paul's Episcopal ChurchBeloit1/1/19894/4/1978Stark-Clint House1/1/19899/13/1985Strang, Soloman J., HouseFootville1/1/19895/7/1982Strong BuildingBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983Strunk, John and Eleanor, HouseJanesville7/20/20073/11/2008Tallman HouseJanesville1/1/198910/15/1970Taylor, A. E., HouseClinton1/1/19898/1/1985 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-133Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-3 Historic Structures and Districts Listed on the NRHP within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site(Sheet 5 of 5) | |||
==References:== | ==References:== | ||
WHS, 2012a; WHS, 2013Historic NameCityDate State ListedNRHP Date ListedDistrict DescriptionTurtleville Iron BridgeTurtle (township)1/1/19899/15/1977West Milwaukee Street Historic DistrictJanesville2/19/19905/17/199054 contributing and 10 non-contributing buildingsWillard, Frances, SchoolhouseJanesville1/1/198910/5/1977Wyman-Rye FarmsteadBradford (township)1/1/198911/7/1977; 11/21/19772 contributing and 3 non-contributing buildingsYates, Florence, HouseBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-134Rev. 019.3.7SOCIOECONOMICSThis subsection characterizes the current socioeconomic conditions within the region of influence (ROI) surrounding the SHINE site. It provides the basis for assessing potential socioeconomic impacts as a result of the construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Janesville site. The socioeconomic characterization addresses demographics (resident and transient population growth rates, race and ethnicity), community characteristics (the economy, housing availability, public services, local transportation), and tax payment information. The socioeconomic characterization is presented on a spatial and temporal (demography) basis. The appropriate nature and extent of socioeconomic characterization is described in the Final ISG Augmenting NUREG-1537, Part 1, Section 19.3.7, that requires the applicant or licensee to briefly describe socioeconomic conditions in the region (affected counties) around the proposed site, including sufficient detail to permit the assessment and evaluation of impacts from the proposed action. Geographic Area of AnalysisFor this assessment, the ROI has been established as the appropriate geographic area of analysis to support the characterization of socioeconomic baselines. The ROI corresponds to the area that incurs the greatest stresses to community services resulting from the SHINE project's demand for construction/operations workers.For purposes of demographic and community characteristics analysis, the ROI is considered to correspond to the residential distribution of the majority of the construction and operational workforces for the SHINE facility. As shown in Table 19.3.7-1, approximately 83percent of the total labor force of Rock County, Wisconsin resides within Rock County. Approximately 15 percent out of the remaining 17percent of the Rock County labor force commutes from counties adjacent to Rock County, or very nearly adjacent, including Winnebago County in Illinois (6.0percent); and Dane County (2.9percent), Walworth County (2.1percent), Green County (1.9percent), and Jefferson County (1.6percent) in Wisconsin. This suggests that the Rock County resident population contains a large workforce that is capable of supporting both construction and operation of the SHINE facility. Table 19.3.7-2 provides a summary of the workforce of Rock County by labor type specific to the occupation categories which are projected to require 20 or more employees at peak times in the construction schedule and subsequent operational phase. This table demonstrates that the workforce of the county is substantial in most categories of projected need for construction labor force and is likely to support the SHINE project. Also demonstrated is the fact that Rock County has a substantial labor force in the areas of industrial process operations, technical support and production management. Available data support the assumption that the local resident labor force of Rock County is capable to meet much of the demand of the SHINE project. Therefore, Rock County, WI is determined to represent the socioeconomic ROI and serves as the basis for assessment of potential project effects from construction and operation.19.3.7.1DemographyThe demography statistics within the ROI are characterized in the following subsections. Within the ROI, there are two municipalities of greater than 25,000 population: Janesville and Beloit. Therefore, demographic analysis includes statistics for these municipalities in addition to Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-135Rev. 0statistics for the overall ROI. This characterization provides a description of the resident population and includes resident population from the 2000 U.S. Census Bureau (USCB), resident population from the 2010 USCB, and population projection through 2055.Population projections at the county level are provided through 2055 to support the assessment of potential effects during the period of the facility's operational license (30 years) and decommissioning. The initial date of operation is anticipated to be 2016. Population projections presented in this subsection are based on published county population projections through the year 2035 and are extended through the year 2055. 19.3.7.1.1Resident Population19.3.7.1.1.1Resident Population of Communities in ROI The resident population of the ROI and its 29 municipalities is 160,331. Between 2000 and 2010, the county experienced a 5.3percent increase in population. During the same period, the city of Janesville, which is the municipality having the largest population in Rock County, grew 6.9percent from a population of 59,498 in 2000 to 63,575 in 2010. The city of Beloit has the second greatest population within Rock County with a population of 36,966 (USCB, 2010c). Other municipalities having a population exceeding 5,000 include the town of Beloit, Edgerton, Evansville, and Milton. All other municipalities have population levels less than 5,000 with the majority being less than 2,000 (Table19.3.7-3). The municipalities in Rock County are shown on Figure 19.3.7-1.19.3.7.1.1.2ROI Resident Population Growth ProjectionThe SHINE Operating License is expected to extend to year 2046. Population projections beyond 2035 are based on extrapolation of the county-specific growth rate of 5 percent that is the resulting equivalent rate of growth projected between 2025 and 2035 based on published projections. The resulting projections for 2045 and 2055 are shown in Table 19.3.7-4. Population projections published by Rock County (Rock County, 2009) anticipate that the county's population will increase by 22,313 persons between 2010 and 2035. As shown in Table19.3.7-4, the projected population for the year 2025 is 174,018 and the projected population for the year 2035 is 182,644. The projected growth rate for this 10-year time period equates to 4.96 percent. Extrapolation of this growth rate for two additional 10-year periods yields population projections of 191,703 for the year 2045 and 201,212 for the year 2055. 19.3.7.1.1.3Transient Population within 5 mi. (8 km)Transient population within the 5-mi. (8-km) area around the SHINE site has been estimated. This subsection establishes an estimate of transient population within 5mi. (8km) from the SHINE site.Significant sources of transient population in the 5-mi. (8-km) area around the SHINE site include major employers, schools (including elementary, middle, and high schools, colleges and universities), recreation areas, medical facilities, lodging facilities, and the SWRA. Estimation of transient populations within a given area may vary according to the time spent in the area Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-136Rev. 0(duration). This estimate is based on raw transient population estimates weighted according to the length of time each transient population group is expected to be in the area as follows:*Employer and school estimates x 0.27, which assumes that each employee or student is present at the facility 9 hours per day and 5 days per week.*Recreation area estimates x 0.33, which assumes that each daily visitor is present at the recreation area 8 hours per day.*SWRA estimates (passengers and crew) x 0.0833, which assumes that each person is present for 2 hours for each takeoff or landing.*Medical facilities and lodging facilities were not multiplied by a weighting factor; the assumption is that each bed at a medical facility and each room in a lodging facility is occupied 24 hours per day and 7 days per week.The 2010 weighted transient population estimate is provided in Table 19.3.7-5. Schools and major employers account for the majority of the transients within the 5-mi. (8-km) area.19.3.7.1.1.4Race and Ethnicity of the Resident Population in the ROIRace and ethnicity information is described for Rock County and for major population centers having a resident population exceeding 25,000. Rock County's population is predominantly white (87.6percent). The county population in 2010 is slightly more diverse overall when compared to 2000 USCB data. In 2000, the county's white population was 91.0percent, and the percentages of Black or African American population (4.6percent) and population classified by the USCB as "Some Other Race" (1.8percent) were slightly less than 2010 USCB numbers (5.0percent and 3.7percent, respectively). Comparative data for persons of Hispanic origin indicate a growth rate that is higher than the statewide rate of growth but is consistent with the national trend. In 2000, the percentage of Rock County's total population that was classified as Hispanic or Latino was 3.9percent and in 2010, the percentage increased to 7.6percent (Table 19.3.7-6). The trends in the city of Janesville are similar to countywide trends, with a slightly more diverse population in 2010 than in 2000 due in part to increases of the Hispanic or Latino population (2.6percent of the total population in 2000, compared to 5.4 percent in 2010). In addition, the percentage of Janesville's population that is Black or African American doubled from 2000 to 2010 (1.3 percent to 2.6 percent), and the population classified as "Some Other Race" also grew, from 1.0 percent to 2.0 percent of the overall population. While there is increased diversity, approximately 92 percent of the Janesville population is white (see Table 19.3.7-6). The city of Beloit is more diverse in comparison with Janesville and Rock County's overall population. Beloit's population is approximately 69percent white, a reduction from 75.6percent in 2000. The City's gains in Hispanic or Latino population and population classified as "Some Other Race" are much more significant than in Janesville, Rock County, the state, and the nation. The percentage of "Some Other Race" and Hispanic populations increased in the city of Beloit from 4.6 percent to 10.0 percent and from 9.1 percent to 17.1percent, respectively (seeTable19.3.7-6).Total minority population percentage for a defined population reflects minority racial status in conjunction with Hispanic or Latino ethnicity. The total minority population percentage is highest Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-137Rev. 0in Beloit, and has increased from 28.1 percent in 2000 to 36.5 percent in 2010. This rate of increase is over twice the statewide rate of increase, and significantly greater than the national rate of increase. Janesville saw total minority population grow at approximately the same rate as the national rate of increase, reaching 11.2 percent in 2010, up from 6.1 percent in 2000. Rock County's total minority population increase, from 10.8 percent in 2000 to 15.5 percent in 2010, was less than the national rate of increase, but greater than that for the State of Wisconsin (seeTable 19.3.7-6).19.3.7.2Community CharacteristicsThe term "community characteristics" is used to describe those socioeconomic attributes that pertain to the local economy, local housing statistics, public services, infrastructure including major transportation facilities, and tax payment information. The data presented are at the level of the ROI with the exception of descriptions of some transportation infrastructure such as highways and railroads that are regional and trans-regional in nature. 19.3.7.2.1EconomyThe economy of the ROI has experienced notable change in recent years. Economic data presented in this subsection include key economic indicators and address the following economic characteristics within the ROI:*Income | WHS, 2012a; WHS, 2013Historic NameCityDate State ListedNRHP Date ListedDistrict DescriptionTurtleville Iron BridgeTurtle (township)1/1/19899/15/1977West Milwaukee Street Historic DistrictJanesville2/19/19905/17/199054 contributing and 10 non-contributing buildingsWillard, Frances, SchoolhouseJanesville1/1/198910/5/1977Wyman-Rye FarmsteadBradford (township)1/1/198911/7/1977; 11/21/19772 contributing and 3 non- | ||
contributing buildingsYates, Florence, HouseBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-134Rev. 019.3.7SOCIOECONOMICSThis subsection characterizes the current socioeconomic conditions within the region of influence (ROI) surrounding the SHINE site. It provides the basis for assessing potential socioeconomic impacts as a result of the construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Janesville site. The socioeconomic characterization addresses demographics (resident and transient population growth rates, race and ethnicity), community characteristics (the economy, housing availability, public services, local transportation), and tax payment information. The socioeconomic characterization is presented on a spatial and temporal (demography) basis. The appropriate nature and extent of socioeconomic characterization is described in the Final ISG Augmenting NUREG-1537, Part 1, Section 19.3.7, that requires the applicant or licensee to briefly describe socioeconomic conditions in the region (affected counties) around the proposed site, including sufficient detail to permit the assessment and evaluation of impacts from the proposed action. Geographic Area of AnalysisFor this assessment, the ROI has been established as the appropriate geographic area of analysis to support the characterization of socioeconomic baselines. The ROI corresponds to the area that incurs the greatest stresses to community services resulting from the SHINE project's demand for construction/operations workers.For purposes of demographic and community characteristics analysis, the ROI is considered to correspond to the residential distribution of the majority of the construction and operational workforces for the SHINE facility. As shown in Table 19.3.7-1, approximately 83percent of the total labor force of Rock County, Wisconsin resides within Rock County. Approximately 15 percent out of the remaining 17percent of the Rock County labor force commutes from counties adjacent to Rock County, or very nearly adjacent, including Winnebago County in Illinois (6.0percent); and Dane County (2.9percent), Walworth County (2.1percent), Green County (1.9percent), and Jefferson County (1.6percent) in Wisconsin. This suggests that the Rock County resident population contains a large workforce that is capable of supporting both construction and operation of the SHINE facility. Table 19.3.7-2 provides a summary of the workforce of Rock County by labor type specific to the occupation categories which are projected to require 20 or more employees at peak times in the construction schedule and subsequent operational phase. This table demonstrates that the workforce of the county is substantial in most categories of projected need for construction labor force and is likely to support the SHINE project. Also demonstrated is the fact that Rock County has a substantial labor force in the areas of industrial process operations, technical support and production management. Available data support the assumption that the local resident labor force of Rock County is capable to meet much of the demand of the SHINE project. Therefore, Rock County, WI is determined to represent the socioeconomic ROI and serves as the basis for assessment of potential project effects from construction and operation.19.3.7.1DemographyThe demography statistics within the ROI are characterized in the following subsections. Within the ROI, there are two municipalities of greater than 25,000 population: Janesville and Beloit. Therefore, demographic analysis includes statistics for these municipalities in addition to Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-135Rev. 0statistics for the overall ROI. This characterization provides a description of the resident population and includes resident population from the 2000 U.S. Census Bureau (USCB), resident population from the 2010 USCB, and population projection through 2055.Population projections at the county level are provided through 2055 to support the assessment of potential effects during the period of the facility's operational license (30 years) and decommissioning. The initial date of operation is anticipated to be 2016. Population projections presented in this subsection are based on published county population projections through the year 2035 and are extended through the year 2055. 19.3.7.1.1Resident Population19.3.7.1.1.1Resident Population of Communities in ROI The resident population of the ROI and its 29 municipalities is 160,331. Between 2000 and 2010, the county experienced a 5.3percent increase in population. During the same period, the city of Janesville, which is the municipality having the largest population in Rock County, grew 6.9percent from a population of 59,498 in 2000 to 63,575 in 2010. The city of Beloit has the second greatest population within Rock County with a population of 36,966 (USCB, 2010c). Other municipalities having a population exceeding 5,000 include the town of Beloit, Edgerton, Evansville, and Milton. All other municipalities have population levels less than 5,000 with the majority being less than 2,000 (Table19.3.7-3). The municipalities in Rock County are shown on Figure 19.3.7-1.19.3.7.1.1.2ROI Resident Population Growth ProjectionThe SHINE Operating License is expected to extend to year 2046. Population projections beyond 2035 are based on extrapolation of the county-specific growth rate of 5 percent that is the resulting equivalent rate of growth projected between 2025 and 2035 based on published projections. The resulting projections for 2045 and 2055 are shown in Table 19.3.7-4. Population projections published by Rock County (Rock County, 2009) anticipate that the county's population will increase by 22,313 persons between 2010 and 2035. As shown in Table19.3.7-4, the projected population for the year 2025 is 174,018 and the projected population for the year 2035 is 182,644. The projected growth rate for this 10-year time period equates to 4.96 percent. Extrapolation of this growth rate for two additional 10-year periods yields population projections of 191,703 for the year 2045 and 201,212 for the year 2055. 19.3.7.1.1.3Transient Population within 5 mi. (8 km)Transient population within the 5-mi. (8-km) area around the SHINE site has been estimated. This subsection establishes an estimate of transient population within 5mi. (8km) from the SHINE site.Significant sources of transient population in the 5-mi. (8-km) area around the SHINE site include major employers, schools (including elementary, middle, and high schools, colleges and universities), recreation areas, medical facilities, lodging facilities, and the SWRA. Estimation of transient populations within a given area may vary according to the time spent in the area Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-136Rev. 0(duration). This estimate is based on raw transient population estimates weighted according to the length of time each transient population group is expected to be in the area as follows:*Employer and school estimates x 0.27, which assumes that each employee or student is present at the facility 9 hours per day and 5 days per week.*Recreation area estimates x 0.33, which assumes that each daily visitor is present at the recreation area 8 hours per day.*SWRA estimates (passengers and crew) x 0.0833, which assumes that each person is present for 2 hours for each takeoff or landing.*Medical facilities and lodging facilities were not multiplied by a weighting factor; the assumption is that each bed at a medical facility and each room in a lodging facility is occupied 24 hours per day and 7 days per week.The 2010 weighted transient population estimate is provided in Table 19.3.7-5. Schools and major employers account for the majority of the transients within the 5-mi. (8-km) area.19.3.7.1.1.4Race and Ethnicity of the Resident Population in the ROIRace and ethnicity information is described for Rock County and for major population centers having a resident population exceeding 25,000. Rock County's population is predominantly white (87.6percent). The county population in 2010 is slightly more diverse overall when compared to 2000 USCB data. In 2000, the county's white population was 91.0percent, and the percentages of Black or African American population (4.6percent) and population classified by the USCB as "Some Other Race" (1.8percent) were slightly less than 2010 USCB numbers (5.0percent and 3.7percent, respectively). Comparative data for persons of Hispanic origin indicate a growth rate that is higher than the statewide rate of growth but is consistent with the national trend. In 2000, the percentage of Rock County's total population that was classified as Hispanic or Latino was 3.9percent and in 2010, the percentage increased to 7.6percent (Table 19.3.7-6). The trends in the city of Janesville are similar to countywide trends, with a slightly more diverse population in 2010 than in 2000 due in part to increases of the Hispanic or Latino population (2.6percent of the total population in 2000, compared to 5.4 percent in 2010). In addition, the percentage of Janesville's population that is Black or African American doubled from 2000 to 2010 (1.3 percent to 2.6 percent), and the population classified as "Some Other Race" also grew, from 1.0 percent to 2.0 percent of the overall population. While there is increased diversity, approximately 92 percent of the Janesville population is white (see Table 19.3.7-6). The city of Beloit is more diverse in comparison with Janesville and Rock County's overall population. Beloit's population is approximately 69percent white, a reduction from 75.6percent in 2000. The City's gains in Hispanic or Latino population and population classified as "Some Other Race" are much more significant than in Janesville, Rock County, the state, and the nation. The percentage of "Some Other Race" and Hispanic populations increased in the city of Beloit from 4.6 percent to 10.0 percent and from 9.1 percent to 17.1percent, respectively (seeTable19.3.7-6).Total minority population percentage for a defined population reflects minority racial status in conjunction with Hispanic or Latino ethnicity. The total minority population percentage is highest Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-137Rev. 0in Beloit, and has increased from 28.1 percent in 2000 to 36.5 percent in 2010. This rate of increase is over twice the statewide rate of increase, and significantly greater than the national rate of increase. Janesville saw total minority population grow at approximately the same rate as the national rate of increase, reaching 11.2 percent in 2010, up from 6.1 percent in 2000. Rock County's total minority population increase, from 10.8 percent in 2000 to 15.5 percent in 2010, was less than the national rate of increase, but greater than that for the State of Wisconsin (seeTable 19.3.7-6).19.3.7.2Community CharacteristicsThe term "community characteristics" is used to describe those socioeconomic attributes that pertain to the local economy, local housing statistics, public services, infrastructure including major transportation facilities, and tax payment information. The data presented are at the level of the ROI with the exception of descriptions of some transportation infrastructure such as highways and railroads that are regional and trans-regional in nature. 19.3.7.2.1EconomyThe economy of the ROI has experienced notable change in recent years. Economic data presented in this subsection include key economic indicators and address the following economic characteristics within the ROI:*Income | |||
*Labor force*Unemployment*Poverty rates19.3.7.2.1.1Income (Population and Household)The per capita income for the ROI is $23,209, which is almost equal to that for the city of Janesville ($23,300) but less than both the statewide ($26,279) and national ($26,942) averages. The per capita income for the city of Beloit ($17,180) is markedly lower. Compared to the 2000 to 2010 rates of change for the state and the nation, the ROI, Janesville, and Beloit experienced much more notable decreases in per capita income from 2000 levels when adjusted for inflation (decreases of 12.3 percent, 17.2percent, and 19.8 percent, respectively). Comparative state and national numbers reflect a more moderate decrease in per capita income (decreases of 2.4percent and 1.4percent, respectively) (Table19.3.7-7). Median household income in the ROI is $49,144, which represents a 14.8percent decline from 2000 when adjusted for inflation. The 2010 median household income for Janesville ($48,257) is slightly less than the ROI, although the city's rate of change from 2000 to 2010 is greater, a 17.1percent decline. The city of Beloit's median household income is comparatively lower at $37,430, which is an 18.8percent decline from 2000 when adjusted for inflation. The 2000 ROI median household income was greater than state and national levels. The 2010 USCB data show that the ROI's median household income ($49,144) is less than the state ($50,814) and the nation ($51,222), although the difference is not as great as that for per capita income levels (seeTable 19.3.7-7). | *Labor force*Unemployment*Poverty rates19.3.7.2.1.1Income (Population and Household)The per capita income for the ROI is $23,209, which is almost equal to that for the city of Janesville ($23,300) but less than both the statewide ($26,279) and national ($26,942) averages. The per capita income for the city of Beloit ($17,180) is markedly lower. Compared to the 2000 to 2010 rates of change for the state and the nation, the ROI, Janesville, and Beloit experienced much more notable decreases in per capita income from 2000 levels when adjusted for inflation (decreases of 12.3 percent, 17.2percent, and 19.8 percent, respectively). Comparative state and national numbers reflect a more moderate decrease in per capita income (decreases of 2.4percent and 1.4percent, respectively) (Table19.3.7-7). Median household income in the ROI is $49,144, which represents a 14.8percent decline from 2000 when adjusted for inflation. The 2010 median household income for Janesville ($48,257) is slightly less than the ROI, although the city's rate of change from 2000 to 2010 is greater, a 17.1percent decline. The city of Beloit's median household income is comparatively lower at $37,430, which is an 18.8percent decline from 2000 when adjusted for inflation. The 2000 ROI median household income was greater than state and national levels. The 2010 USCB data show that the ROI's median household income ($49,144) is less than the state ($50,814) and the nation ($51,222), although the difference is not as great as that for per capita income levels (seeTable 19.3.7-7). | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-138Rev. 019.3.7.2.1.2Labor Force and UnemploymentThe 2012 civilian labor force in Rock County is 78,132, which represents a 5.2percent decrease from the total labor force in 2002. In contrast, the state of Wisconsin and national labor force have increased over this same time period, at 1percent and 6.8percent, respectively. Although the ROI labor force has been decreasing since 2006, unemployment rates are consistently higher than the statewide total number and national unemployment rates (Table19.3.7-8). This can be attributed mostly to layoffs by GM at its Janesville plant beginning in 2006, followed by the plant's closure in 2008. Overall, the GM plant closure resulted in the elimination of approximately 4,700 jobs, and subsequent closures of local automotive suppliers resulted in additional job losses (SWWDB, 2009). At the ROI, state, and national levels, the number of unemployed workers has increased significantly over a 10-year period (change of 43.3percent for county, 43.5percent for the state, and 51.3 percent for the nation); however, the unemployment rates are much higher for the ROI, peaking at 12.8 percent in 2009 compared to 8.7 percent for the state and 9.3 percent for the nation. The most current 2012 data available show a 9.2 percent unemployment rate for the ROI, a decrease compared with the previous 3 years, but higher than both the state (7.5percent) and the national unemployment rate (8.2percent) (seeTable19.3.7-8).As evidenced by the 2008 GM plant closure, a contributing factor to the higher unemployment rate in the ROI is the decline of its manufacturing base. In 2000, manufacturing was the largest employment category in the ROI (29.7 percent of total jobs in the ROI), followed by education and health services (18.6 percent) and retail trade (12.1 percent). These industry rankings are consistent with state data for 2000 (22.2 percent, 20 percent, and 11.6percent, respectively), although in the ROI a larger percentage of employment was manufacturing-based. Since 2000, the number of manufacturing employees in the ROI has decreased by 62.9percent, and the largest employer is now the education and health services industry. Manufacturing is estimated to currently comprise 13.9percent of the ROI's total jobs, compared to 16.3 percent of total jobs at the state level. Statewide there has been a significant decrease in manufacturing employment (declined by 27.1percent); however, the manufacturing industry remains the largest employer in the state. Other industries (retail trade, transportation/warehousing/utilities, information, finance/ | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-138Rev. 019.3.7.2.1.2Labor Force and UnemploymentThe 2012 civilian labor force in Rock County is 78,132, which represents a 5.2percent decrease from the total labor force in 2002. In contrast, the state of Wisconsin and national labor force have increased over this same time period, at 1percent and 6.8percent, respectively. Although the ROI labor force has been decreasing since 2006, unemployment rates are consistently higher than the statewide total number and national unemployment rates (Table19.3.7-8). This can be attributed mostly to layoffs by GM at its Janesville plant beginning in 2006, followed by the plant's closure in 2008. Overall, the GM plant closure resulted in the elimination of approximately 4,700 jobs, and subsequent closures of local automotive suppliers resulted in additional job losses (SWWDB, 2009). At the ROI, state, and national levels, the number of unemployed workers has increased significantly over a 10-year period (change of 43.3percent for county, 43.5percent for the state, and 51.3 percent for the nation); however, the unemployment rates are much higher for the ROI, peaking at 12.8 percent in 2009 compared to 8.7 percent for the state and 9.3 percent for the nation. The most current 2012 data available show a 9.2 percent unemployment rate for the ROI, a decrease compared with the previous 3 years, but higher than both the state (7.5percent) and the national unemployment rate (8.2percent) (seeTable19.3.7-8).As evidenced by the 2008 GM plant closure, a contributing factor to the higher unemployment rate in the ROI is the decline of its manufacturing base. In 2000, manufacturing was the largest employment category in the ROI (29.7 percent of total jobs in the ROI), followed by education and health services (18.6 percent) and retail trade (12.1 percent). These industry rankings are consistent with state data for 2000 (22.2 percent, 20 percent, and 11.6percent, respectively), although in the ROI a larger percentage of employment was manufacturing-based. Since 2000, the number of manufacturing employees in the ROI has decreased by 62.9percent, and the largest employer is now the education and health services industry. Manufacturing is estimated to currently comprise 13.9percent of the ROI's total jobs, compared to 16.3 percent of total jobs at the state level. Statewide there has been a significant decrease in manufacturing employment (declined by 27.1percent); however, the manufacturing industry remains the largest employer in the state. Other industries (retail trade, transportation/warehousing/utilities, information, finance/ | ||
| Line 266: | Line 605: | ||
Additionally, Rock County is served by Interstate Highway 43 (I-43), which begins in Beloit and extends northeasterly toward Milwaukee and then north to Green Bay. In relation to the site,I-39/90 is located 2.2 mi. (3.5 km) to the east and I-43 is located approximately 6.9mi. (11.1km) to the southeast.The U.S. highways include US 14 and US 51. US 14 generally extends from east to west, whereas US 51 is oriented north to south. Both highways pass through Janesville in central Rock County.From the site, I-39/90 is accessible via US 51 and SH 11. Major highways/roadways and their pavement condition are listed below.*US 51, a minor arterial that is oriented north-south along the west side of the site is in good condition.*SH 11, a major collector that extends east-west just north of the site is in good condition. *I-39/90, a principal arterial that is oriented north-south about 2.2 mi. (3.5 km) east of the site, is in fair condition.*Town Line Road, a major collector that runs east-west about 2.7 mi. (4.3 km) south of the site, is in good condition.Traffic volumes, obtained from the Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WisDOT), are for 2010 and are listed below (WisDOT, 2010):*I-39/90 - 45,700 vehicles per day (vpd), south of SH 11 | Additionally, Rock County is served by Interstate Highway 43 (I-43), which begins in Beloit and extends northeasterly toward Milwaukee and then north to Green Bay. In relation to the site,I-39/90 is located 2.2 mi. (3.5 km) to the east and I-43 is located approximately 6.9mi. (11.1km) to the southeast.The U.S. highways include US 14 and US 51. US 14 generally extends from east to west, whereas US 51 is oriented north to south. Both highways pass through Janesville in central Rock County.From the site, I-39/90 is accessible via US 51 and SH 11. Major highways/roadways and their pavement condition are listed below.*US 51, a minor arterial that is oriented north-south along the west side of the site is in good condition.*SH 11, a major collector that extends east-west just north of the site is in good condition. *I-39/90, a principal arterial that is oriented north-south about 2.2 mi. (3.5 km) east of the site, is in fair condition.*Town Line Road, a major collector that runs east-west about 2.7 mi. (4.3 km) south of the site, is in good condition.Traffic volumes, obtained from the Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WisDOT), are for 2010 and are listed below (WisDOT, 2010):*I-39/90 - 45,700 vehicles per day (vpd), south of SH 11 | ||
*I-39/90 - 50,400 vpd, north of SH 11 | *I-39/90 - 50,400 vpd, north of SH 11 | ||
*US 51 - 9,000 vpd, south of SH 11*SH 11 - 8,400 vpd, east of US 51*SH 11 - 12,400 vpd, west of I-39/90 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-141Rev. 0*Town Line Road - 3,400 vpd, east of US 5119.3.7.2.3. | *US 51 - 9,000 vpd, south of SH 11*SH 11 - 8,400 vpd, east of US 51*SH 11 - 12,400 vpd, west of I-39/90 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-141Rev. 0*Town Line Road - 3,400 vpd, east of US 5119.3.7.2.3.2Transit Public transportation in the city of Janesville is provided by the Janesville Transit System, which operates a regular bus service Monday through Saturday on six routes inside Janesville (City of Janesville, 2012b). Additionally, the Beloit-Janesville Express operates on weekdays between the two cities. The route of the Beloit-Janesville Express passes directly to the west of the SHINE site on US 51. The nearest stops along this route are at Kellogg Avenue to the north and at Sunny Lane to the south (City of Janesville, 2012b). The Kellogg Avenue Route extends south from the Janesville Transfer Center to Kellogg Avenue, which is approximately 2.3 mi. (3.7 km) north of the SHINE site (City of Janesville, 2012c).19.3.7.2.3.3RailThe nearest railroad to the SHINE site is the Union Pacific Railroad, which is approximately 1.6mi. (2.6km) northeast of the site and is oriented in a northwest-to-southeast direction. The Union Pacific Railroad manages a rail yard just north of SH 11 and west of I-39/90 (see Figure19.3.7-3). No passenger rail service is currently available in Janesville (Vandewalle & Associates, 2009a). There is no direct access to rail from the site.19.3.7.2.3.4AirSWRA is a general aviation airport immediately west of the SHINE site off of US 51. The airport has three paved runways. The runways have a length of 7300 ft. (2225 m), 6701 ft. (2042 m), and 5,000 ft. (1524 m) long. The airport has more than 50,000 operations per year (landings and take-offs) and there are 94 aircraft based at the airport (Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, 2012b). The airport recently began a project to modernize, enlarge and increase the functionality of the 50-year old terminal building. Phase one of this four-phase project began in May 2012 at a cost of $1.46 million. This last phase of construction is expected to be complete by 2014/2015 (Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, 2012c).19.3.7.2.4Tax Payment InformationThe construction and operation of the SHINE facility results in the payment of taxes to political jurisdictions (Table 19.3.7-13). It is probable, over the course of construction and operation, that tax payments are directly or indirectly made by SHINE to many different jurisdictions, including multiple states, due to the likelihood that some materials used for construction and operational purposes are purchased from suppliers in other states where sales taxes are applied. As discussed in Subsection 19.3.7, it is assumed that the majority of the SHINE workforce resides within the ROI (Rock County). This includes current residents of Rock County who have been contributing to the local tax base as well as some individuals and families who are anticipated to relocate to Rock County and add to the local tax base. Thus the effects of tax payments associated with development and operation of the SHINE plant are expected to be greatest on the city of Janesville, Janesville School District, and Rock County, as well as the state of Wisconsin. The tax rates for these jurisdictions are discussed below.The state of Wisconsin has a flat corporate tax rate of 7.9 percent. Wisconsin assesses a variable tax rate on earned income. The income tax rate increases from 4.6 to 7.75percent depending on income level and marital status. Wisconsin has a statewide sales tax rate of Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-142Rev. 05percent. An additional 0.5 percent is added by Rock County as local sales tax. Property tax on owned property is assessed at the county and municipal levels. The property tax rates in Rock County vary among local school districts. Within the Janesville School District in the city of Janesville, the net property tax rate in 2011 was $25.0148 per $1,000 of assessed value. Of this net property tax rate, $6.4427 per $1,000 is allocated for the Rock County government, $7.0402 per $1,000 is allocated for the city of Janesville government (City of Janesville, 2012d), $10.1902 is allocated for the Board of Education, $1.8275 per $1,000 is allocated for the Blackhawk Technical College, $0.8612 per $1,000 is allocated for the Public Library System, $0.1738 per $1,000 is allocated for the state of Wisconsin, and a reduction of $1.5208 per $1,000 is applied due to state of Wisconsin tax credit. The SHINE site is located within the Janesville School District in the city of Janesville. 19.3.7.2.5Public ServicesThis subsection addresses the following public services within the ROI:*Public Water Supply and Wastewater Systems *Local Public Schools | ||
*Public | *Public Recreat ional Facilities19.3.7.2.5.1Public Water Supply and Wastewater SystemsPublic Water SuppliesThis subsection provides a characterization of the existing public water supplies and waste water treatment systems within the ROI. All public water supplies in Rock County are from groundwater. Table 19.3.7-14 lists the nine major municipal water suppliers that each serve communities in Rock County. Six of the nine municipal water systems in Rock County have a wellhead protection plan, including Clinton, Evansville, Footville, Janesville, Milton, and Orfordville. Wellhead protection ordinances are in place for only Evansville and Janesville (USGS, 2007).The water systems serving the largest populations are those in Beloit and Janesville. In addition to the public water systems, numerous private wells provide drinking water to residents not connected to municipal water supplies. The Janesville Water Utility provides water supply for both public drinking water and for fire protection utilizing eight wells. The water supply system for the city of Janesville includes two water storage reservoirs and one water tower. According to the city of Janesville, the total pumping capacity of its eight groundwater wells is 29 Mgd (109.8 Mld). Average water usage is about 11 Mgd (41.6 Mld). Accordingly, the excess capacity of the Janesville water supply system is approximately 18 Mgd (68.1 Mld). Public water supplies within Wisconsin are monitored to ensure public health protection, whereas individual well owners are responsible for monitoring and testing private wells. The public water use index for Rock County is 80 (Table 19.3.7-15), which estimates how many people are served by public water supplies. A number greater than 50 means more people are served by public water versus private wells. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-143Rev. 0Wastewater Treatment SystemsWaste water treatment is provided by local jurisdictions. Table 19.3.7-16 details public waste water treatment systems, their permitted capacities, and their average daily usage for each community in Rock County. Sewage within the city of Janesville is collected from about 300mi. (483km) of sewer main, and treated at a plant off Afton Road, near the City's south- west corner. The treatment plant has an average design peak flow of 25 Mgd (94.6 Mld). The average daily discharge flow is 13 Mgd (49.2 Mld). Accordingly, the excess capacity of the Janesville wastewater treatment system is approximately 12 Mgd (45.4 Mld) (Vandewalle & Associates, 2009a). 19.3.7.2.5.2Local Public SchoolsRock County is served by eight local public school districts, in addition to one state of Wisconsin facility (Table 19.3.7-17). Current student enrollment is 27,807. The Janesville School District has an enrollment of 10,325. Collectively, the school districts operate 39elementary schools, 11middle schools, and 15 high schools. Three additional schools are classified as elementary/, providing classes from kindergarten or first grade through | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-143Rev. 0Wastewater Treatment SystemsWaste water treatment is provided by local jurisdictions. Table 19.3.7-16 details public waste water treatment systems, their permitted capacities, and their average daily usage for each community in Rock County. Sewage within the city of Janesville is collected from about 300mi. (483km) of sewer main, and treated at a plant off Afton Road, near the City's south- west corner. The treatment plant has an average design peak flow of 25 Mgd (94.6 Mld). The average daily discharge flow is 13 Mgd (49.2 Mld). Accordingly, the excess capacity of the Janesville wastewater treatment system is approximately 12 Mgd (45.4 Mld) (Vandewalle & Associates, 2009a). 19.3.7.2.5.2Local Public SchoolsRock County is served by eight local public school districts, in addition to one state of Wisconsin facility (Table 19.3.7-17). Current student enrollment is 27,807. The Janesville School District has an enrollment of 10,325. Collectively, the school districts operate 39elementary schools, 11middle schools, and 15 high schools. Three additional schools are classified as elementary/, providing classes from kindergarten or first grade through 12 th grade (DPI, 2012). The closest public schools to the SHINE site, defined as those within 2.5 mi. (4 km), are units of the Janesville School district and are located to the north of the SHINE site: Janesville Academy for International Studies (20 enrollment), Jackson Elementary School (325 enrollment), Lincoln Elementary School (397 enrollment), and Edison Middle School (724 enrollment). Janesville Academy for International Studies is located at 2909Kellogg Avenue, Jackson Elementary School is located at 441 West Burbank Avenue, Lincoln Elementary School is located at 1821 Conde Street, and Edison Middle School is located at 1649 South Chatham Street (Janesville School District, 2012).Other educational institutions are located in the vicinity of the SHINE site. Private schools located within 2.5 mi. (4 km) of the SHINE site include Rock County Christian School (111enrollment), and Oakhill Christian School (69 enrollment). Higher education institutions located within 2.5 mi. (4 km) of the SHINE site include Blackhawk Technical College (Janesville Aviation Center and Janesville Central Campus), and the University of Wisconsin-Rock County.19.3.7.2.5.3Public Recreational FacilitiesFigure 19.3.7-4 and Table 19.3.7-18 identify the major recreational facilities within the ROI and provide information relative to their distance from the SHINE site. Rock County owns and maintains 888.2 ac. (359.4 ha) of park space (Design Perspectives Inc., 2009). The county parks are classified as regional parks, community parks, and trails. Other community and regional recreational facilities in the county are owned and maintained by the city of Janesville and the city of Beloit. Janesville maintains 64 improved parks, 10 of which are regional or community parks (City of Janesville, 2012f). Beloit's park system is comprised of 42 parks, including one regional park and four community parks (Vandewalle & Associates, 2006). The WDNR owns and maintains 17,000 ac. (6879.7 ha) of State Wildlife Areas, which are open to the public for recreational use, including seasonal hunting. As is illustrated in Figure 19.3.7-4, each of the State Wildlife Areas is located a minimum of 10mi. (16km) from the SHINE site (WDNR, 2009). | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-144Rev. 0Regional and community parks in the Rock County, Janesville, and Beloit park systems are identified on Table 19.3.7-18 and shown on Figure 19.3.7-4. Included is indication of the distance from each park to the SHINE site and the recreational purpose of each park in terms of active (recreation facilities such as ball fields and recreation centers) or passive (recreation facilities such as trails and picnic facilities). One park, Airport Park, is located within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the SHINE site. It is a two-acre (0.8-ha) passive use park with picnic tables, benches, and a picnic shelter (Design Perspectives Inc., 2009). Eight parks are located at distances between 1mi. and 5 mi. (1.6km and 8 km) from the SHINE site; they include a mix of passive and active recreational amenities (Table 19.3.7-18). Trails in the area of the SHINE site are primarily for recreational use. The city of Janesville manages the South Connector Trail, a multi-use trail that runs adjacent to the north of, and parallel to, SH 11 from west of the Rock River eastward to near the Union Pacific Railroad. There are no direct trail connections or marked bike routes to the SHINE site. Rock County also maintains 226 mi. (364 km) of snowmobile trails, with the nearest snowmobile trail located approximately 2.4 mi. (3.9 km) south of the site. Though not classified as public recreational facilities, there are two private golf facilities within the immediate area of the SHINE site. Glen Erin Golf Course (1417 W. Airport Road) is located immediately southwest of the site (adjacent to the south of SWRA), and Mid City Golf Range (4337 S. US 51) is located immediately south of the site. | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-144Rev. 0Regional and community parks in the Rock County, Janesville, and Beloit park systems are identified on Table 19.3.7-18 and shown on Figure 19.3.7-4. Included is indication of the distance from each park to the SHINE site and the recreational purpose of each park in terms of active (recreation facilities such as ball fields and recreation centers) or passive (recreation facilities such as trails and picnic facilities). One park, Airport Park, is located within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the SHINE site. It is a two-acre (0.8-ha) passive use park with picnic tables, benches, and a picnic shelter (Design Perspectives Inc., 2009). Eight parks are located at distances between 1mi. and 5 mi. (1.6km and 8 km) from the SHINE site; they include a mix of passive and active recreational amenities (Table 19.3.7-18). Trails in the area of the SHINE site are primarily for recreational use. The city of Janesville manages the South Connector Trail, a multi-use trail that runs adjacent to the north of, and parallel to, SH 11 from west of the Rock River eastward to near the Union Pacific Railroad. There are no direct trail connections or marked bike routes to the SHINE site. Rock County also maintains 226 mi. (364 km) of snowmobile trails, with the nearest snowmobile trail located approximately 2.4 mi. (3.9 km) south of the site. Though not classified as public recreational facilities, there are two private golf facilities within the immediate area of the SHINE site. Glen Erin Golf Course (1417 W. Airport Road) is located immediately southwest of the site (adjacent to the south of SWRA), and Mid City Golf Range (4337 S. US 51) is located immediately south of the site. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-145Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-1 Rock County Labor Force Distribution by County of Employee ResidenceCounty of Employee ResidenceStateRock County Labor ForceNumberPercentRock CountyWI56,85082.9%Winnebago CountyIL4,0956.0%Dane CountyWI1,9902.9% | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-145Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-1 Rock County Labor Force Distribution by County of Employee ResidenceCounty of Employee ResidenceStateRock County Labor ForceNumberPercentRock CountyWI56,85082.9%Winnebago CountyIL4,0956.0%Dane CountyWI1,9902.9% | ||
| Line 275: | Line 614: | ||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), 2012 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-146Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-2 Comparison of Estimated Major SHINE Labor Force Needs with Estimated Rock County Available Work ForceOccupationSHINE Peak Need(a)Estimate of Labor Force Availability in Rock County(b)Construction | American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), 2012 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-146Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-2 Comparison of Estimated Major SHINE Labor Force Needs with Estimated Rock County Available Work ForceOccupationSHINE Peak Need(a)Estimate of Labor Force Availability in Rock County(b)Construction Phase Boilermaker24No DataCarpenter 45360Electrician55190Ironworker50No DataLaborer70340Equipment Operator/Eng. | ||
26130Plumber/Pipefitter 7070Sheet Metal Worker 3080(c)Construction Supervisor 20160Total Construction Labor Force(d)420Operational PhaseOperation Support40340 first-line supervisors of production and operating workers Productions/Operations37110 industrial production managers Tech Support (e)40500 maintenance, 90 engineers, 2,000 craftspeopleTotal Operational Labor Force(d)150b) Rock County labor force estimate from BLS, 2011 unless otherwise notedc) Labor force estimates from BLS, 2009; no data available for 2011 d) SHINE total labor force estimate at peak month includes all labor categories e) Tech support subcategories include: maintenance (machinery maintenance workers and general maintenance and repair workers), engineers (industrial engineers and mechanical drafters), and craftspeople (janitors and cleaners, landscaping and groundskeepers, electricians, plumbers and pipefitters, industrial | |||
==References:== | ==References:== | ||
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), 2009 and BLS, 2011 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-147Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-3 Population and Growth Rates of Municipalities within Rock | Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), 2009 and BLS, 2011 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-147Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-3 Population and Growth Rates of Municipalities within Rock CountyMunicipalityPopulation 2000Population2010Observed Growth Rate (%)TownAvon5866083.8%Beloit 7,0387,6628.9%Bradford 1,0071,12111.3%Center1,0051,0666.1%Clinton8939304.1%Fulton 3,1583,2523.0%Harmony2,3512,5699.3%Janesville3,7503,434-8.4%Johnstown802778-3.0%La Prairie 929834-10.2%Lima1,3121,280-2.4%Magnolia 854767-10.2%Milton2,8442,9232.8%Newark 1,5711,541-1.9%Plymouth1,2701,235-2.8%Porter9259452.2%Rock3,3383,196-4.3%Spring Valley813746-8.2%Turtle2,4442,388-2.3%Union1,8602,09912.8%VillageClinton 2,1622,154-0.4%Footville 7888082.5%Orfordville 1,2721,44213.4%CityBeloit 35,77536,9663.3%Broadhead(a)N/A90Edgerton4,8915,3649.7%Evansville 4,0395,01224.1%Janesville 59,49863,5756.9%Milton5,1325,5468.1%Total Rock County152,307160,3315.3%a) 2000 data for Broadhead, Rock County is unavailable. The majority of Broadhead is located in Green County, WI. | ||
==References:== | ==References:== | ||
USCB, 2000a; USCB, 2010c Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-148Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-4 Resident Population Distribution, Growth Rates, and Projections for Rock CountyCountyPopulationProjected Population(a)200020102000-2010 Growth Rate (%)201520252035204520552015-2055 Projected Growth Rate (%)Rock County152,307160,3315.3165,354174,018182,644191,703201,21221.7a) The growth rate of 4.96 percent per ten year time period, calculated based on the projected ten year growth from 2025 and 2035 published projections, is extrapolated to determine projections for the years 2045 and 2055 | USCB, 2000a; USCB, 2010c Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-148Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-4 Resident Population Distribution, Growth Rates, and Projections for Rock CountyCountyPopulationProjected Population (a)200020102000-2010 Growth Rate (%)201520252035204520552015-2055 Projected Growth Rate (%)Rock County152,307160,3315.3165,354174,018182,644191,703201,21221.7a) The growth rate of 4.96 percent per ten year time period, calculated based on the projected ten year growth from 2025 and 2035 published projections, is extrapolated to determine projections for the years 2045 and 2055 | ||
==References:== | ==References:== | ||
Rock County, 2009; USCB, 2000a; and USCB, 2010d Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-149Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-5 Estimated Transient Population within 5 mi. (8 km) of the SHINE Site (2010)Transient SourceNumber of FacilitiesRaw Population EstimateWeighted Population EstimateMajor Employers 149,8412,657Schools, Colleges, Universityies3214,8604,014Recreation Areas431,366451Medical Facilities21717717 Lodging Facilities3149149 Total11326, | Rock County, 2009; USCB, 2000a; and USCB, 2010d Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-149Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-5 Estimated Transient Population within 5 mi. (8 km) of the SHINE Site (2010)Transient SourceNumber of FacilitiesRaw Population EstimateWeighted Population EstimateMajor Employers 149,8412,657Schools, Colleges, Universityies3214,8604,014Recreation Areas431,366451Medical Facilities21717717 Lodging Facilities3149149 Total11326,933 8,073(a)a)Total Weighted Population Estimate includes passengers, crew, and all employees of various companies at the SWRA which are not included in any individual transient source subtotal. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-150Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-6 Demographic (Race and Ethnicity) Characteristics of Rock | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-150Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-6 Demographic (Race and Ethnicity) Characteristics of Rock CountyLocationYear Total PopulationPopulation by Race (%)Persons of Hispanic OriginWhiteMinority Population (including Hispanic Black or African AmericanAmerican Indian and Alaska NativeAsianNative Hawaiian and Other Pacific IslanderSome Other RaceCity of Janesville200059,49895.36.11.30.21.0012.6201063,57591.711.22.60.31.3025.4% Change6.9-3.65.11.30.10.3012.8City of Beloit200035,77575.628.115.40.41.20.14.69.1201036,96668.936.515.10.41.101017.1% Change3.3-6.78.4-0.30-0.1-0.15.48 Rock County 2000152,30791.010.84.60.30.801.83.92010160,33187.615.55.00.31.003.77.6% Change5.3-3.44.70.400.201.93.7State of WI20005,363,67588.912.75.70.91.701.63.6 20105,686,98686.216.76.31.02.302.45.9% Change6.0-2.74.00.60.10.600.82.3 Nation2000281,421,90675.130.912.30.93.60.15.512.5 2010308,745,53872.436.312.60.94.80.26.216.3% Change9.7-2.75.40.301.20.10.73.8 | ||
==References:== | ==References:== | ||
USCB, 2000a and 2010a Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-151Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-7 Median Household and Per Capita Income Levels within RockCountyIncome2000(a)2010% ChangeMedian | USCB, 2000a and 2010a Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-151Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-7 Median Household and Per Capita Income Levels within RockCountyIncome2000 (a)2010% ChangeMedian Household City of Janesville$58,200$48,257-17.1City of Beloit$46,111$37,430-18.8Rock County$57,638$49,144-14.8State of WI$55,452$50,814-8.4Nation$53,177$51,222-3.7Per Capita City of Janesville$28,142$23,300-17.2City of Beloit$21,416$17,180-19.8Rock County$26,459$23,209-12.3State of WI$26,935$26,279-2.4Nation$27,336$26,942-1.4a)Adjusted for inflation to year 2010 dollars based on the BLS Consumer Price Index Inflation Calculator | ||
==References:== | ==References:== | ||
USCB, 2008-2010; USCB, 2000b; BLS, 2012b Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-152Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-8 Civilian Labor Force and Unemployment Rates within Rock County, 2002-201220022003200420052006200720082009201020112012(a)Growth Rate (%)2002-12Rock CountyLabor Force82,43382,48882,72983,60884,66484,61983,45982,87480,96578,68778,132-5.2Employed77,42277,39178,07178,66580,41079,97978,28372,27471,89171,22370,949-8.4Unemployed5,0115,0974,6584,9434,2544,6405,17610,6009,0747,4647,18343.3 Unemployment Rate (%)6.16.25.65.95.05.56.212.811.29.59.2State of WisconsinLabor Force3,021,0683,033,6743,020,4023,035,8083,077,0963,096,9263,089,3763,115,3573,082,6763,062,2593,049,7021.0Employed2,860,9152,862,5872,868,3762,890,1172,932,4822,948,7252,939,7732,842,9162,821,8032,833,4312,819,901-1.4Unemployed160,153171,087152,026145,691144,614148,201149,603272,441260,873228,828229,80143.5Unemployment Rate (%)5.35.65.04.84.74.84.88.78.57.57.5United StatesLabor Force(b)144,863146,510147,401149,320151,428153,124154,287154,142153,889153,617154,7076.8Employed(b)136,485137,736139,252141,730144,427146,047145,362139,877139,064139,869142,0344.1Unemployed(b)8,3788,7748,1497,5917,0017,0788,92414,26514,82513,74712,67351.3Unemployment Rate (%)5.86.05.55.14.64.65.89.39.68.98.2a) Through March 2012. | USCB, 2008-2010; USCB, 2000b; BLS, 2012b Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-152Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-8 Civilian Labor Force and Unemployment Rates within Rock County, 2002-201220022003200420052006200720082009201020112012 (a)Growth Rate (%)2002-12Rock CountyLabor Force82,43382,48882,72983,60884,66484,61983,45982,87480,96578,68778,132-5.2Employed77,42277,39178,07178,66580,41079,97978,28372,27471,89171,22370,949-8.4Unemployed5,0115,0974,6584,9434,2544,6405,17610,6009,0747,4647,18343.3 Unemployment Rate (%)6.16.25.65.95.05.56.212.811.29.59.2State of WisconsinLabor Force3,021,0683,033,6743,020,4023,035,8083,077,0963,096,9263,089,3763,115,3573,082,6763,062,2593,049,7021.0Employed2,860,9152,862,5872,868,3762,890,1172,932,4822,948,7252,939,7732,842,9162,821,8032,833,4312,819,901-1.4Unemployed160,153171,087152,026145,691144,614148,201149,603272,441260,873228,828229,80143.5Unemployment Rate (%)5.35.65.04.84.74.84.88.78.57.57.5United StatesLabor Force(b)144,863146,510147,401149,320151,428153,124154,287154,142153,889153,617154,7076.8Employed(b)136,485137,736139,252141,730144,427146,047145,362139,877139,064139,869142,0344.1Unemployed(b)8,3788,7748,1497,5917,0017,0788,92414,26514,82513,74712,67351.3Unemployment Rate (%)5.86.05.55.14.64.65.89.39.68.98.2a) Through March 2012. | ||
b) Numbers in thousands | b) Numbers in thousands | ||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
BLS, 2012a Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-153Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-9 Employment by Industry within Rock CountyEmployment Industry20002012(a)2000-2012 Change (%)NumberPercentNumberPercentRock CountyConstruction, Mining and Natural Resources(b)5,7387.52,0003.3-65.1Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting, and | BLS, 2012a Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-153Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-9 Employment by Industry within Rock CountyEmployment Industry20002012(a)2000-2012 Change (%)NumberPercentNumberPercentRock CountyConstruction, Mining and Natural Resources (b)5,7387.52,0003.3-65.1Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting, and Mining 1,3141.7No dataNo data--Construction 4,4245.8No dataNo data--Manufacturing 22,64029.78,400 13.9-62.9Wholesale Trade2,5923.43,4005.631.2Retail Trade 9,27012.18,300 13.8-10.5Transportation, Warehousing, Utilities3,4994.62,6004.3-25.7Information 1,4972.01,1001.8-26.5Finance, Insurance, Real Estate3,0294.02,0003.3-34.0Professional and Business Services 3,7244.94,3007.115.5Education and Health Services14,19718.610,400 17.2-26.7Leisure and Hospitality5,1626.85,7009.510.4Other Services (except Public Administration) 2,8893.83,5005.821.1Public Administration 2,0992.78,60014.3309.7State of Wisconsin Construction, Mining and Natural Resources (b)237,0438.781,9003.0-65.4Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting, and Mining 75,4182.8No dataNo dataConstruction161,6255.9No dataNo dataManufacturing606,84522.2442,300 16.3-27.1Wholesale Trade 87,9793.2115,7004.331.5Retail Trade317,88111.6287,400 10.6-9.6Transportation, Warehousing, Utilities123,6574.597,4003.6-21.2Information 60,1422.246,0001.7-23.5Finance, Insurance, Real Estate168,0606.1155,5005.7-7.5Professional and Business Services179,5036.6280,900 10.456.5Education and Health Servic es548,11120.0416,000 15.3-24.1Leisure and Hospitality198,5287.3235,6008.718.7Other Services (except Public Administration)111,0284.1134,1004.920.8Public Administration 96,1483.5420,100 15.5336.9a) Through April 2012b) 2012 figures reflect non-farm employment and do not isolate "construction," contrasted to 2000 data. | ||
==References:== | ==References:== | ||
USCB, 2000b; Department of Workforce Development (DWD), 2012 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-154Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-10 Top 10 Employers within the ROI (Rock County), City of JanesvilleEmployerNumber of EmployeesPercentProduct/ServiceTop 10 Employers within Rock CountyMercy Health System(a)3,68729.0Medical ServicesBeloit Health System 1,48611.7Medical ServicesJanesville School District 1,36810.8Public EducationRock County 1,1709.2GovernmentHendricks Holdings (ABC et. al.) 8576.7Wholesale DistributorBeloit School District 8496.7Public EducationWal-Mart/Sam's Club(a)8556.7RetailGHC Specialty Brands 8436.6Wholesale DistributorBlackhawk Technical College 8256.5Educational | USCB, 2000b; Department of Workforce Development (DWD), 2012 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-154Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-10 Top 10 Employers within the ROI (Rock County), City of JanesvilleEmployerNumber of EmployeesPercentProduct/ServiceTop 10 Employers within Rock CountyMercy Health System (a)3,68729.0Medical ServicesBeloit Health System 1,48611.7Medical ServicesJanesville School District 1,36810.8Public EducationRock County 1,1709.2GovernmentHendricks Holdings (ABC et. al.) 8576.7Wholesale DistributorBeloit School District 8496.7Public EducationWal-Mart/Sam's Club(a)8556.7RetailGHC Specialty Brands 8436.6Wholesale DistributorBlackhawk Technical College 8256.5Educational Services Kerry Americas(a)7596.0Food ProductsTotal12,699100.0Top 10 Employers within the City of JanesvilleMercy Health System (a)3,68734.8Medical ServicesJanesville School District 1,36812.9Public EducationRock County 1,17011.1GovernmentWal-Mart/Sam's Club(a)8558.1RetailGHC Specialty Brands 8438.0Wholesale DistributionBlackhawk Technical College 8257.8Public EducationWoodman's Food Market, Inc.5415.1RetailLemans Corporation4504.3Wholesale DistributionJ.P. Cullen & Sons4324.1ConstructionSeneca Foods Corporation4153.9Food ProcessingTotal10,586100.0Top 5 Manufacturing Sector Employers within the City of JanesvilleSeneca Foods Corporation41526.0Food ProcessingSSI Technologies, Inc.38223.9Metal Components and SensorsPrent Corporation34221.4Plastic PartsSimmons23915.0MattressesHUFCOR, Inc.22013.8Accordion Doors & WallsTotal1,598100.0a) Employees located at multiple locations | ||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
| Line 304: | Line 644: | ||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
USCB, 2008-2010; USCB, 2000b Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-156Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-12 Housing Unit Characteristics within Rock CountyHousing Category200020102000- | USCB, 2008-2010; USCB, 2000b Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-156Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-12 Housing Unit Characteristics within Rock CountyHousing Category200020102000-2010 ChangeCity of JanesvilleTotal Number of Units25,08327,4339.4%Number of Occupied Units23,89425,2595.7%Number of Vacant Units1,1892,17482.8% | ||
Number of Occupied Units105,480,101114,596,9278.6%Number of Vacant Units10,424,54016,613,67959.4%Vacancy Rate9.0%12.7%3.7%Median Value(a)$151,449$187,50023.8%a)Adjusted for inflation to year 2010 dollars based on the BLS Consumer Price Index Inflation Calculator | Vacancy Rate4.7%7.9%3.2%Median Value (a)$126,630$135,4006.9%City of BeloitTotal Number of Units14,26215,3307.5%Number of Occupied Units13,37013,5831.6%Number of Vacant Units 8921,74795.9% | ||
Vacancy Rate6.3%11.4%5.1%Median Value (a)$86,361$90,5004.8%Rock CountyTotal Number of Units62,18768,39210.0%Number of Occupied Units58,61762,4066.5%Number of Vacant Units3,5705,98667.7% | |||
Vacancy Rate5.7%8.8%3.1%Median Value (a)$124,350$140,30012.8%State of WisconsinTotal Number of Units2,321,1442,612,29912.5%Number of Occupied Units2,084,5442,282,5079.5%Number of Vacant Units236,600329,79239.4% | |||
Vacancy Rate10.2%12.6%2.4%Median Value (a)$142,078$171,00020.4% | |||
NationTotal Number of Units115,904,641131,210,60613.2% | |||
Number of Occupied Units105,480,101114,596,9278.6%Number of Vacant Units10,424,54016,613,67959.4% | |||
Vacancy Rate9.0%12.7%3.7%Median Value (a)$151,449$187,50023.8%a)Adjusted for inflation to year 2010 dollars based on the BLS Consumer Price Index Inflation Calculator | |||
==References:== | ==References:== | ||
| Line 311: | Line 657: | ||
==References:== | ==References:== | ||
City of Janesville, 2012d; Department of Revenue (DOR), 2011; and DOR, 2012LocationCorporate Tax Rate(%)Income Tax Rate(%)Property Tax Rate (Dollars per $1,000 value)Sales Tax Rate (%) | City of Janesville, 2012d; Department of Revenue (DOR), 2011; and DOR, 2012LocationCorporate Tax Rate(%)Income Tax Rate(%)Property Tax Rate (Dollars per $1,000 value)Sales Tax Rate (%)CountyCity Board of EducationNet(a)Rock Countyn/an/a6.44277.040210.190225.01480.50State of WI 7.9 4.6-7.755.0 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-158Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-14 Major Municipal Water Suppliers in Rock County | ||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
USGS, 2007MunicipalWater SystemWellheadProtection PlanWellheadProtection OrdinanceCity of BeloitNoNoClinton WaterworksYesNo Edgerton WaterworksNoNoEvansville WaterworksYesYesFootville WaterworksYesNo Fulton Utility DistrictNoNoJanesville Water UtilityYesYesMilton WaterworksYesNo Orfordville WaterworksYesNo Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-159Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-15 Rock County Community Water Supply Characteristics (2010)Groundwater PopulationSurface Water PopulationPopulation ServedCounty PopulationPublic Water Use Index122,5850122,585152,30780 | USGS, 2007MunicipalWater SystemWellheadProtection PlanWellheadProtection OrdinanceCity of BeloitNoNoClinton WaterworksYesNo Edgerton WaterworksNoNoEvansville WaterworksYesYesFootville WaterworksYesNo Fulton Utility DistrictNoNoJanesville Water UtilityYesYesMilton WaterworksYesNo Orfordville WaterworksYesNo Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-159Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-15 Rock County Community Water Supply Characteristics (2010) | ||
Groundwater PopulationSurface Water PopulationPopulation ServedCounty PopulationPublic Water Use Index122,5850122,585152,30780 | |||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
| Line 320: | Line 667: | ||
==References:== | ==References:== | ||
USEPA, 2008 and | USEPA, 2008 and Vand ewalle & Asso ciates, 2009aTreatment Facility/ Project Name Existing Total Flow(Mgd)Present Design Total Flow (Mgd)ExcessCapacity(Mgd)ExcessCapacity(Percent)Beloit WWTP9.0011.002.0018%Clinton STP 0.130.380.2566%Edgerton STP 0.530.700.1725% | ||
Evansville WWTP 0.450.600.1626%Footville STP 0.080.110.0328%Janesville WWTP(a) 13.0025.0012.0048%Milton STP 0.380.630.2540%Orfordville STP 0.120.400.2870%Consolidated Koshkonong STP0.420.600.1830%Plymouth #1STP0.020.030.0133%Beloit, Town0.450.650.2132% | Evansville WWTP 0.450.600.1626%Footville STP 0.080.110.0328%Janesville WWTP (a) 13.0025.0012.0048%Milton STP 0.380.630.2540%Orfordville STP 0.120.400.2870%Consolidated Koshkonong STP0.420.600.1830% | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-161Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-17 Public School Enrollment (2012) within Rock | Plymouth #1STP0.020.030.0133%Beloit, Town0.450.650.2132% | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-161Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-17 Public School Enrollment (2012) within Rock County DistrictStudentEnrollmentNumber of SchoolsElementaryElementary/Secondary Middle SchoolHigh SchoolBeloit School District6,96711223Beloit Turner School District1,4612011Clinton Community School District1,1901011Edgerton School District1,7862011Evansville Community School District1,7752011Janesville School District10,32513036Milton School District3,3635011Parkview School District940 3011WI Department of Public Instruction00100Total, Rock County27,8073931115 | |||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
Department of Public Instruction (DPI), 2012 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-162Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-18 Recreation Facilities within Rock County (Sheet 1 of 2)ParkAmenitiesAcreageDistance from SHINE SitePassiveActiveac.hami.kmRegional | Department of Public Instruction (DPI), 2012 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-162Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-18 Recreation Facilities within Rock County (Sheet 1 of 2) | ||
ParkAmenitiesAcreageDistance from SHINE SitePassiveActiveac.hami.kmRegional Parks Rock CountyBeckman Mill County Park51.620.910.817.4Carver-Roehl Park5221.010.216.4 Gibbs Lake ParkX286.6116.013.621.9Happy Hollow ParkX191.277.41.93.1Lee ParkXX4016.211.318.2 Magnolia Bluff ParkX112.145.418.129.1Murwin ParkX4217.013.922.4City of JanesvilleNortheast Regional ParkX8735.27.411.9 Palmer ParkX16466.446.4Riverside ParkXX8735.26.310.1 Rockport ParkXX24699.63.45.5City of BeloitBig Hill Memorial ParkX197.279.84.77.6Community Parks Rock CountyAirport ParkX20.80.50.8 Avon ParkX176.916.827.0Koshkonong Lake AccessX12.75.115.424.8Ice Age ParkX3.41.48.814.2 Indianford ParkX1.20.512.820.6Royce Dallman ParkX2.30.915.324.6Schollmeyer ParkX10.45.58.9 Sugar River ParkX6.52.616.125.9Sweet-Allyn ParkXX3915.85.58.9 Walt Lindemann Sportsman's ParkXX104.06.911.1City of JanesvilleBond ParkX124.946.4 Kiwanis Community ParkX93.66.410.3Lustig ParkX3212.934.8Monterey ParkX4217.03.25.1 Optimist Community Park3514.25.18.2Traxler ParkX2710.94.67.4City of BeloitKrueger Recreation AreaX15.76.47.111.4 Leeson ParkX41.516.87.712.4Riverside ParkX24.910.17.712.4 Telfer ParkX28.811.76.310.1 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-163Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-18 Recreation Facilities within Rock County (Sheet 2 of 2) | |||
ParkAmenitiesLength (a)Distance from SHINE SitePassiveActivemi.kmmi.kmRock County TrailsSouth Connector TrailX4.06.40.81.3Ice Age Connector TrailX3.76.07.712.4Pelishak-Tiffany Nature TrailX6.09.79.715.6Hanover Wildlife Area 1X17.67.16.810.9a) Hanover Wildlife Area is measured in acres/hectares | |||
==References:== | ==References:== | ||
City of Janesville, 2012c; City of Janesville, 2012f, Design Perspectives Inc, 2009, and Vandewalle & Associates, 2006 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-164Rev. 019.3.8HUMAN HEALTHThis subsection describes the existing public and occupational health issues.19.3.8.1Maps of Potentially Sensitive Surrounding Facilities Figures 19.3.8-1 and 19.3.8-2 show distances from the proposed action to the following points or areas:*Nearest full-time resident.*Nearest sensitive receptors.-Educational facilities-Medical facilities | City of Janesville, 2012c; City of Janesville, 2012f, Design Perspectives Inc, 2009, and Vandewalle & Associates, 2006 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-164Rev. 019.3.8HUMAN HEALTHThis subsection describes the existing public and occupational health issues.19.3.8.1Maps of Potentially Sensitive Surrounding Facilities Figures 19.3.8-1 and 19.3.8-2 show distances from the proposed action to the following points or areas:*Nearest full-time resident.*Nearest sensitive receptors. | ||
-Educational facilities-Medical facilities | |||
-Community centers | -Community centers | ||
-Animal production facilities-Parks-Religious institutionsThe site boundary distances to these locations are summarized in Table 19.3.8-1. The nearest site boundary is approximately 300m (0.19mi.) east of the production facility building centerpoint (see Figure19.2.1-1).The nearest drinking water intake is an active, drilled, private well (Wisconsin unique well number MF461) located northwest of the site at 1112 W. Knilans Road, Janesville, Wisconsin, 53545.19.3.8.2Background Radiation Exposure The major sources and levels of background radiation exposure, both natural and man-made, are discussed in this subsection. | -Animal production facilities-Parks-Religious institutionsThe site boundary distances to these locations are summarized in Table 19.3.8-1. The nearest site boundary is approximately 300m (0.19mi.) east of the production facility building centerpoint (see Figure19.2.1-1).The nearest drinking water intake is an active, drilled, private well (Wisconsin unique well number MF461) located northwest of the site at 1112 W. Knilans Road, Janesville, Wisconsin, 53545.19.3.8.2Background Radiation Exposure The major sources and levels of background radiation exposure, both natural and man-made, are discussed in this subsection. | ||
Based on the information contained in the following subsections, there are no abnormal radiation hazards in the vicinity of the SHINE site; therefore, the background radiation exposure due to both natural and man-made sources is 6.2 millisievert per year (mSv/yr) (620 millirem [roentgen equivalent man] per year [mrem/yr]) (NRC, 2012a).19.3.8.2.1Natural SourcesThe U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) divides natural sources of radiation into three categories: cosmic, internal, and terrestrial. Cosmic radiation is the result of radiation received from extraterrestrial sources, such as the sun and other stars, that penetrate the Earth's atmosphere. Internal radiation is the result of naturally occurring potassium-40 (K-40) and carbon-14 (C-14) in all humans. Lastly, terrestrial radiation is the result of dose received from naturally occurring uranium, thorium, and radium found in soil and rock. Also, radon gas seeps through the ground and into the air where it is inhaled; this source represents the majority of the background radiation for an average member of the public (NRC, 2012b). | Based on the information contained in the following subsections, there are no abnormal radiation hazards in the vicinity of the SHINE site; therefore, the background radiation exposure due to both natural and man-made sources is 6.2 millisievert per year (mSv/yr) (620 millirem [roentgen equivalent man] per year [mrem/yr]) (NRC, 2012a).19.3.8.2.1Natural SourcesThe U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) divides natural sources of radiation into three categories: cosmic, internal, and terrestrial. Cosmic radiation is the result of radiation received from extraterrestrial sources, such as the sun and other stars, that penetrate the Earth's atmosphere. Internal radiation is the result of naturally occurring potassium-40 (K-40) and carbon-14 (C-14) in all humans. Lastly, terrestrial radiation is the result of dose received from naturally occurring uranium, thorium, and radium found in soil and rock. Also, radon gas seeps through the ground and into the air where it is inhaled; this source represents the majority of the background radiation for an average member of the public (NRC, 2012b). | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-165Rev. 0Based on information in the following subsections, there are no natural features of the SHINE site vicinity that would place natural background radiation at levels higher than the United States average. Therefore, the public receives an average natural background dose of 3.1 mSv/yr (310mrem/yr) (NRC, 2012a).19.3.8.2.1.1Cosmic RadiationCosmic radiation exposure depends on the site elevation. The terrain in the vicinity of the SHINE site is relatively flat, and the site elevation is well within the national elevation average. Therefore, it is appropriate to use the average annual dose due to cosmic radiation, 0.31 mSV/yr (31 mrem/yr) (NRC, 2012a).19.3.8.2.1.2Internal Radiation There are no above-normal sources of radioactivity contained in the food and water consumed in Janesville, Wisconsin based on publicly available USEPA data (USEPA, 2009). The average annual dose due to internal radiation, 0.31 mSv/yr (31 mrem/yr), is applicable (NRC, 2012a). 19.3.8.2.1.3Terrestrial RadiationThe national average for terrestrial radiation, 2.48 mSv/yr (248 mrem/yr), which includes uranium, thorium, radium, and radon gas, is applicable to the vicinity of the SHINE site (NRC,2012a).19.3.8.2.2Man-Made SourcesMan-made sources of radiation consist of medical sources, consumer products, and nuclear power sources. Medical procedures (e.g., X-rays, whole body CT scans, nuclear medicine procedures) account for a vast majority of the man-made radiation received annually. Consumer products, such as smoke detectors, televisions, and combustible fuels, also contribute to man-made radiation dose. Lastly, nuclear fuel cycle facilities (from uranium mining and milling to the disposal of spent nuclear fuel), nuclear power plants, and the transportation of radioactive material contribute to man-made radiation dose (NRC, 2012c). Based on the information in the following subsections, there are no abnormal sources of radiation located in the vicinity of the SHINE site; therefore, the public receives an average dose due to man-made radiation sources of 3.1 mSv/yr (310 mrem/yr) (NRC, 2012a).19.3.8.2.2.1Medical SourcesThe area surrounding the SHINE site contains three medical facilities: First Choice Women's Health Center, Mercy Clinic South, and Mercy Hospital, which are all located in Janesville, Wisconsin (see Table 19.3.8-1). First Choice Women's Health Center does not provide services that utilize ionizing radiation. Mercy Clinic South provides imaging services to patients (MHS,2012a). Mercy Hospital provides modern medical services to patients that include imaging services, radiation oncology, and nuclear medicine (MHS, 2012b).Those members of the public who are employed at Mercy Hospital or Mercy Clinic South may receive a higher dose due to medical sources than that of the average citizen medical dose, an Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-166Rev. 0average total dose of 2.98 mSv/yr (298 mrem/yr), but the medical workers do not receive a dose in excess of the occupational limits set in 10 CFR 20, 0.05 Sv/yr (5 rem/yr) (NRC, 2012a).19.3.8.2.2.2Consumer Products Ionizing radiation dose from the use of consumer products will fluctuate based on the lifestyle of the individual in question; therefore, a best estimate of the average annual dose due to consumer products, 0.12 mSv/yr (12 mrem/yr), is used (NRC, 2012a). | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-165Rev. 0Based on information in the following subsections, there are no natural features of the SHINE site vicinity that would place natural background radiation at levels higher than the United States average. Therefore, the public receives an average natural background dose of 3.1 mSv/yr (310mrem/yr) (NRC, 2012a).19.3.8.2.1.1Cosmic RadiationCosmic radiation exposure depends on the site elevation. The terrain in the vicinity of the SHINE site is relatively flat, and the site elevation is well within the national elevation average. Therefore, it is appropriate to use the average annual dose due to cosmic radiation, 0.31 mSV/yr (31 mrem/yr) (NRC, 2012a).19.3.8.2.1.2Internal Radiation There are no above-normal sources of radioactivity contained in the food and water consumed in Janesville, Wisconsin based on publicly available USEPA data (USEPA, 2009). The average annual dose due to internal radiation, 0.31 mSv/yr (31 mrem/yr), is applicable (NRC, 2012a). 19.3.8.2.1.3Terrestrial RadiationThe national average for terrestrial radiation, 2.48 mSv/yr (248 mrem/yr), which includes uranium, thorium, radium, and radon gas, is applicable to the vicinity of the SHINE site (NRC,2012a).19.3.8.2.2Man-Made SourcesMan-made sources of radiation consist of medical sources, consumer products, and nuclear power sources. Medical procedures (e.g., X-rays, whole body CT scans, nuclear medicine procedures) account for a vast majority of the man-made radiation received annually. Consumer products, such as smoke detectors, televisions, and combustible fuels, also contribute to man-made radiation dose. Lastly, nuclear fuel cycle facilities (from uranium mining and milling to the disposal of spent nuclear fuel), nuclear power plants, and the transportation of radioactive material contribute to man-made radiation dose (NRC, 2012c). Based on the information in the following subsections, there are no abnormal sources of radiation located in the vicinity of the SHINE site; therefore, the public receives an average dose due to man-made radiation sources of 3.1 mSv/yr (310 mrem/yr) (NRC, 2012a).19.3.8.2.2.1Medical SourcesThe area surrounding the SHINE site contains three medical facilities: First Choice Women's Health Center, Mercy Clinic South, and Mercy Hospital, which are all located in Janesville, Wisconsin (see Table 19.3.8-1). First Choice Women's Health Center does not provide services that utilize ionizing radiation. Mercy Clinic South provides imaging services to patients (MHS,2012a). Mercy Hospital provides modern medical services to patients that include imaging services, radiation oncology, and nuclear medicine (MHS, 2012b).Those members of the public who are employed at Mercy Hospital or Mercy Clinic South may receive a higher dose due to medical sources than that of the average citizen medical dose, an Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-166Rev. 0average total dose of 2.98 mSv/yr (298 mrem/yr), but the medical workers do not receive a dose in excess of the occupational limits set in 10 CFR 20, 0.05 Sv/yr (5 rem/yr) (NRC, 2012a).19.3.8.2.2.2Consumer Products Ionizing radiation dose from the use of consumer products will fluctuate based on the lifestyle of the individual in question; therefore, a best estimate of the average annual dose due to consumer products, 0.12 mSv/yr (12 mrem/yr), is used (NRC, 2012a). | ||
19.3.8.2.2.3Nuclear Reactor Facilities The contribution to man-made | 19.3.8.2.2.3Nuclear Reactor Facilities The contribution to man-made radiat ion from nuclear reactor facilities in the proposed action area is small. There are no nuclear fuel cycle facilities in the area; however, I-39/90 is approximately 2 mi. (3.2 km) from the site boundary, so there may be some radiation received from the transportation of radioactive material along that roadway. Railroads surround the proposed action area on all but the southeast sides, so transportation of radioactive materials along the railroads may contribute additional doses. In addition, the SHINE site is located between two nuclear reactors: Exelon's Byron Station (a two-unit pressurized water reactor (PWR) with a total net electrical generation of 2336 megawatts [MWe]) and the University of Wisconsin Nuclear Reactor (UWNR) research facility (variable thermal power up to 1 MWt) (Exelon, 2012; UWNR, 2011a). Byron Station is located approximately 40 mi. (64 km) south-southwest of the project facility (Google, 2012). Based on off-site dose calculations from Byron Station, the dose to the public near the SHINE site is very low due to the distance between the site and Byron Station (TBEES, 2011). Similarly, the UWNR is approximately 37 mi. (60 km) north-northwest of the project facility, and the dose to the public is very low due to the distance between the UWNR and the SHINE site (Google, 2012; UWNR,2011b). 19.3.8.3Description of Radioactive and Nonradioactive Liquid, Gaseous, and Solid Waste Management Effluent Control SystemsThere are no radioactive materials currently stored on the site or within the vicinity of the SHINE site; therefore, there are no radioactive effluent control systems on or within the vicinity of the site. See Subsection 19.3.8.8 for a description of nearby nuclear reactor facilities' radioactive effluent monitoring programs.Nonradioactive liquid, gaseous, and solid waste effl uents from facilities in the vicinity of the SHINE site report hazardous effluents to the USEPA (USEPA, 2012e). | ||
19.3.8.4Information on Radioactive and Nonradioactive Effluents Released to the EnvironmentThere are no radioactive materials stored on the site; therefore, there are no radioactive effluents released to the environment on-site. Mercy Hospital stores medical isotopes for use in their nuclear medicine program (MHS, 2012b). See Subsection 19.3.8.2.2.3 for a discussion of nearest operating nuclear reactor facilities' radioactive releases. | 19.3.8.4Information on Radioactive and Nonradioactive Effluents Released to the EnvironmentThere are no radioactive materials stored on the site; therefore, there are no radioactive effluents released to the environment on-site. Mercy Hospital stores medical isotopes for use in their nuclear medicine program (MHS, 2012b). See Subsection 19.3.8.2.2.3 for a discussion of nearest operating nuclear reactor facilities' radioactive releases. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-167Rev. 0See Table 19.3.8-2 for a list of hazardous materials stored within 5 mi. (8 km) of the SHINE site. It is assumed that any of these materials could be released to the environment in the vicinity of the SHINE site.19.3.8.5Radioactive and Nonradioactive Hazardous Material Stored On-Site or within the VicinityThere are no radioactive materials currently stored on the site. Mercy Hospital stores medical isotopes for use in their nuclear medicine program (MHS, 2012b). | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-167Rev. 0See Table 19.3.8-2 for a list of hazardous materials stored within 5 mi. (8 km) of the SHINE site. It is assumed that any of these materials could be released to the environment in the vicinity of the SHINE site.19.3.8.5Radioactive and Nonradioactive Hazardous Material Stored On-Site or within the VicinityThere are no radioactive materials currently stored on the site. Mercy Hospital stores medical isotopes for use in their nuclear medicine program (MHS, 2012b). | ||
There are no hazardous industrial materials stored on the site. However, since the SHINE site is currently used for agricultural purposes (see Subsection 19.3.4.1.1.3), chemical fertilizers and pesticides may have been used on the site. See Table 19.3.8-2 for a list of hazardous material stored within 5 mi. (8 km) of the SHINE site.19.3.8.6Current On-Site or Nearby Sources and Levels of Exposure to Members of the Public and Workers from Radioactive MaterialsThere are no existing radioactive materials currently stored on-site; therefore there is no exposure to the public. Mercy Hospital is the only facility in the vicinity of the SHINE site that possesses radioactive material. Patients at the hospital may be exposed to this radiation in a planned and controlled manner based on professionally prepared treatments. See Subsection 19.3.8.2.2.1 for the average annual radiation dose from medical facilities. There may be some radiation dose received from the transportation of radioactive material along I-39/90, which is located approximately 2mi. (3.2km) east of the site boundary. Railroads surround the proposed action area on all but the southeast sides, so transportation of radioactive materials along the railroads may contribute additional doses. Contributions from these sources are discussed in Subsection 19.3.8.2.2.3.19.3.8.7Historical Exposures to Radioactive Materials to Both Workers and Members of the PublicThere are no recordable incidents involving radioactive material in the vicinity of the SHINE site (USEPA, 2012e). | There are no hazardous industrial materials stored on the site. However, since the SHINE site is currently used for agricultural purposes (see Subsection 19.3.4.1.1.3), chemical fertilizers and pesticides may have been used on the site. See Table 19.3.8-2 for a list of hazardous material stored within 5 mi. (8 km) of the SHINE site.19.3.8.6Current On-Site or Nearby Sources and Levels of Exposure to Members of the Public and Workers from Radioactive MaterialsThere are no existing radioactive materials currently stored on-site; therefore there is no exposure to the public. Mercy Hospital is the only facility in the vicinity of the SHINE site that possesses radioactive material. Patients at the hospital may be exposed to this radiation in a planned and controlled manner based on professionally prepared treatments. See Subsection 19.3.8.2.2.1 for the average annual radiation dose from medical facilities. There may be some radiation dose received from the transportation of radioactive material along I-39/90, which is located approximately 2mi. (3.2km) east of the site boundary. Railroads surround the proposed action area on all but the southeast sides, so transportation of radioactive materials along the railroads may contribute additional doses. Contributions from these sources are discussed in Subsection 19.3.8.2.2.3.19.3.8.7Historical Exposures to Radioactive Materials to Both Workers and Members of the PublicThere are no recordable incidents involving radioactive material in the vicinity of the SHINE site (USEPA, 2012e). | ||
Any historical exposure to radioactive material would come from treatment in the Mercy Hospital nuclear medicine department. Patients at the hospital may have been historically exposed to this radiation in a planned and controlled manner, based on professionally-prepared treatments.19.3.8.8Description of Nearby | Any historical exposure to radioactive material would come from treatment in the Mercy Hospital nuclear medicine department. Patients at the hospital may have been historically exposed to this radiation in a planned and controlled manner, based on professionally-prepared treatments.19.3.8.8Description of Nearby Operatin g Facilities' Effluent Monitoring ProgramsExelon's Byron Station submits an annual radiological environmental operating report to the NRC, and the most recent results of the radiological environmental monitoring program are approximately the same as those found during the pre-operational studies conducted at Byron Station. Liquid effluents from Byron Station are released to the Rock River in controlled batches after radioassay of each batch. Gaseous effluents are released to the atmosphere and are calculated on the basis of analyses of weekly grab samples and grab samples of batch releases Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-168Rev. 0prior to the release of noble gases as well as continuously-collected composite samples of iodine and particulate radioactivity sampled during the course of the year. The results of effluent analyses are summarized on a monthly basis. Airborne concentrations of noble gases, iodine-131 (I-131), and particulate radioactivity in off-site areas are calculated using isotopic composition of effluents and meteorological data. C-14 concentration in off-site areas is calculated based on industry-approved methodology for estimation of the amount released and meteorological data. (TBEES, 2011)Environmental monitoring is conducted by sampling at indicator and control (background) locations in the vicinity of Byron Station to measure changes in radiation or radioactivity levels that may be attributable to station operation. If significant changes attri butable to Byron Station are measured, these changes are correlated with effluent releases. An environmental monitoring program is conducted which also includes all potential pathways at the site. Gaseous pathways include ground plane (direct), inhalation, vegetation, meat, and milk. Liquid pathways include potable water and freshwater fish. The critical pathway for 2010 gaseous dose was vegetation. | ||
The critical pathway for 2010 liquid dose was freshwater fish. (TBEES, 2011)The UWNR effluent monitoring program uses Landauer Luxel brand area monitors located in areas surrounding the reactor laboratory. Liquid effluents are monitored, recorded, and discharged to the sanitary sewer from the | The critical pathway for 2010 liquid dose was freshwater fish. (TBEES, 2011)The UWNR effluent monitoring program uses Landauer Luxel brand area monitors located in areas surrounding the reactor laboratory. Liquid effluents are monitored, recorded, and discharged to the sanitary sewer from the fac ility. Exhaust effluents are monitored, recorded, and discharged through the UWNR stack. Solid waste is monitored, recorded, and transferred to the UW Broad Scope license for ultimate disposal in accordance with the UWNR radioactive materials license. Quantities of released effluents are reported in the UWNR annual operating report. (UWNR, 2011b)19.3.8.9Relevant Occupational Injury Rates and Occupational Fatal Injury Rates Occupational injury and fatal injury rates for occupations relevant to the construction, operation, and decommissioning of the SHINE facility are discussed in this subsection. | ||
Recent BLS data, which lists the national incidence rates of nonfatal occupational injuries and illnesses by industry, was consulted to estimate relevant occupational injury rates for the SHINE project. The incidence rate is defined as the number of injuries and illnesses per 100 full-time workers. For this estimate the incidence rate of the total number of recordable cases was used. | Recent BLS data, which lists the national incidence rates of nonfatal occupational injuries and illnesses by industry, was consulted to estimate relevant occupational injury rates for the SHINE project. The incidence rate is defined as the number of injuries and illnesses per 100 full-time workers. For this estimate the incidence rate of the total number of recordable cases was used. | ||
During the construction and decommissioning phases, the total number of recordable cases for construction workers in the construction industry is 3.9 per 100full-time workers. During the operation phase, SHINE employees work in environments found in multiple industries, therefore, the total number of recordable cases for all industries (3.8 per 100full-time workers), is used to estimate the occupational injury rate for SHINE employees. (BLS, 2012c)Comparable BLS data exists for national occupational fatal injury rates. The BLS defines fatal injury rates as the number of fatal occupational injuries per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers. For the construction industry, the fatal injury rate is estimated to be 8.9 per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers. As discussed above, SHINE employees work in varying environments, so the fatal injury rate for all industries (3.5 per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers) is used to estimate the occupational fatal injury rate for SHINE employees. (BLS, 2012d) | During the construction and decommissioning phases, the total number of recordable cases for construction workers in the construction industry is 3.9 per 100full-time workers. During the operation phase, SHINE employees work in environments found in multiple industries, therefore, the total number of recordable cases for all industries (3.8 per 100full-time workers), is used to estimate the occupational injury rate for SHINE employees. (BLS, 2012c)Comparable BLS data exists for national occupational fatal injury rates. The BLS defines fatal injury rates as the number of fatal occupational injuries per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers. For the construction industry, the fatal injury rate is estimated to be 8.9 per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers. As discussed above, SHINE employees work in varying environments, so the fatal injury rate for all industries (3.5 per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers) is used to estimate the occupational fatal injury rate for SHINE employees. (BLS, 2012d) | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-169Rev. 0Table 19.3.8-1 Distance to Nearest Agricultural and Urban FacilitiesFacility Type Location of InterestDistance to SHINE Site BoundaryResidentialNearest Full-Time Resident0.33 mi. (0.53 km)ParkAirport Park0.30 mi. (0.48 km)Paw Print Park1.16 mi. (1.87 km) | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-169Rev. 0Table 19.3.8-1 Distance to Nearest Agricultural and Urban FacilitiesFacility Type Location of InterestDistance to SHINE Site BoundaryResidentialNearest Full-Time Resident0.33 mi. (0.53 km) | ||
ParkAirport Park0.30 mi. (0.48 km)Paw Print Park1.16 mi. (1.87 km) | |||
Burbank Park1.38 mi. (2.22 km)MedicalFirst Choice Women's Health Center1.37 mi. (2.20 km) | Burbank Park1.38 mi. (2.22 km)MedicalFirst Choice Women's Health Center1.37 mi. (2.20 km) | ||
Mercy Clinic South1.58 mi. (2.54 km) | Mercy Clinic South1.58 mi. (2.54 km) | ||
| Line 347: | Line 699: | ||
Blackhawk Technical College Aviation Center0.89 mi. (1.43 km) | Blackhawk Technical College Aviation Center0.89 mi. (1.43 km) | ||
Rock County Christian School1.14 mi. (1.83 km) | Rock County Christian School1.14 mi. (1.83 km) | ||
Jackson Elementary School1.28 mi. (2.06 km)Community Kids Learning Centers1.36 mi. (2.19 km)Community CenterCaravilla Education and Rehabilitation Comm Center1.62 mi. (2.61 km)Religious InstitutionsIglesia Hispania Pentecostes0.35 mi. (0.56 km)Summit Baptist Church1.37 mi. (2.20 km)Animal ProductionDairy Production0.51 mi. (0.82 km)Horse Pasture0.52 mi. (0.84 km) | Jackson Elementary School1.28 mi. (2.06 km)Community Kids Learning Centers1.36 mi. (2.19 km)Community CenterCaravilla Education and Rehabilitation Comm | ||
Center1.62 mi. (2.61 km)Religious InstitutionsIglesia Hispania Pentecostes0.35 mi. (0.56 km)Summit Baptist Church1.37 mi. (2.20 km) | |||
Animal ProductionDairy Production0.51 mi. (0.82 km)Horse Pasture0.52 mi. (0.84 km) | |||
Goat Production0.69 mi. (1.11 km)MacFarland Pheasants, Inc.0.86 mi. (1.38 km)Beef Production Area0.97 mi. (1.56 km) | Goat Production0.69 mi. (1.11 km)MacFarland Pheasants, Inc.0.86 mi. (1.38 km)Beef Production Area0.97 mi. (1.56 km) | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-170Rev. 0Table 19.3.8-2 Chemicals Used/Stored Within Five Miles of the Site(Sheet 1 of 4)List of ChemicalsNo. 2 Diesel FuelNo. 2 Fuel Oil 1,2,3-Propanetriol10-34-0 Ammonium Polyphosphate Solution2,2-Dimethypropane - 1,3-Diol 2-Ethylhexnol 2-Phenoxyethanol 4,4-Diphenylmethane Diisocyanate77-80% Calcium | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-170Rev. 0Table 19.3.8-2 Chemicals Used/Stored Within Five Miles of the Site(Sheet 1 of 4)List of ChemicalsNo. 2 Diesel FuelNo. 2 Fuel Oil 1,2,3-Propanetriol10-34-0 Ammonium Polyphosphate Solution2,2-Dimethypropane - 1,3-Diol 2-Ethylhexnol 2-Phenoxyethanol 4,4-Diphenylmethane Diisocyanate77-80% Calcium Chloride AC-101 Acetic Acid | ||
Ammonium Polyph, 4%N 10%P205 10%K20 1%S, .25Ammonium Polyphosphate Potassium ChlorideAmmonium Polyphosphate Potassium Hydro Ammonium Polyphosphate Potassium Hydroxide, 6-24-6 Ammonium Polyphosphate Potassium Solution Ammonium Polyphoste Potassium ChlorideAnionic Asphalt EmulsionAmmonium Thiosulfate Aromatic Polyester Polyol ArosurfBattery | |||
Acrylamide Copolymer AdogenAlkyl Dimethylamine C1295Aminoethylethanolamine Anhydrous Ammonia Ammonium Hydroxide Solution (29%) | |||
Ammonium Polyph, 4%N 10%P205 10%K20 1%S, .25Ammonium Polyphosphate Potassium ChlorideAmmonium Polyphosphate Potassium Hydro Ammonium Polyphosphate Potassium Hydroxide, 6-24-6 Ammonium Polyphosphate Potassium Solution Ammonium Polyphoste Potassium ChlorideAnionic Asphalt EmulsionAmmonium Thiosulfate | |||
Aromatic Polyester Polyol | |||
ArosurfBattery Acid Battery Electrolyte Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-171Rev. 0Table 19.3.8-2 Chemicals Used/Stored Within Five Miles of the Site (Sheet 2 of 4)List of Chemicals Benzoic Acid Benzyl Chloride Biodiesel ChlorineD-36 Condensate Treatement Diary Acid #5W De-icing Fluid | |||
Diesel Fuel Diethyloxyester Dimethylammonium ChlorideDiethanolamine Diethyl Sulfate | |||
Diethylene Glycol Diethylene TriamineDihydrogenated Tallowmethyl AmineDimethyl C12 Amine 95% | |||
Dimethyl C16 Amine 95% | Dimethyl C16 Amine 95% | ||
Dimethyl Sulfate DimethylamineopropylamineDXP 5522-048DXP 5522-131 DXP 5558-66 DXP 5536-094 Ethyl AlcoholEthyl MercaptanEthylene Oxide Fatty Acid C8-C18 Fatty Alcohol C12-C18Fertilizer RinsatcFertilizer, Commercial BlenD Liquid N-P-K Furfuryl Alcohol Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-172Rev. 0Table 19.3.8-2 Chemicals Used/Stored Within Five Miles of the Site (Sheet 3 of 4)List of ChemicalsGasolineGlyphosphate HerbicideHubercarb Q200 (Calcium Carbonate)Hydrogen Hydrogen Peroxide INDULIN 747IsopropanolJet Fuel Lauric Acid 1299 Liquified Petroleum Propane Metam-SodiumMethoxypolyglycol | |||
REWOTERIC AM TEG Road Saver | Dimethyl Sulfate DimethylamineopropylamineDXP 5522-048DXP 5522-131 DXP 5558-66 DXP 5536-094 | ||
Ethyl AlcoholEthyl MercaptanEthylene Oxide Fatty Acid C8-C18 Fatty Alcohol C12-C18Fertilizer RinsatcFertilizer, Commercial BlenD Liquid N-P-K Furfuryl Alcohol Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-172Rev. 0Table 19.3.8-2 Chemicals Used/Stored Within Five Miles of the Site (Sheet 3 of 4)List of ChemicalsGasolineGlyphosphate | |||
HerbicideHubercarb Q200 (Calcium Carbonate) | |||
Hydrogen Hydrogen Peroxide | |||
INDULIN 747IsopropanolJet Fuel Lauric Acid 1299 Liquified Petroleum Propane | |||
Metam-SodiumMethoxypolyglycol Basic Methyl Chloride Methyldiethanolamine | |||
N-Butyl Alcohol Nitric Acid Oleic AcidP&G Code 10020418 P&G Code 65163 Pesticides/Insecticides Peracetic AcidPhosphoric AcidPolyethylene Glycol POLYHEED 997 | |||
Polyol Potassium ChloridePotassium HydroxidePropylene Glycol Propylene Oxide Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-173Rev. 0Table 19.3.8-2 Chemicals Used/Stored Within Five Miles of the Site (Sheet 4 of 4)List of ChemicalsPropaneQUESTAR CAF | |||
REWOCOROS AC 100 US REWODERM S 1333REWOPAL 12 REWOQUAT (WE 18, E US, WE 28 US, WE 16, CQ 100) | |||
REWOTERIC AM TEG Road Saver Sealants Sodium Bisulfate Sodium Bisulfite Sodium Hydroxide Sodium Hypochlorite Soft Tallow DiesterSolvent Blend 19205Sorbitan Trioleate | |||
Stearic Acid | |||
Styrene Sulfuric AcidTEGO IL IMESTEGO AMID S 18 TEGOTENS EC 11 TEGOSOFT PBE Triethanolamine UreaVarious Oils | |||
Varamide Varine OVariquatVarisoft Varonic Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTable of ContentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-iRev. 0SECTION 19.4IMPACTS OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION, OPERATIONS, AND DECOMMISSIONINGTable of Contents SectionTitlePage19.4IMPACTS OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION, OPERATIONS, AND DECOMMISSIONING..................................................................................19.4-119.4.1LAND USE AND VISUAL RESOURCES..................................................19.4-119.4.2AIR QUALITY AND NOISE.......................................................................19.4-619.4.3GEOLOGIC ENVIRONMENT....................................................................19.4-3119.4.4WATER RESOURCES..............................................................................19.4-3419.4.5ECOLOGICAL RESOURCES...................................................................19.4-40 19.4.6HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES.............................................19.4-4919.4.7SOCIOECONOMICS.................................................................................19.4-50 19.4.8HUMAN HEALTH......................................................................................19.4-61 19.4.9WASTE MANAGEMENT...........................................................................19.4-8119.4.10TRANSPORTATION.................................................................................19.4-8319.4.11POSTULATED ACCIDENTS.....................................................................19.4-92 19.4.12ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE...................................................................19.4-10419.4.13CUMULATIVE EFFECTS..........................................................................19.4-111 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-iiRev. 1List of Tables NumberTitle19.4.2-1Isotope Production Process - Gaseous Effluents19.4.2-2Standby Diesel Generator - Emissions19.4.2-3Emissions from Production Facility Building - Natural Gas-Fired Boiler19.4.2-4Emissions from Administration Building - Natural Gas-Fired Heater19.4.2-5Emissions from Support Facility Building - Natural Gas-Fired Heater19.4.2-6Emissions from Waste Staging & Shipping Building - Natural Gas-Fired Heater19.4.2-7Emissions from Diesel Generator Building - Natural Gas-Fired Heater19.4.2-8Total Annual Emissions19.4.2-9SHINE Facility Release Point Characteristics 19.4.2-10Pollutant Impacts Compared to the SIL19.4.2-11Pollutant Impacts Compared to the NAAQS19.4.2-12Typical Noise and Emissions from Construction Equipment19.4.5-1Summary of Impacts to 2006 Land Use/Land Cover(a)19.4.7-1Projected ROI Labor Availability and On-site Labor Requirements at Peak Month of Construction, Operations and Decommissioning Schedules19.4.7-2Summary of Traffic Impacts during Construction and Operations19.4.7-3Summary of the Effects of Mitigative Measures on Traffic ConditionsduringOperations19.4.8-1Summary of Major Chemical Inventory and Quantity 19.4.8-2Chemical Storage Area Characteristics19.4.8-3Potential Occupational Hazards19.4.8-4This table number not used 19.4.8-5Annual Total Effective Dose Equivalent to the Public at Bounding Dose Receptors Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-iiiRev. 0List of Tables(Continued) | |||
NumberTitle19.4.8-6Environmental Monitoring Locations19.4.8-7Administrative Dose Limits 19.4.10-1Population Density, Exposed Population, and the Adjustment Factor for Transportation Route to Andrews, Texas 19.4.10-2Population Density, Exposed Population, and the Adjustment Factor for Transportation Route to Clive, Utah19.4.10-3Population Density, Exposed Population, and the Adjustment Factor for Transportation Route to Hazelwood, Missouri19.4.10-4Population Density, Exposed Population, and the Adjustment Factor for Transportation Route to North Billerica, Massachusetts19.4.10-5Incident-Free Radiological Dose Summary (Person-Rem/Year) 19.4.11-1SHINE Hazardous (Toxic) Chemical Source Terms and Concentrations 19.4.12-1Minority and Low-Income Population Statistics for Block Groups within a 5-Mi. Radius of the SHINESite19.4.13-1Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Projects and Other Actions Considered in the Cumulative Effects Analysis19.4.13-2Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Projects and Other Actions Retained for the Cumulative Effects Analysis19.4.13-3Cumulative Impacts on Environmental Resources, Including the Impacts of the Proposed Project Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of FiguresSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-ivRev. 0List of Figures NumberTitle19.4.1-1Conceptual Rendering of SHINE Facility19.4.1-2SHINE Facility Construction Grading Plan19.4.8-1Location of Environmental Monitors19.4.10-1Population Density for Transportation Route to Andrews, Texas 19.4.10-2Population Density for Transportation Route to Clive, Utah19.4.10-3Population Density for Transportation Route to Hazelwood, Missouri19.4.10-4Population Density for Transportation Route to North Billerica, Massachusetts19.4.12-1Low Income Populations in the Vicinity of the SHINE Site19.4.13-1Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Projects and Other Actions Retained for the Cumulative Effects Analysis Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-vRev. 0Acronyms and AbbreviationsAcronym/Abbreviation Definition | |||
µg/m3micrograms per cubic meter/Qrelative atmospheric concentration ac.acreacfmactual cubic feet per minute ALARAAs Low As Reasonably Achievable AMSLabove mean sea level BLSBureau of Labor Statistics BMPbest management practice Btubritish thermal unitBtu/hrBtu per hour Btu/scfBtu per standard cubic foot Bu.bushelCCelsiusCAMcontinuous air monitor CEDEcommitted effective dose equivalent CEQCouncil on Environmental Quality CFRCode of Federal Regulations Ci/yrCuries per year COcarbon monoxide CO2carbon dioxide CO2eCO2 equivalentD/Qground level deposition factor dBAdecibels Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-viRev. 1Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition DBAdesign basis accident DOEU.S. Department of Energy DORWisconsin Department of Revenue DOTU.S. Department of Transportation DPIWisconsin Department of Public Instruction DSSIDiversified Scientific Services, Inc. | |||
EDEeffective dose equivalent EJEnvironmental Justice ESFengineered safety feature FFahrenheit FRFederal Register ft.feetft/secfeet per second GHGgreenhouse gas GISGeographic Information Systemgpdgallons per daygrams/bhp-hrgrams per brake horsepower-hour H1Hhigh, first high H2Hhigh, second high hahectareHATHazard Analysis Team HAZOPSHazard and Operability Study Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-viiRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd) | |||
Acronym/AbbreviationDefinition HChydrocarbons HEPAhigh-efficiency particulate air hr.hourHVACheating, ventilation, and air conditioningI-129iodine-129I-131iodine-131 IAIowaIEinitiating event ILIllinoisINIndianaISAIntegrated Safety Analysis ISCIndustrial Source Complex ISGInterim Staff Guidance JSDJanesville School District keffneutron multiplication factorkmkilometer km2square kilometerKr-85krypton-85L/cylliters per cylinder lb/hrpounds per hour lb/MMBtupounds per million Btu lb/yrpounds per year Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-viii Rev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd) | |||
Acronym/AbbreviationDefinition lb.poundLEUlow enriched uranium LNBlow NOx burnersLOSlevel of service lpdliters per day LSAlow specific activity mmeterm/smeter per second MAMassachusetts MARmaterial-at-risk MEBmass and energy balance MEImaximally exposed individual Mgdmillion gallons per day MHAmaximum hypothetical accident mi.mileMldmillion liters per dayMMBtu/hrmillion Btu per hour MOMissouriMo-99molybdenum-99 mremmilliremmrem/yrmillirem per year mSvmillisievert mSv/yrmillisievert per year NAAQSNational Ambient Air Quality Standards Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-ixRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd) | |||
Acronym/AbbreviationDefinition NAVD 88North American Vertical Datum 1988 NENebraskaNEPANational Environmental Policy Act of 1969 NESHAPNational Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants NHRPNational Register of Historic Properties NLCDNational Land Cover Database NO2nitrogen dioxide NOxnitrogen oxideNPDESNational Pollutant Discharge Elimination SystemNRNatural ResourcesNRCU.S. Nuclear Regulatory CommissionNSPSNew Source Performance Standards NWSNational Weather ServiceNYNew York O3ozoneOHOhioOKOklahomaOSHAOccupational Safety and Health Administration PAPennsylvania PCSprimary cooling system PHAPreliminary Hazard Analysis PMparticulate matter Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-xRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd) | |||
Acronym/AbbreviationDefinition PM10particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than 10 microns PM2.5particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than 2.5 micronsPOTWpublically owned treatment worksPPEpersonal protective equipmentPrHAProcess Hazard AnalysisPSARPreliminary Safety Analysis ReportPSBprimary system boundaryPSDPrevention of Significant DeteriorationPVVSprocess vessel vent system RCARadiologically Controlled AreaRCRAResource Conservation and Recovery Actremroentgen equivalent manrem/srem per secondROIregion of influence RPCSradioisotope process facility cooling system RPFRadioisotope Production Facility rpmrevolutions per minute RPSreactivity protection system RVZ1RCA ventilation system Zone 1 RVZ2RCA ventilation system Zone 2 RVZ3RCA ventilation system Zone 3 SACTISeasonal/Annual Cooling Tower Impact Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-xiRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd) | |||
Acronym/AbbreviationDefinition SCASsubcritical assembly system scfstandard cubic foot scf/hrstandard cubic foot per hour scfmstandard cubic feet per minute SDGstandby diesel generatorsec.secondSHINESHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. | |||
SH 11State Highway 11 SHPOState Historic Preservation Office SILSignificant Impact Level SOsulfur oxides SO2sulfur dioxideSPspecial purpose district SPCCSpill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure SSCsstructures, systems, and components SWPPPStorm Water Pollution Prevention Plan T/yrtons per year TBPtri-n-butyl phosphate TEDEtotal effective dose equivalent TIFTax Increment FinancingTLDthermoluminescent dosimeter TSVtarget solution vessel TXTexas Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-xiiRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd) | |||
Acronym/AbbreviationDefinition U.S.United States UREXuranium extraction US 14U.S. Highway 14 US 51U.S. Highway 51 USCBU.S. Census Bureau USEPAU.S. Environmental Protection Agency USFWSU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service UTUtahVOCvolatile organic compound WCSWaste Control Specialists WDNRWisconsin Department of Natural Resources WHSWisconsin Historical Society WIWisconsin WIAAQSWisconsin Ambient Air Quality Standards WPDESWisconsin Pollutant Discharge Elimination System WYWyomingXe-133xenon-133 yd.yardyryear Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-1Rev. 0CHAPTER 1919.4IMPACTS OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION, OPERATIONS, AND DECOMMISSIONINGThis chapter provides an analysis of the impacts of construction, operation and decommissioning of the SHINE facility. Overall impact rankings are given to each environmental resource evaluated. Unless otherwise defined, criteria followed the guidance given in NRC Impact Rankings 10 CFR 51 Subpart A, Appendix B, Table B-1, Footnote 3 as follows: *SMALL (S) - Environmental effects are not detectable or are so minor that they will neither destabilize nor noticeably alter any important attribute of the resource.*MODERATE (M) - Environmental effects are sufficient to alter noticeably, but not to destabilize, important attributes of the resource.*LARGE (L) - Environmental effects are clearly noticeable and are sufficient to destabilize important attributes of the resource.19.4.1LAND USE AND VISUAL RESOURCESThis subsection assesses the impacts of construction and operation on land use and visual resources for the SHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. (SHINE) site and region. As described in Subsection19.3.1, the land use for the site and region is analyzed using the National Land Cover Database 2006 (Fry et al, 2011). Impacts include effects from activities associated with construction and operation, including excavation, grading, placement of fill material, temporary staging and construction laydown, construction of permanent features, and potential operational disturbances. 19.4.1.1Land UseThis subsection discusses the land use impacts from construction and operation of the SHINE facility. | |||
19.4.1.1.1Site and RegionAs described in Subsections19.3.1 and19.3.5, the SHINE site consists of a 91.27-acre(ac.) (36.94-hectare[ha]) parcel that has been historically farmed and is routinely disturbed by the disking, plowing, herbicide application and harvesting activities associated with row crop production. The region surrounding the SHINE site is defined in Subsection19.3.1.1.2 as the area within a 5-mile(mi.) (8-kilometer[km]) radius of the site centerpoint. The entire region is located within Rock County, Wisconsin. The potential construction-related land use impacts to the SHINE site and near off-site areas are based on the SHINE facility construction grading plan (Figure 19.4.1-2). Activities such as earthmoving, excavation, pile driving, erection, batch plant operation, and construction-related traffic generate potential disturbances to land use during the construction phase of the SHINE project. Construction-related direct impacts to the site and near site areas are limited to land previously utilized for agricultural/cultivated crop production. | 19.4.1.1.1Site and RegionAs described in Subsections19.3.1 and19.3.5, the SHINE site consists of a 91.27-acre(ac.) (36.94-hectare[ha]) parcel that has been historically farmed and is routinely disturbed by the disking, plowing, herbicide application and harvesting activities associated with row crop production. The region surrounding the SHINE site is defined in Subsection19.3.1.1.2 as the area within a 5-mile(mi.) (8-kilometer[km]) radius of the site centerpoint. The entire region is located within Rock County, Wisconsin. The potential construction-related land use impacts to the SHINE site and near off-site areas are based on the SHINE facility construction grading plan (Figure 19.4.1-2). Activities such as earthmoving, excavation, pile driving, erection, batch plant operation, and construction-related traffic generate potential disturbances to land use during the construction phase of the SHINE project. Construction-related direct impacts to the site and near site areas are limited to land previously utilized for agricultural/cultivated crop production. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-2Rev. 0Of the 91.27ac. (36.94ha) comprising the SHINE site, construction permanently converts 25.67ac. (10.39ha) of agricultural/cultivated crops to industrial facilities (Table19.4.1-1). Permanent conversions to industrial facilities include the construction of facility buildings, employee parking lot, facility access road/driveway, stormwater detention area, and access road drainage ditches. Direct construction impacts also include the temporary impact of 14.54ac. (5.88ha) of agricultural lands on-site used for the construction parking area, construction material staging or lay down area, and temporary disturbance from water and sewer line installation, as well as, the temporary indirect impact of 0.62ac. (0.25ha) of off-site agricultural lands immediately adjacent to the northern boundary of the site for temporary disturbance from water and sewer line installation. Temporary impact areas are either returned to agriculture or restored with either cool season grasses or native prairie. The loss of agricultural/cultivated crops to industrial facilities is minor when compared to the 25,236ac. (10,213ha) of agricultural land remaining within a 5-mi. (8-km) radius of the site (seeTable19.4.1-1). Furthermore, lands on-site not utilized for development of industrial facilities are returned to agriculture or restored using cool season grasses or native prairie species. As such, impacts to land use from construction and operations are SMALL.19.4.1.1.2Special Land UsesAs discussed in Subsection19.3.1.1.3, there are no federal special land use classification areas within the region of the SHINE site, but there are two state special land use areas in the region, with neither area located on-site. Permanent and temporary impacts from construction and operation of the facility occur on-site and in near off-site areas, but not within either state 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.19.4.1.1.3Agricultural Resources and FacilitiesThe agricultural resources and facilities on-site and within the region of the SHINE site are described in Subsection19.3.1.1.4. Both prime farmland and farmland of state-wide importance occur within the site boundaries, with approximately 41,950ac. (16,977ha) of the area within the region having soils classified as prime farmland and farmland of state-wide importance (see Subsection19.3.1.1.4). Based on the SHINE facility site layout (Figure19.2.1-1), the direct and indirect impacts from construction and operation of the facility occur on-site and near off-site, impacting 25.67ac. (10.39ha) of agricultural/cultivated crops on-site and 0.62ac. (0.25ha) of agricultural/cultivated crops near off-site (see Table19.4.1-1). As described in Subsection19.3.1.1.4, the potential relative value of the farmland for all 91.27ac. (36.94ha) comprising the SHINE site is 13,771bushels (Bu.) of grain corn or 3947Bu. of soybeans, while the 10-year production estimate average for Rock County, Wisconsin, is 22,075,540Bu. of grain corn and 3,786,415Bu. of soybeans. No other agricultural resources within the region of the SHINE site are located on-site or near off-site, as discussed in Subsection19.3.1.1.4, and therefore, will not be impacted by construction and operations-related impacts.The loss of on-site agricultural lands, including prime farmland and farmland of state-wide importance, and the subsequent loss of potential crop production to industrial facilities, is minor when compared to the amount of agricultural land, land designated as prime farmland or farmland of state-wide importance, and potential crop production remaining within the region surrounding the site (see Table19.4.1-1 and Subsection19.3.1.1.4). Furthermore, lands on-site not utilized for development of industrial facilities are returned to agriculture or restored using Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-3Rev. 0cool season grasses or native prairie species. As such, direct and indirect impacts to agricultural resources and facilities from construction and operations are SMALL.19.4.1.1.4Mineral ResourcesAs described in Subsection19.3.1.1.5, important mineral resources within the region include sand, gravel, and crushed stone. Two sand and gravel operations occur within the region of the SHINE site, but neither is located on-site. Permanent and temporary impacts from construction and operation 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 and operations of the facility are SMALL. Impacts to mineral resources are discussed further in Subsection19.4.3. | ||
19.4.1.1.5Major Population Centers and InfrastructureSubsection19.3.1.1.6 summarizes the major population centers and infrastructure located within Rock County, which include the major population centers of Janesville and Beloit, several major transportation corridors, and the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport. While US51 and the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport are located just west of the SHINE site, none of the major population centers or infrastructure are located on-site. Permanent and temporary impacts from construction and operations of the facility occur on-site and immediately adjacent to the northern boundary of the site. Therefore, construction and operations-related direct and indirect impacts on major population centers and infrastructure are SMALL.19.4.1.1.6Impacts from Decommissioning Construction of the SHINE facility is expected to begin in 2015. Following the cessation of operations, the facility will be decommissioned. Decommissioning activities, however, are similar to construction activities and involve heavy equipment to dismantle buildings and remove roadway and parking facilities. Resultant land uses following decommissioning are undetermined but may consist of agricultural lands or open space. As such, direct and indirect impacts from decommissioning are anticipated to be similar to the impacts associated with construction and SMALL.19.4.1.2Visual ResourcesThe visual setting of the area affected by the construction and operation of the SHINE site is described in Subsection19.3.1.2. Illustrations of the bounding condition of the SHINE facility superimposed on the current viewshed are shown on Figure19.4.1-1.The existing site is composed entirely of land used for agricultural purposes and has no existing architectural features, established structures, or natural or built barriers, screens or buffers. Consequently, the SHINE facility alters the on-site condition and partially obstructs views of the existing landscape. However, the visual setting of the site is generally flat and uniform in landform with low vegetation diversity and a low visual quality rating (see Subsection19.3.1.2). Bounding dimensions of the production facility building for visual impact assessment include a height of 86 feet (ft.) (26 meters [m]), a length of 416ft. (127m), and a width of 167 ft. (51m). | 19.4.1.1.5Major Population Centers and InfrastructureSubsection19.3.1.1.6 summarizes the major population centers and infrastructure located within Rock County, which include the major population centers of Janesville and Beloit, several major transportation corridors, and the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport. While US51 and the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport are located just west of the SHINE site, none of the major population centers or infrastructure are located on-site. Permanent and temporary impacts from construction and operations of the facility occur on-site and immediately adjacent to the northern boundary of the site. Therefore, construction and operations-related direct and indirect impacts on major population centers and infrastructure are SMALL.19.4.1.1.6Impacts from Decommissioning Construction of the SHINE facility is expected to begin in 2015. Following the cessation of operations, the facility will be decommissioned. Decommissioning activities, however, are similar to construction activities and involve heavy equipment to dismantle buildings and remove roadway and parking facilities. Resultant land uses following decommissioning are undetermined but may consist of agricultural lands or open space. As such, direct and indirect impacts from decommissioning are anticipated to be similar to the impacts associated with construction and SMALL.19.4.1.2Visual ResourcesThe visual setting of the area affected by the construction and operation of the SHINE site is described in Subsection19.3.1.2. Illustrations of the bounding condition of the SHINE facility superimposed on the current viewshed are shown on Figure19.4.1-1.The existing site is composed entirely of land used for agricultural purposes and has no existing architectural features, established structures, or natural or built barriers, screens or buffers. Consequently, the SHINE facility alters the on-site condition and partially obstructs views of the existing landscape. However, the visual setting of the site is generally flat and uniform in landform with low vegetation diversity and a low visual quality rating (see Subsection19.3.1.2). Bounding dimensions of the production facility building for visual impact assessment include a height of 86 feet (ft.) (26 meters [m]), a length of 416ft. (127m), and a width of 167 ft. (51m). | ||
The high bay footprint has bounded dimensions of 58ft. (18m) wide by 190ft. (58m) long. The facility's main building has an exhaust vent stack that under the bounding condition extends to Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical | The high bay footprint has bounded dimensions of 58ft. (18m) wide by 190ft. (58m) long. The facility's main building has an exhaust vent stack that under the bounding condition extends to Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-4Rev. 096ft. (29m) above grade. Figure19.4.1-1 presents a conceptual rendering of the facility and the arrangements on-site based upon bounded dimensions. As discussed in Subsection 19.4.2.1.2.2.5, plume visibility from the production process is expected to be minimal. Additionally, the facility does not utilize cooling towers, radar towers or other large structures that visibly intrude upon the existing landscape. Based upon these site characteristics and the bounded dimensions of the facility as illustrated in Figure 19.4.1-1, facility structures have a relatively low profile, so any impacts to the viewshed are SMALL. The operation of the SHINE facility results in minor increases in noise as described in Subsection19.4.2. However, noise levels are localized to the SHINE site and not elevated above background noise emissions from US51, immediately adjacent to the site. Therefore, noise emissions from the site do not create audible intrusions that are out of character with the setting around the SHINE site.As described in Subsection19.3.1.2, two large warehouses are located immediately adjacent to the southern border of the site that support local agricultural operations and provide storage for large farming equipment. The viewshed to the west of the site across US51 is a light industrial development landscape that consists of the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport and its associated facilities, which include the airport control tower and several large warehouses and hangers. Additionally, the viewshed to the south includes several stacks associated with power generation facilities. Together with the buildings and structures to the south and west, the SHINE facility does not significantly alter the visual setting. Therefore, impacts to visual resources from construction and operation of the SHINE facility are SMALL. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-5Rev. 0Table 19.4.1-1 Summary of Impacts to Land Use/Land CoverNLCD 2006 Land Cover ClassPermanent Site ImpactsTemporary Site ImpactsTotal Land Cover within theRegion (a)Percentac.haac.haac.haOpen Water7963221.6Developed, Open Space0.180.07304312316.1Developed, Low Intensity5858237111.7Developed, Medium Intensity19687963.9Developed, High Intensity9924012Barren43170.1Deciduous Forest329813356.6Evergreen Forest68280.1 Mixed Forest100Shrub/Scrub5052041Grassland10494252.1 Pasture/Hay5896238611.7Cultivated Crops25.67(b)10.39(b)14.54(b)5.88(b)25,23610,21350.2Woody Wetlands7222921.4Emergent Herbaceous Wetland7873181.6Total(c)28.8510.4614.545.8850,26220,339100a) | ||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
Fry et al., 2011. | Fry et al., 2011. | ||
b)Cultivated Crops on the SHINE site are entirely prime farmland and farmland of state-wide importance.c)Total may add up to more or less than 100 percent due to rounding. | b)Cultivated Crops on the SHINE site are entirely prime farmland and farmland of state-wide importance.c)Total may add up to more or less than 100 percent due to rounding. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-6Rev. 019.4.2AIR QUALITY AND NOISEThis subsection addresses the direct physical impacts of construction and operation on the communities within the vicinity of the SHINE site. Direct physical impacts include the effects from air emissions and noise. This evaluation indicates the magnitude of potential impacts and whether mitigation measures are required. 19.4.2.1Air Quality19.4.2.1.1Impacts from Construction Construction activities result in localized increases in air emissions. Earthmoving, excavation, clearing, pile driving, erection, batch plant operation, and construction-related traffic generate fugitive dust and fine particulate matter that potentially impact both on-site workers and off-site residents of the community. Vehicles and engine-driven equipment (e.g., generators and compressors) generate combustion product emissions such as carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides and, to a lesser extent, sulfur dioxides. Painting, coating, and similar operations also generate emissions from the use of volatile organic compounds.People living near or working at or near construction sites may be subject to the physical impacts of construction activities. Activities associated with the use of construction equipment may result in varying amounts of dust, air emissions, noise, and vibration. The magnitude and area of extent of the impacts from these emissions depends on atmospheric conditions at the time of the activity. The magnitude of these potential impacts is typically related to the specific construction activities that occur at a given site, the nature and effectiveness of implemented environmental controls, and the proximity of the site to populated areas. Contractors, vendors, and subcontractors are required to adhere to appropriate federal and state occupational health and safety regulations. These regulations set limits to protect workers from adverse conditions, including air emissions. On-site equipment use and traffic due to constructi on activities can also result in local increases in emissions. Subsection19.4.7 provides information regarding the type and volume of traffic generated by the SHINE facility during construction. While guidance from the Final ISG Augmenting NUREG-1537 suggests that emissions from on-site and o ff-site vehicle use (including fugitive dust) be estimated, SHINE believes that this information is not necessary to evaluate the impacts of the SHINE facility given the absence of near off-site receptors, the short term duration of such emissions, and the classification of the regional air quality as "attainment." Analysis of on-site and off-site vehicle use, including fugitive dust, are more appropriate for projects requiring a Conformity Analysis in non-attainment areas. Because construction equipment use and generated traffic volumes are relatively minor compared to other regional traffic generated emissions, and because the SHINE site is largely surrounded by agricultural fields and other undeveloped areas associated with the airport, potential air quality impacts from construction are limited. Implementation of controls and limits at the source of emissions on the construction site result in reduction of impacts off-site. For example, the dust control program reduces dust due to construction activities to minimize dust reaching site boundaries. Transportation and other off-site activities result in emissions from vehicle usage. Off-site transportation activities generally occur on improved surfaces, limiting fugitive dust emissions. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-7Rev. 0Specific mitigation measures to control fugitive dust may include any or all of the following:*Stabilizing construction roads and spoil piles.*Limiting speeds on unpaved construction roads. | ||
*Periodically watering unpaved construction roads.*Performing housekeeping (e.g., remove dirt spilled onto paved roads). | *Periodically watering unpaved construction roads.*Performing housekeeping (e.g., remove dirt spilled onto paved roads). | ||
*Covering haul trucks when loaded or unloaded. | *Covering haul trucks when loaded or unloaded. | ||
*Minimizing material handling (e.g., drop heights, double-handling).*Phased grading to minimize the area of disturbed soils.*Re-vegetating road medians and slopes.While emissions from construction activities and equipment are unavoidable, implementation of mitigation measures minimize impacts to local ambient air quality and the nuisance impacts to the public in proximity to the project. The mitigation may include any or all of the following:*Implementing controls to minimize daily emissions such as reducing engine idle time, using cleaner fuels (e.g., ultra low sulfur diesel fuel or biodiesel), installing pollution control equipment on construction equipment (e.g., diesel oxidation catalysts and particulate matter filters), and curtailing or controlling the time of day construction activities are performed.*Performing proper maintenance of construction vehicles to maximize efficiency and minimize emissions.In summary, air emission impacts from construction are SMALL because emissions are controlled at the source where practicable; maintained within established regulatory limits designed to minimize impacts; and located a significant distance from the public.19.4.2.1.2Impacts from OperationSection19.2 provides information regarding the cooling and heating dissipation systems and the waste systems for the SHINE facility. The design of the new plant includes a cooling system that does not require the use of either mechanical or natural draft cooling towers. The SHINE site is located in Rock County, Wisconsin, which is part of the Rockford (Illinois)-Janesville-Beloit (Wisconsin) Interstate Air Quality Control Region (40Code of Federal Regulations [CFR]81.71, Natural Resources [NR]404.03 Wisconsin Administrative Code) (Section14.4.3.2.2). The Clean Air Act and | *Minimizing material handling (e.g., drop heights, double-handling).*Phased grading to minimize the area of disturbed soils.*Re-vegetating road medians and slopes.While emissions from construction activities and equipment are unavoidable, implementation of mitigation measures minimize impacts to local ambient air quality and the nuisance impacts to the public in proximity to the project. The mitigation may include any or all of the following:*Implementing controls to minimize daily emissions such as reducing engine idle time, using cleaner fuels (e.g., ultra low sulfur diesel fuel or biodiesel), installing pollution control equipment on construction equipment (e.g., diesel oxidation catalysts and particulate matter filters), and curtailing or controlling the time of day construction activities are performed.*Performing proper maintenance of construction vehicles to maximize efficiency and minimize emissions.In summary, air emission impacts from construction are SMALL because emissions are controlled at the source where practicable; maintained within established regulatory limits designed to minimize impacts; and located a significant distance from the public.19.4.2.1.2Impacts from OperationSection19.2 provides information regarding the cooling and heating dissipation systems and the waste systems for the SHINE facility. The design of the new plant includes a cooling system that does not require the use of either mechanical or natural draft cooling towers. The SHINE site is located in Rock County, Wisconsin, which is part of the Rockford (Illinois)-Janesville-Beloit (Wisconsin) Interstate Air Quality Control Region (40Code of Federal Regulations [CFR]81.71, Natural Resources [NR]404.03 Wisconsin Administrative Code) (Section14.4.3.2.2). The Clean Air Act and it s amendments establish National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ambient pollutant concentrations that are considered harmful to public health and the environment. Similarly, Wisconsin has established the Wisconsin Ambient Air Quality Standards (WIAAQS) (NR404.03 Wisconsin Administrative Code). Primary standards set limits to protect public health and secondary standards set limits to protect public welfare such as decreased visibility, and damage to animals, crops, vegetation, and buildings. The principal pollutants for which NAAQS have been set are carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), lead, sulfur dioxide (SO 2), particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than 10 microns (PM 10), particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than 2.5 microns (PM2.5), and ozone (O 3). One or more averaging times are associated with each pollutant for which the standard must be attained. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-8Rev. 0Areas having air quality as good as, or better than, the NAAQS are designated as attainment areas. Areas having air quality that is worse than the NAAQS are designated as nonattainment areas. Rock County is designated as better than national Standards for SO 2 and unclassifiable/ attainment for CO, 1-hour (hr.) ozone, 8-hr. ozone (1997 and 2008 standards), NO 2, PM2.5, and lead (2008 standard) (40CFR81, SubpartC, §350). Rock County is near (but not part of) the Milwaukee-Racine PM 2.5 (2006) and 8-hr.ozone nonattainment areas (Subsection19.3.2.2). Walworth County separates Rock County from the nonattainment area.The nearest Class I area is Rainbow Lake, a U.S. Forest Service site about 311mi. (500km) north of Janesville, Wisconsin (Subsection19.3.2.2). Rainbow Lake is not a federally mandated Class I area (40CFR81, SubpartD). A Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) source within 31mi. (50km) of the Rainbow Lake Class I area must perform a significance analysis for the increase in emissions. In addition, any PSD source that locates within approximately 124mi. | ||
(200km) of a Class I Area, must notify the applicable Federal Land Manager. Since Rainbow Lake is well beyond the distance limits, the additional analysis and notification are not required.19.4.2.1.2.1Gaseous EffluentsGaseous effluents at the SHINE facility are from two types of processes: isotope production and fuel combustion. | (200km) of a Class I Area, must notify the applicable Federal Land Manager. Since Rainbow Lake is well beyond the distance limits, the additional analysis and notification are not required.19.4.2.1.2.1Gaseous EffluentsGaseous effluents at the SHINE facility are from two types of processes: isotope production and fuel combustion. | ||
19.4.2.1.2.1.1Isotope Production Gaseous effluents from the SHINE isotope production process originate from two main sources: Mo-99, Xe-133, and I-131 production and purification and uranium recycling. Process off-gases are treated in two separate, but connected, systems: the target solution vessel (TSV) off-gas system and the process vessel vent system (PVVS).Tritium gas is the accelerator target in the accelerator-based neutron source used in the production process. Maintenance operations on the accelerator will result in the release of tritium gas that will be exhausted by the ventilation system.The TSV off-gas system is dedicated to treating only the off-gas from the TSVs, with each TSV being equipped with its own system. The PVVS treats gases from the following sources: vent streams from process vessels in contact with streams containing fissile or radioactive materials, thermal denitration off-gas, after initial caustic scrubbing, and off-gas from the uranium oxidation furnace.The SHINE production facility utilizes a ventilation scheme for the process operating areas that is typical for nuclear processing facilities of this type. The operating areas are divided into zones, with each zone representing a specific hazard, and being subject to specific constraints, in terms of the potential for radioactive contamination or dose to the facility workers. Gaseous effluents resulting from the production process are summarized in Table19.4.2-1. These values are based on a 50-week per year operating schedule. There are no emissions of carbon monoxide, lead, ozone, or particulate matter (PM). | 19.4.2.1.2.1.1Isotope Production Gaseous effluents from the SHINE isotope production process originate from two main sources: Mo-99, Xe-133, and I-131 production and purification and uranium recycling. Process off-gases are treated in two separate, but connected, systems: the target solution vessel (TSV) off-gas system and the process vessel vent system (PVVS).Tritium gas is the accelerator target in the accelerator-based neutron source used in the production process. Maintenance operations on the accelerator will result in the release of tritium gas that will be exhausted by the ventilation system.The TSV off-gas system is dedicated to treating only the off-gas from the TSVs, with each TSV being equipped with its own system. The PVVS treats gases from the following sources: vent streams from process vessels in contact with streams containing fissile or radioactive materials, thermal denitration off-gas, after initial caustic scrubbing, and off-gas from the uranium oxidation furnace.The SHINE production facility utilizes a ventilation scheme for the process operating areas that is typical for nuclear processing facilities of this type. The operating areas are divided into zones, with each zone representing a specific hazard, and being subject to specific constraints, in terms of the potential for radioactive contamination or dose to the facility workers. Gaseous effluents resulting from the production process are summarized in Table19.4.2-1. These values are based on a 50-week per year operating schedule. There are no emissions of carbon monoxide, lead, ozone, or particulate matter (PM). | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-9Rev. 019.4.2.1.2.1.2Fuel CombustionSeveral combustion sources at the SHINE facility contribute to the gaseous effluents. These combustion sources are a natural gas-fired boiler that is used for the production facility building, natural gas-fired heaters in the administration building, support facility building, waste staging and shipping building, and the standby generator building. In addition to these natural gas-fired heaters, a diesel-fired standby diesel generator (SDG) is present at the facility. Each of these sources vents emissions to the outside through an associated stack. The boiler, heaters, and generator all emit CO, nitrogen oxides (NO x), PM, SO 2, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and carbon dioxide (CO 2), as summarized in Tables19.4.2-2 to 19.4.2-7. Total annual emissions are presented in Table 19.4.2-8.19.4.2.1.2.2Evaluation of Emission Impacts on Air Quality19.4.2.1.2.2.1Vehicle and Other Emissions During the operations phase, vehicular air emissions occur from the commuting workforce and from routine deliveries to/from the SHINE facility. As described in Subsection19.4.7, the volume of traffic generated during operations is considerably lower than that expected during construction. Additionally, the lands on the developed SHINE site are either developed surfaces (buildings, paved parking/access road) or consist of either agricultural or landscaped uses. Limitation of routine vehicle uses to paved areas reduces the emissions of fugitive dust. Impacts from vehicular air emissions and fugitive dust are far less than during the construction phase. Impacts during the operations phase are therefore, SMALL.The AERMOD modeling system was used to assess the impacts of pollutants expected to be generated by the new plant from the production unit and five natural gas-fired heaters. A SDG is only operated for limited periods of time for testing and therefore is not modeled. A March 2012 Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) memorandum on dispersion modeling of intermittent sources, states "In conjunction with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) document cited previously, dispersion modeling for intermi ttent units is not performed for any of the state or federal ambient air quality standards or increments." (WDNR, 2012a). 19.4.2.1.2.2.2Release Point CharacteristicsEmissions and stack characteristics for each emission source are based on the design parameters, assumptions, and emission factors. Exhaust characteristics for the SDG are estimated based on heat input to the source, fuel consumption, and combustion calculations assuming 25percent excess combustion air. Exhaust gas temperatures for the SDG are based on data in the CATC175-20 Diesel Engine Technical Data Sheet, and the calculated exhaust gas flow rates are benchmarked against exhaust flow data included in the CAT technical data sheet. Exhaust characteristics for the production facility building natural gas-fired boiler are estimated based on heat input to the source, fuel consumption, and combustion calculations assuming 25percent excess combustion air. Exhaust gas temperatures for the natural gas-fired boiler are based on temperature data provided by boiler vendors for other similar projects. Exhaust from the natural gas-fired boiler is vented to the atmosphere through a stack that is separate from the Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-10Rev. 0process stack, which is designed primarily to vent gaseous effluents from the SHINE isotope production process. Stack characteristics for the indirect-fired heaters are based on information available from equipment vendors for packaged indirect-fired heaters. Vertical convection stack vents equipped with a rain cap are assumed for each natural gas-fired heater for all buildings except the production facility. No rain cap is assumed for the main production facility. Each stack is assumed to be 5ft. (1.5m) higher than the highest point of the roof of the building. Natural gas heater information sources referenced for this evaluation include those by Reznor (Reznor, 2002) and Hastings (Hastings, 2011). Process-related and natural gas boiler exhaust flows are released through separate stacks. Release point characteristics for the process-related, boiler, and natural gas-fired heater gaseous effluents are presented in Table19.4.2-9.19.4.2.1.2.2.3Gaseous Effluent Control Systems Emission calculations included in this evaluation are intended to provide bounding values for emissions from the SHINE facility. As such, emission calculations assume that emissions are limited using standard combustion controls, but do not assume the installation of post-combustion control systems.The SHINE facility generates gaseous effluents resulting from process operations and the ventilation of operating areas. The gaseous effluent from ventilation of operating areas includes the following control systems: *The Zone 1 exhaust airstream passes through two stages of HEPA filtration and a single stage activated carbon bed prior to discharge from the stack.*The Zone 2 and Zone 3 exhaust airstreams pass through two stages of HEPA filtration prior to discharge from the stack.*Additional controls may be implemented as required by local permit conditions. Acid gases from the thermal denitration process pass through a scrubber before being emitted to the atmosphere. All the gaseous effluents from the production process are vented to the atmosphere through the main stack on the production facility building.The diesel generator specified for the SHINE facility is required to meet all applicable New Source Performance Standards (NSPS, 40CFRPart 60 SubpartIIII) and National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP, 40CFRPart63 Subpart ZZZZ). The NSPS and NESHAP standards applicable to the diesel generator depend upon several design parameters and operating variables which have not yet been established, including the year the engine is manufactured, size of the engine, displacement liters per cylinder(L/cyl), speed (revolutions per minute [rpm]), annual hours of operation, and classification of the facility as a major or area source of hazardous air pollutants. Therefore, diesel engine emissions for this evaluation are based on published emissions data for a CATC175-20 engine, which are expected to be typical of emissions from large diesel-fired engines with no post-combustion emission control systems. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-11Rev. 0Emissions of NO x from the natural gas-fired boiler are controlled using low NO x burners (LNB), which are standard equipment on most new boilers manufactured in the United States. LNBs limit NOx formation by controlling both the stoichiometric and temperature profiles of the combustion flame in each burner flame envelope. This control is achieved with design features that regulate the aerodynamic distribution and mixing of the fuel and air, yielding reduced oxygen in the primary combustion zone, reduced flame temperature, and reduced residence time at peak combustion temperatures. The combination of these techniques produces lower NO x emissions during the combustion process. Post-combustion air quality control systems are not anticipated for the natural gas-fired boiler, as natural gas is an inherently clean fuel with minimal SO 2 and PM emissions.Emissions from the natural gas-fired heaters are controlled using combustion controls and properly designed and tuned burners. Gas burners come in a great variety of shapes, sizes, and designs. Typical gas burners found in indirect-fired heaters are the ribbon-port type, which vary in length and in port sizes, and may employ a single ribbon or many ribbons depending on the volume of gas to be burned (Reznor, 2002). The emission calculations assume properly designed and tuned burners, with a proper balance of primary air and secondary air to ensure complete combustion. Post-combustion air quality control systems are not anticipated for the natural gas-fired heaters, as natural gas is an inherently clean fuel with minimal SO 2 and PM emissions.19.4.2.1.2.2.4Dispersion Modeling Assumptions and Results19.4.2.1.2.2.4.1Model AssumptionsSince there are no cooling towers associated with the SHINE facility, there are no estimates of fogging, icing, plume shadowing, and salt deposition from the Seasonal/Annual Cooling Tower Impact (SACTI) model.To estimate the impacts of non-radiological pollutants from the process, boiler, and heaters, the AERMOD Modeling System is used. The AERMOD system is a state-of-the-science dispersion model system that the USEPA promulgated in 2005 to replace the Industrial Source Complex (ISC) model. The AERMOD system is composed of a terrain preprocessor (AERMAP, version 11103), a tool to develop building downwash parameters for AERMOD (BPIPPRM, version 04274), and the dispersion model (AERMOD, version 12345).Although the SHINE facility has a standby diesel generator, the emissions from this source are not included in the dispersion modeling because the generator is considered an intermittent unit. | ||
The WDNR issued a policy statement on March 6, 2012, as discussed above, exempting intermittent operating units. Since this modeling demonstration is an assessment of potential impacts and not for the purposes of an air permitting, 5 years of preprocessed meteorological data for Madison, Wisconsin (available from the WDNR web site) | The WDNR issued a policy statement on March 6, 2012, as discussed above, exempting intermittent operating units. Since this modeling demonstration is an assessment of potential impacts and not for the purposes of an air permitting, 5 years of preprocessed meteorological data for Madison, Wisconsin (available from the WDNR web site) wa s used in place of processing 5 years of National Weather Service (NWS) data from Janesville. Comparing the location of the NWS instrumentation at the Madison airport (Dane County Regional Airport) and Janesville airport (Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport), some differences in the processed meteorological input to AERMOD can be expected, but not enough to cause an exceedance of a federal or state ambient air quality standard. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-12Rev. 0The stacks associated with the heaters in all buildings except the production building are designed to have rain caps, which restricts the vertical flow. AERMOD has two ways to model this situation: modify the source characteristics or use the non-default beta option to define the type of source. For this modeling demonstration, the former method is used so the modeling is conducted in accordance with AERMOD's regulatory default options.For this modeling demonstration, an assumption was made, based on information contained on the SHINE facility site layout (Figure 19.2.1-1) that a fence encircles the entire property boundary (fence line), forming a continuous physical barrier restricting public access to the SHINE site. Ambient air is defined as "-that portion of the atmosphere, external to buildings, to which the general public has access" (40CFR50.1(e)). If plant property is accessible to the public (exclusive of the workforce), then impacts from facility emissions are required to be modeled at those locations.AERMOD analyses were performed using a number of bounded conditions. Since the boiler and heater stacks are subject to downwash, the actual stack diameter and exit temperature are used, but the exit velocity is set to a nominally low value, such as 0.001meter per second (m/s). This value is used on modeling the SHINE facility stacks associated with the heaters in all buildings except the production building. The stack associated with heating of the production building is modeled without a rain cap.The modeling results assume full-time operations for the year of the natural gas-fired heating system in each building (8760 hr.). A proposed operating schedule of the heating system, limiting operations of those units to about 5600 hr. per year (with no heating from June through August and a limited schedule in the month prior to and the month after the summer months), was not modeled. Additionally, the emission rate used for the modeling assumed a 25percent design margin on the heating load. These assumptions provide a bounding analysis on the expected impacts from the facility.19.4.2.1.2.2.4.2AERMOD Model ResultsA Significant Impact Level (SIL) establishes the concentration below which a pollutant impact is presumed not to cause or contribute to a violation of a NAAQS or WIAAQS. If pollutant concentrations do not exceed the SIL, then no further modeling (i.e., a compliance demonstration) is required (unless the WDNR would require additional modeling). The estimated highest impacts for each pollutant and averaging time are compared to the individual SILs in Table19.4.2-10. Based on this assessment the impacts for all pollutants and averaging times are less than the SIL except for the 1-hr. and annual NO 2 standard. The 1-hr. and annual NO 2 impacts, which do exceed the respective SILs, are about 53 percent and 26 percent of the | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | |||
respective NAAQS.To assess potential impacts of the SHINE facility operation relative to the NAAQS, the concentration estimates are added with background concentrations and are compared to the NAAQS standards for each pollutant and averaging time (Table19.4.2-11). Most background concentrations were obtained from a WDNR draft memorandum on regional background concentrations (WDNR,2011a). A background concentration for the 1-hr. NO 2 impacts was obtained from a WDNR technical support document (WDNR, 2 010) and a background Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-13Rev. 0concentration for the 1-hr. SO 2 impacts was obtained from a document that identifies procedures to be followed by Region 5 states in conducting modeling (Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium, 2011).Table19.4.2-11 shows that none of the pollutants exceed the NAAQS for the SHINE facility alone, or in combination with background concentration. Both the 24-hr. and annual PM 2.5 values are approximately 85 percent of the NAAQS, but most of this is due to the background concentration. Additionally, neither PM2.5 averaging period exceeds their respective SIL. Comparing the impacts to the PSD increment shows that the impacts from the SHINE facility alone are orders of magnitude smaller than the PSD increment.In summary, the initial AERMOD analysis with the assumptions described above for emissions from the process, boiler, and heaters shows that none of the pollutants exceed the NAAQS, and do not result in a modeled exceedance of the USEPA SILs for any pollutant and averaging time, except for 1-hr. and annual NO 2 impacts. 19.4.2.1.2.2.4.3 Potential Maximum Concentration Since AERMOD can directly estimate concentrations that are more precise, normalized concentrations are not presented. The SILs establish the concentration below which a pollutant impact is presumed not to cause or contribute to a violation of an ambient air quality standard. The SILs are shown in Table19.4.2-10 along with the highest concentration estimates at points within a reasonable area that could be impacted (a square area 4 km x 4 km [2.5 mi. x 2.5 mi.] in size). Highest impacts range from the fence line to about 325ft. (100m) from the fence line.Pollutant impacts at points of maximum individual exposure will be less than the maximum impacts at the fence line for each averaging time. The nearest residence is about 0.33mi (0.53km) to the north-northwest from the proposed SHINE site. A church is about 0.35mi (0.56km) to the south-southeast. For all pollutants and averaging times except for the 1-hr. and annual NO 2, the maximum concentration anywhere within a reasonable area is less than the SIL. Applying AERMOD without limitations on the operating schedule, the 1-hr. NO 2 impacts at the residence and at the church are 35.4micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m | |||
: 3) and 29.7µg/m 3, respectively. For the annual NO 2 exposure, the impacts are 0.36 µg/m 3 and 0.21 µg/m 3 for the residence and church, respectively. As is demonstrated in Table19.4.2-11, no impacts exceed the primary ambient air quality standards that have been established to protect public health, including the health of sensitive populations such as children, the elderly, and those with respiratory problems. Therefore, pollutant impacts within a reasonable area that could be impacted and at points of the maximum individual exposure are SMALL.19.4.2.1.2.2.5Plume Visibility CharacteristicsThe plume from the production process should not be visible. All process exhaust passes through two stages of tested high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filters in series. The HEPA filters remove all visible particulate from the exhaust air stream. The vapors are removed with Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-14Rev. 0process off-gas treatment systems and all of the exhaust air passes through a single stage activated carbon bed prior to discharge from the stack.Plume visibility from the natural gas-fired boiler and heaters is expected to be minimal. Because natural gas is a gaseous fuel, filterable PM emissions which generally contribute to plume visibility are expected to be very low. PM emissions associated with natural gas combustion are usually larger molecular weight hydrocarbons that are not fully combusted; thus increased PM emissions can result from poor air/fuel mixing or maintenance problems (USEPA, 1995). With proper burner maintenance and tuning, opacity associated with the natural gas-fired boiler and heaters is expected to be minimal.White, blue, and black smoke can be emitted from diesel-fired engines (USEPA, 1995). Liquid particles can appear as white smoke in the exhaust during an engine cold start, idling, or low load operation. These emissions are formed in the quench layer adjacent to the engine's cylinder walls, where the temperature is not high enough to ignite the fuel. Blue smoke can be emitted when lubricating oil leaks into the combustion chamber and is partially burned. Proper maintenance is the most effective method of preventing blue smoke emissions from all types of internal combustion engines. The primary constituent of black smoke is agglomerated carbon particles or soot. Proper engine maintenance and combustion controls will minimize particulate matter emissions and limit opacity from the SDG. Opacity is expected to be less than 5percent at all times excluding, potentially, periods of startup.19.4.2.1.2.3Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Greenhouse gases trap heat in the atmosphere, absorbing and emitting radiation in the thermal infrared range. The most important of these gases are CO 2, methane, nitrous oxide, and fluorinated gases. Greenhouse gases (GHG) are reported as CO 2 equivalent (CO 2e) and refer to the global warming potential of the greenhouse gas or gases being emitted.Activities associated with the proposed SHINE site that are expected to contribute to the greenhouse gases include: *Construction activities at t he SHINE site resulting in principally emissions of CO 2; GHG emissions associated with construction activities include the commuting of the construction workforce and operation of construction equipment at the site. *Plant operation activities associated with the operation of plant equipment and the operations workforce. *Decommissioning activities associated with the decommissioning workforce and decommissioning equipment.*Life cycle activities related to the mining, processing, and transport of materials and waste storage should also be considered as part of the GHG inventory.As noted in Subsection19.3.2.5, SHINE will develop a comprehensive program to avoid and control GHG emissions associated with the SHINE facility. It is expected that this program will include elements such as developing a GHG emission inventory, investigating and implementing methods for avoiding or controlling the GHG emissions identified in the inventory, encouraging car pooling or other measures to minimize GHG emissions due to vehicle traffic during construction and operation of the SHINE facility, and conducting periodic audits of GHG control procedures and implementing corrective actions when necessary. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-15Rev. 019.4.2.1.2.4Mitigative MeasuresEmission-specific strategies and measures will be developed and implemented to ensure compliance within the applicable regulatory limits defined by the National Primary and Secondary Ambient Air Quality Standards (40CFRPart50) and National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (40CFRPart61). Contractors, vendors, and subcontractors are required to adhere to appropriate federal and state occupational health and safety regulations. These regulations set limits to protect workers from adverse conditions, including air emissions. Implementation of controls and limits at the source of emissions on the construction site result in reduction of impacts off-site. 19.4.2.1.3Impacts of DecommissioningDecommissioning is the removal of a nuclear facility from service and to reduce residual radioactivity to a level that permits release of the property for unrestricted use and termination of the license. During the decommissioning phase, activities, equipment usage and their associated emissions are expected to be similar, but less than that of the construction phase as decommissioning activities are less extensive than construction. Therefore, impacts during the decommissioning phase are SMALL.19.4.2.1.4Required PermitsAs described in Subsection19.1.2, several air quality permits are required to support the construction and operation of the SHINE facility. Table19.1.2-1 indicates that an Air Pollution Control Construction Permit pursuant to the Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapter NR406, and an Air Pollution Control Construction Permit pursuant to the Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapter NR407 are required.After the greenhouse gases are quantified, as noted in Subsection 19.4.2.1.2.3, a determination will be made as to whether the proposed SHINE facility will be subject to regulation. | |||
19.4.2.2NoiseThis subsection provides an assessment of noise impacts from construction, operation and decommissioning of the SHINE facility. | 19.4.2.2NoiseThis subsection provides an assessment of noise impacts from construction, operation and decommissioning of the SHINE facility. | ||
19.4.2.2.1Impacts of Construction Typical noise levels from equipment commonly used during construction are listed on Table19.4.2-12. On-site noise level exposure is controlled through appropriate training, personal protective equipment, periodic health and safety monitoring, and industry best practices. Practices such as maintenance of noise limiting devices on vehicles and equipment, controlling access to high noise areas, duration of emissions, and/or shielding high noise sources near their origin limit the adverse effects of noise on workers. Non-routine activities with potential adverse impacts on noise levels are limited and use best industry practices that further limit adverse effects. | 19.4.2.2.1Impacts of Construction Typical noise levels from equipment commonly used during construction are listed on Table19.4.2-12. On-site noise level exposure is controlled through appropriate training, personal protective equipment, periodic health and safety monitoring, and industry best practices. Practices such as maintenance of noise limiting devices on vehicles and equipment, controlling access to high noise areas, duration of emissions, and/or shielding high noise sources near their origin limit the adverse effects of noise on workers. Non-routine activities with potential adverse impacts on noise levels are limited and use best industry practices that further limit adverse effects. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-16Rev. 0The City of Janesville has no published ordinance governing noise emissions from developed land uses. As a point of reference, Rock Township has published noise level limits for properties outside of the M-1 Light Industrial District, the M-2 Heavy Industrial District, and the SP Special Purpose District. The SHINE site falls within the B1 Local Commercial District zoning boundary (TownofRock,2006). The protective level for B1 Local Commercial zoning is 79 decibels (dBA) (TownofRock,2008). No distinction is made between day and night noise level limits.As shown in Table19.4.2-12, noise levels for construction equipment range from 80 to 88dBA at 50ft. (15m) to 50 to 58dBA at 1500ft. (457 m). These data indicate that noise levels attenuate rapidly with distance (30dBA over a distance of 1450ft. [442m]). Based on the natural attenuation of noise levels over distance, the bounding condition construction noise level is below the Rock Township standard between 50 and 500ft. (15 and 457m) from its source. As is evident in Figures 19.3.1-1 and 19.3.1-7, the SHINE site is relatively isolated from potential sensitive noise receptors, the closest residences, churches and recreation areas are between 1700 and 2100ft. (518 and 640m) from the SHINE site. Thus, the impact of noise from construction of the new site on nearby residences, churches and recreational areas is SMALL.Traffic associated with the construction workforce traveling to and from the SHINE site also generates noise. The increase in noise relative to background conditions is most noticeable during the shift changes in the morning and late afternoon. The 451vehicles and 14heavy vehicles are dispersed in shifts, with the largest shift working during the day. Additionally, posted speed limits, traffic control and administrative measures, such as staggered shift hours, are employed that reduce traffic noise during the weekday business hours. Therefore, potential noise impacts to the community are intermittent and limited primarily to shift changes. The impact from noise from construction-related traffic to nearby residences and recreat ional areas is SMALL.Potential indirect impacts may be anticipated to off-site areas associated with the roadway network and adjacent lands beyond the site boundary. Noise related impacts may result from an increased traffic volume and resultant increases in traffic generated noise as discussed above. | ||
Noise levels during shift changes in these off-site areas are not notable as these residences are currently located within a roadway network that is characterized by traffic volumes that exhibit traffic noise.In summary, noise control practices at the construction site and the additional attenuation provided by the distance between the public and the site, limits noise effects to the public and workers during construction so that its impact is SMALL and temporary.19.4.2.2.2Impacts of Operation External noise emission from the SHINE facility during operation is primarily limited by the walls and other physical barriers of the facility itself. Noise generated during operations relates primarily to vehicular movements associated with employees and with truck deliveries. | Noise levels during shift changes in these off-site areas are not notable as these residences are currently located within a roadway network that is characterized by traffic volumes that exhibit traffic noise.In summary, noise control practices at the construction site and the additional attenuation provided by the distance between the public and the site, limits noise effects to the public and workers during construction so that its impact is SMALL and temporary.19.4.2.2.2Impacts of Operation External noise emission from the SHINE facility during operation is primarily limited by the walls and other physical barriers of the facility itself. Noise generated during operations relates primarily to vehicular movements associated with employees and with truck deliveries. | ||
Traffic associated with the operation of the SHINE facility also generates noise. The increase in traffic relative to background traffic conditions is most evident during the morning and afternoon drive time when workers are going to and leaving work. Approximately 118work-related vehicles per day are expected to access the site once the site is operational. As discussed in Subsection19.3.7.2.3.1, existing (2010) traffic volume on US51 is 9000vehicles per day. The work-related trips generated by the SHINE facility are insignificant in the existing traffic flow. | Traffic associated with the operation of the SHINE facility also generates noise. The increase in traffic relative to background traffic conditions is most evident during the morning and afternoon drive time when workers are going to and leaving work. Approximately 118work-related vehicles per day are expected to access the site once the site is operational. As discussed in Subsection19.3.7.2.3.1, existing (2010) traffic volume on US51 is 9000vehicles per day. The work-related trips generated by the SHINE facility are insignificant in the existing traffic flow. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-17Rev. 0Therefore, potential noise impacts to the community from noise from operations-related traffic to nearby residences and recreational areas are SMALL.Normal operations also include stationary external equipment (a standby diesel generator, heating, ventilation, and air conditioning [HVAC] equipment) that represent a lesser component of noise emission and are more limited in operation. The standby diesel generator is operated intermittently (i.e., for periodic testing and for asset protection during a loss of offsite power), and is therefore not part of normal operations. HVAC equipment is an expected noise source that is a characteristic of normal summer operations.Potential indirect impacts to off-site areas are associated with the roadway network and adjacent residences and lands beyond the site boundary. Noise related impacts may result from an increased traffic volume and resultant increases in traffic generated noise as discussed above. | ||
Noise levels during shift changes in these off-site areas are not notable as these residences are currently located within a roadway network that is characterized by traffic volumes that exhibit traffic noise. The intermittent increase in traffic volume associated with shift changes, and the natural noise attenuation over distance results in noise levels that attenuate to levels below the local standards for continuous noise levels. Therefore, noise impacts resulting from normal operations are SMALL.19.4.2.2.3Impacts of DecommissioningDecommissioning is the removal of a nuclear facility from service and reduction of residual radioactivity to a level that permits release of the property for unrestricted use and termination of the license. During the decommissioning phase, activities, equipment usage and the noise associated with their operation are expected to be similar or less than that of the construction phase. Therefore, impacts during the decommissioning phase are SMALL. | Noise levels during shift changes in these off-site areas are not notable as these residences are currently located within a roadway network that is characterized by traffic volumes that exhibit traffic noise. The intermittent increase in traffic volume associated with shift changes, and the natural noise attenuation over distance results in noise levels that attenuate to levels below the local standards for continuous noise levels. Therefore, noise impacts resulting from normal operations are SMALL.19.4.2.2.3Impacts of DecommissioningDecommissioning is the removal of a nuclear facility from service and reduction of residual radioactivity to a level that permits release of the property for unrestricted use and termination of the license. During the decommissioning phase, activities, equipment usage and the noise associated with their operation are expected to be similar or less than that of the construction phase. Therefore, impacts during the decommissioning phase are SMALL. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-18Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-1 Isotope Production Process - Gaseous Effluentsa)Based on 50 weeks operationEffluentRate NOX< 6000 pounds per year (lb/yr) | ||
Table 3.4-13457187165 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | (a)CO, lead, O 3, PMnoneSulfuric acid (H 2SO4)< 50 lb/yr (a)krypton-85 (Kr-85)< 120 Curies per year (Ci/yr)iodine-131 (I-131) | ||
<1.5 Ci/yrxenon-133 (Xe-133)< 17,000 Ci/yr tritium (H-3)< 4400 Ci/yr Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-19Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-2 Standby Diesel Generator - Emissionsa) AP-42 from USEPA, 1995b) Assuming 96 hours operation per yearPollutantEmission Rates(grams/bhp-hr)Source (a)Annual Emissions (T/yr)(b)Hourly Emissions (lb/hr)Equivalent Heat Input Emission Factor(lb/MMBtu)CO0.52CAT C175-20 Diesel Engine Technical Data Sheet0.367.50.17 NOx 5.07CAT C175-20 Diesel Engine Technical Data Sheet3.5273.31.68PM0.04CAT C175-20 Diesel Engine Technical Data Sheet0.0260.550.013Hydrocarbons | |||
(VOC)0.17CAT C175-20 Diesel Engine Technical Data Sheet0.122.510.058 SO20.015Calculated based on maximum fuel sulfur content of 50 ppm0.010.220.005 CO2497AP-42 (10/96) | |||
Table 3.4-13457187165 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-20Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-3 Emissions from Production Facility Building - Natural Gas-Fired BoilerPollutantEmission FactorUnitsSource (a)Annual Emissions(b)Hourly Emissions(T/yr)(lb/hr)(lb/MMBtu) | |||
CO84lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1 (7/98)10.372.47 0.082 NOx50lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1 (7/98)6.221.480.049 PM10 (filterable) 1.9lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.250.060.0020 PM10 (total)7.6lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.920.220.0073 VOC 5.5lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.670.160.0053 SO2 0.6lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.080.0180.0006 CO2 120,000lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)14,8223529117.6Design Firing Rate: | |||
30.0MMBtu/hrEstimated based on preliminary building sizing and materials of construction plus 25% design marginHeating Value for Natural Gas:1,020Btu/scfAP-42 Table 1.4-1 Maximum Fuel FiringRate:29,412scf/hrCalculated (Firing Rate/Heating Value)a)AP-42 from USEPA, 1995b) Based on 50 weeks per year Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-21Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-4 Emissions from Administration Building - Natural Gas-Fired Heatera)Exhaust characteristics for the indirect-fired heaters were based on information available from equipment vendors for packaged indirect-fired heaters.b)AP-42 from USEPA, 1995c)Based on 50 weeks per year | |||
==References:== | ==References:== | ||
Hastings, 2011; Reznor, 2002 PollutantEmission FactorUnitsSource(b)Annual Emissions(c)Hourly Emissions(T/yr)(lb/hr)(lb/MMBtu)CO(Residential Furnace)40lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1(7/98)0.050.0110. | Hastings, 2011; Reznor, 2002 PollutantEmission FactorUnitsSource (b)Annual Emissions (c)Hourly Emissions(T/yr)(lb/hr)(lb/MMBtu) | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | CO(Residential Furnace)40lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1 (7/98)0.050.0110.038 NOx(Residential Furnace)94lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1 (7/98)0.110.0270.093 PM10 (filterable) 1.9lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.0020.00050.002 PM10 (total) 7.6lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.0090.00220.008 VOC 5.5lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.0070.00160.006 SO2 0.6lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.0010.000170.0006 CO2 120,000lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)143.234.1117.6Estimated Heating Load:233,278Btu/hrEstimated based on preliminary building size and materials of constructionDesign Firing Rate:290,000Btu/hrHeating load plus a design margin of approximately 25% to provide bounding valueHeating Value for NaturalGas:1,020Btu/scfAP-42 Table 1.4-1Firing Rate:284.3scf/hrCalculated (Firing Rate/Heating Value) | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-22Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-5 Emissions from Support Facility Building - Natural Gas-Fired Heatera)Exhaust characteristics for the indirect-fired heaters were based on information available from equipment vendors for packaged indirect-fired heaters.b)AP-42 from USEPA, 1995c)Based on 50 weeks per year | |||
==References:== | ==References:== | ||
Hastings, 2011; Reznor, 2002PollutantEmission FactorUnitsSource(b)Annual Emissions(c)Hourly Emissions(T/yr)(lb/hr)(lb/MMBtu)CO(Residential Furnace)40lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1(7/98)0.0670.0160. | Hastings, 2011; Reznor, 2002PollutantEmission FactorUnitsSource (b)Annual Emissions (c)Hourly Emissions(T/yr)(lb/hr)(lb/MMBtu) | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | CO(Residential Furnace)40lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1 (7/98)0.0670.0160.038 NOx(Residential | ||
Furnace)94lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1 (7/98)0.160.0390.093 PM10 (filterable) 1.9lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.0030.00080.002 PM10 (total) 7.6lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.0130.00310.007VOC 5.5lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.0100.00230.005 SO2 0.6lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.0010.000250.0006 CO2 120,000lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)207.549.4117.6Estimated Heating Load:337,317Btu/hrEstimated based on preliminary building size and materials of constructionDesign Firing Rate:420,000Btu/hrHeating load plus a design margin of approximately 25% to provide bounding valueHeating Value for NaturalGas:1,020Btu/scfAP-42 Table 1.4-1Firing Rate:411.8scf/hrCalculated (Firing Rate/Heating Value) | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-23Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-6 Emissions from Waste Staging & Shipping Building - Natural Gas-Fired Heatera)Exhaust characteristics for the indirect-fired heaters were based on information available from equipment vendors for packaged indirect-fired heaters.b)AP-42 from USEPA, 1995c)Based on 50 weeks per year | |||
==References:== | ==References:== | ||
Hastings, 2011; Reznor, 2002PollutantEmission FactorUnitsSource(b)Annual Emissions(c)Hourly Emissions(T/yr)(lb/hr)(lb/MMBtu)CO(Residential Furnace)40lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1(7/98)0.0290.0070.039NOx(Residential Furnace)94lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1(7/98)0.0710.0170.094PM10 (filterable) 1.9lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2(7/98)0.0010.00030. | Hastings, 2011; Reznor, 2002PollutantEmission FactorUnitsSource(b)Annual Emissions(c)Hourly Emissions(T/yr)(lb/hr)(lb/MMBtu) | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | CO(Residential Furnace)40lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1(7/98)0.0290.0070.039NOx(Residential Furnace)94lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1(7/98)0.0710.0170.094PM10 (filterable) 1.9lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2(7/98)0.0010.00030.002 PM10 (total) 7.6lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2(7/98)0.0050.00130.007 VOC 5.5lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2(7/98)0.0040.00100.006 SO2 0.6lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2(7/98)<0.0010.0000110.0006 CO2 120,000lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2(7/98)89.021.2117.8Estimated Heating Load:141,597Btu/hrEstimated based on preliminary building size and materials of constructionDesign Firing Rate:180,000Btu/hrHeating load plus a design margin of approximately 25% to provide bounding | ||
valueHeating Value for NaturalGas:1,020Btu/scfAP-42 Table 1.4-1Firing Rate:176.5scf/hrCalculated (Firing Rate/Heating Value) | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-24Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-7 Emissions from Diesel Generator Building - Natural Gas-Fired Heatera)Exhaust characteristics for the indirect-fired heaters were based on information available from equipment vendors for packaged indirect-fired heaters.b)AP-42 from USEPA, 1995c)Based on 50 weeks per year | |||
==References:== | ==References:== | ||
Hastings, 2011; Reznor, 2002PollutantEmission FactorUnitsSource(b)Annual Emissions(c)Hourly Emissions(T/yr)(lb/hr)(lb/MMBtu)CO(Residential Furnace)40lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1(7/98)0.0130.0030. | Hastings, 2011; Reznor, 2002PollutantEmission FactorUnitsSource (b)Annual Emissions (c)Hourly Emissions(T/yr)(lb/hr)(lb/MMBtu) | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | CO(Residential Furnace)40lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1 (7/98)0.0130.0030.042 NOx(Residential | ||
Conc.(µg/m3)Total Conc.(µg/m3)NAAQS(b)(µg/m3)% of NAAQSPSD Increment(µg/m3)CO1-hr.H2H(c)2820091363139140,0003None8-hr.H2H(c)1320081191120410, | |||
Furnace)94lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1 (7/98)0.0290.0070.097 PM10 (filterable) 1.9lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)< 0.0010.00010.001 PM10 (total) 7.6lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.0020.00050.007 VOC 5.5lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.0020.00040.006 SO2 0.6lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)< 0.0010.000040.0006 CO2 120,000lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)35.78.5118.1Estimated Heating Load: | |||
57,987Btu/hrEstimated based on preliminary building size and materials of constructionDesign Firing Rate: | |||
72,000Btu/hrMaximum heat input required plus 25% design marginHeating Value for NaturalGas:1,020Btu/scfAP-42 Table 1.4-1Firing Rate: | |||
70.6scf/hrCalculated (Firing Rate/Heating Value) | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-25Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-8 Total Annual Emissionsa) Includes 3 T/yr (6,000 lb/yr) NO x emissions from process stackPollutantAnnual Emissions (T/yr)CO10.9NOx 13.1 (a)PM (total)0.98HC (VOC)0.81SO20.09CO215,642 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-26Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-9 SHINE Facility Release Point Characteristics(Sheet 1 of 2)Production Facility BuildingStack DataUnitsBoilerProcessExhaust Flowacfm14,45053,251Exhaust Temperature oF585104Heightfeet above grade 6666Diameterfeet1.674.67Exhaust Velocityfeet/sec110.451.9Stack Base Elevationfeet above mean sea level821821Administration Building Stack DataUnitsValueDescriptionHeightfeet above grade21Based on Administration Building height of 16 feet and heater exhaust height of 5 feet above roofExhaust OrientationVerticalAssumed vertical with rain capDiameterinches5.0Typical exhaust vent outlet for 200,000 to 300,000 Btu/hr heaterExhaust Fan Flow acfm180Approximate full load exhaust gas flow rate based on natural gas combustionExhaust Temperature oF160Assumed for indirect-fired natural gas heaterExhaust Velocityft/sec22CalculatedStack Base Elevationfeet AMSL817Support Facility Building Stack DataUnitsValueDescriptionHeightfeet above grade26Based on support facility building height of 21 feet and heater exhaust height of 5 feet above roofExhaust OrientationVerticalAssumed vertical with rain capDiameterinches6.0Typical exhaust vent outlet for >300,000 Btu/hr heaterExhaust Fan Flowacfm260Approximate full load exhaust gas flow rate based on natural gas combustionExhaust Temperature oF160Assumed for indirect-fired natural gas heaterExhaust Velocityft/sec22CalculatedStack Base Elevationfeet AMSL822 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-27Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-9 SHINE Facility Release Point Characteristics(Sheet 2 of 2)Waste Staging and Shipping BuildingStack DataUnitsValueDescription Heightfeet above grade23Based on Administration Building height of 18 feet and heater exhaust height of 5 feet above roofExhaust OrientationVerticalAssumed vertical with rain capDiameterinches4.0Typical exhaust vent outlet for <200,000 Btu/hr heaterExhaust Fan Flowacfm120Approximate full load exhaust gas flow rate based on natural gas combustionExhaust Temperature oF160Assumed for indirect-fired natural gas heaterExhaust Velocityft/sec23CalculatedStack Base Elevationfeet AMSL824Diesel Generator Building Stack DataUnitsValueDescriptionHeightfeet above grade22Based on Diesel Generator Building height of 17 feet and heater exhaust height of 5 feet above roofExhaust OrientationVerticalAssumed vertical with rain capDiameterinches4.0Typical exhaust vent outlet for <200,000 Btu/hr heaterExhaust Fan Flowacfm60Approximate full load exhaust gas flow rate based on natural gas combustionExhaust Temperature oF160Assumed for indirect-fired natural gas heaterExhaust Velocityft/sec11CalculatedStack Base Elevationfeet AMSL823 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-28Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-10 Pollutant Impacts Compared to the SILa)A recent court decision (US Court of Appeals, For the District of Columbia Circuit), January 22, 2013, Sierra Club vs. EPA (No.10-1413) vacated the PM 2.5 SIL and remanded it to EPA. The SILs for other pollutants remain in effect.b)Values represent the highest predicted impacts for each pollutant and averaging time.PollutantAveraging PeriodMaximum Predicted Impact (µg/m 3)(b)YearSIL(µg/m3)CO1-hr.30200920008-hr.152007500NO21-hr.64.65-yr7.5Annual2.320071SO21-hr.0.235-yr7.93-hr.0.1420082524-hr.0.07420085Annual0.008520071PM1024-hr.0.925-yr5Annual0.095-yr1PM2.5 (a)24-hr.0.755-yr1.2Annual0.095-yr0.3 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-29Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-11 Pollutant Impacts Compared to the NAAQSa) 5-yr indicates an average over the 5 modeled yearsb) Primary standards except SO 2 3-hr., which is a secondary standardc) H1H is the high, first high and H2H is the high, second high concentration of ranked concentrations at all receptors d) NOx modeled; assume a 100% conversion rate of NO x to NO2e) 6th highest value over 5 yearsf)Although there is a SIL for the annual PM 10 impacts, there is no NAAQS standardg) 24-hr. and Annual standards revoked June 22, 2010 (75 FR 35520)PollutantAveraging PeriodRankPredicted Impact (µg/m3)Year(a)Bkgd. | |||
Conc.(µg/m3)Total Conc. | |||
(µg/m3)NAAQS(b)(µg/m3)% of NAAQSPSD Increment | |||
(µg/m3)CO1-hr.H2H(c)2820091363139140,0003None8-hr.H2H(c)1320081191120410,00012None NOx(as NO2)(d)1-hr.98th %47.45-yr55102.418854NoneAnnualH1H(c)2.3200724.126.41002625 PM10(f)24-hr.H6H(e)0.75-yr47.047.71503230 PM2.524-hr.98th %0.545-yr28.929.435849AnnualH1H(c)0.095-yr10.210.312864 SO2(g)1-hr.99th %0.195-yr1313.21967None3-hr.H2H0.14200843.243.313003512 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-30Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-12 Typical Noise and Emissions from Construction Equipmenta)Rock Township, Wisconsin, Noise Limits:M-1 Light Industrial, M-2 Heavy Industrial and SP Special Purpose District: 79 dBAAll other districts: 72 dBA | |||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
California Energy Commission, 2009Equipment TypeNoise Level in dBA(a)At 50 FeetAt 500 FeetAt 1500 FeetEarthmoving Loaders886858 Dozer886858 Tractor806050 Grader856555 Trucks866656 Shovels846454 Materials Handling Concrete pumps/mixers816151 Derrick and mobile cranes836353 Stationary Portable Generator846454Impact Paving breaker806050Light Duty VehiclesNANANA Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewGeologic EnvironmentSHINE Medical | California Energy Commission, 2009Equipment TypeNoise Level in dBA (a)At 50 FeetAt 500 FeetAt 1500 FeetEarthmoving Loaders886858 Dozer886858 Tractor806050 Grader856555 Trucks866656 Shovels846454 | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewGeologic EnvironmentSHINE Medical | |||
Materials Handling Concrete pumps/mixers816151 Derrick and mobile cranes836353 Stationary Portable Generator846454Impact Paving breaker806050Light Duty VehiclesNANANA Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewGeologic EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-31Rev. 019.4.3GEOLOGIC ENVIRONMENTPotential impacts to geologic and soil resources during the construction, operation, and decommissioning of the proposed facility include large-scale hazards and local hazards. The large-scale hazards include earthquakes, volcanic activity, landslides, subsidence, and erosional processes. Local hazards are associated with site-specific properties of the soil and bedrock and include soil disturbances due to excavation, exposure of contaminated soil during excavation, blasting of bedrock (if required for construction), volume of material excavated or used during construction, impacts to rare or unique geologic resources, and impacts to rock/mineral/energy rights.19.4.3.1Impacts of Large-Scale HazardsAs noted in Subsection 19.3.3, the probability of large-scale impacts due to geologic factors is low. The seismologic regime (Subsection 19.3.3.5) of the region demonstrates that the site is located in one of the lowest earthquake hazard regions of the country. The lack of earthquakes in the region is associated with a lack of tectonic and volcanic activity, as discussed in Subsections 19.3.3.2 and19.3.3.6.2. The geologic environment features that are associated with landslides, subsidence, and erosional processes are discussed in Subsections 19.3.3.3 and 19.3.3.4. While landslides and subsidence can occur, the risk for subsidence or landslides within Rock County is not considered high. In addition, no sinkholes have been reported in the county in recent years. The primary soils present at the SHINE site are classified as slightly erodible and the secondary soils at the site are classified as moderately erodible. No soils present at or near the site are classified as highly erodible soils. Consequently, impacts relative to the geologic environment are SMALL.19.4.3.2Other Impacts on Soils and Geology The construction of the facility will include the excavation of the Radiologically Controlled Area (RCA) to an approximate depth of approximately 39ft. (11.9m) below a final grade of 826.0 ft. (251.8m). The resulting final elevation of the base of the excavation is 787 ft. (239.9 m). The maximum frost depth is 4ft. (1.2m) below ground surface, and all underground utilities will be designed accordingly, with a preliminary estimation of utility excavation depth of 5ft. (1.5m) below ground surface. No evidence of "recognized environmental conditions" as described in ASTM E 1527-05 were found to exist at the SHINE site, nor were any samples collected during the groundwater monitoring (as described in Subsection 19.3.4.3, Table 19.3.4-9) found to contain contamination indicating the presence of contaminated soil above the groundwater.An analysis of the geology of Rock County indicates that it is similar to the geology of much of southern Wisconsin and northern Illinois in that it comprises glacial sediments and limestone which are not unique or rare geological resources in the region (Olcott, Perry G., 1969). Historic mineral production in Rock County has included the mining of sand, gravel, and crushed and broken limestone, with no precious- or base-metal mineral resources mapped or discovered within Rock County (Olcott, Perry G., 1969). In addition, no extraction of energy resources occurs at the site. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewGeologic EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-32Rev. 0As noted in Subsection 19.3.4.1.2.2, bedrock at the SHINE site is at a depth greater than 220 ft. (67m) below ground surface. The deepest excavation planned is approximately 39 ft. (11.9m) below ground surface which eliminates the need for blasting to support excavations.Figure 19.4.1-2 provides an illustration of the SHINE facility construction grading plan. Excavation depth of the RCA is bounded at approximately 39ft. (11.9 m) below finished grade. For estimation of excavation quantities, a depth of 5 ft. (1.5m) below finished grade was used for the ancillary buildings. Direct impacts associated with excavation and topsoil removal for underground utilities and site grading has also been estimated. The total amount of material to be excavated at the SHINE site is 278,000 cubic yards (212,550 cubic meters). Additional assumptions made in preparing the estimate include:*Twenty-five percent margin for bounding considerations.*Frost depth is 4 ft. (1.2 m), and ancillary building foundations will be at a minimum depth of 5 ft. (1.5 m).*The bearing material at the final depth of excavation is suitable for supporting the design load, eliminating the need for over-excavation.*An allowance for a 12-inch (30.5-centimeter) thick mudmat was included at the bottom of excavations within the RCA, with the total depth of the excavation, including mudmat allowance, not to exceed approximately 39ft. (11.9m) below ground surface*Excavated slopes are stable on a slope of 1.5 horizontal to 1 vertical.*An 8-ft. (2.4m) wide bench is included in the excavation for slope stability concerns.*The excavation is 10 ft. (3.05 m) wider at the base of the excavation around the sides of the RCA to allow for the erection of forms and to provide a working area.*Below 1 ft. (0.3 m) of topsoil, the underlying material is essentially homogenous.Preliminary plans call for materials excavated during site grading and construction to be stockpiled on-site and used as backfill. Topsoil and other materials not suited for use as structural fill will be stockpiled on-site and placed as non-structural fill. A sediment and erosion control plan is required and mitigates the potential indirect impacts associated with the release of sediment or other runoff constituents to off-site areas.Based on the above assumptions, the estimated quantity of geologic material required for the completion of this project, exclusive of concrete acquired from commercial concrete mixing plants for construction of the buildings, is:*Backfill: 74,000 cubic yards (56,580 cubic meters) around structures in main excavation (reuse of suitable material excavated on-site);*Topsoil: 10,000 cubic yards (7645 cubic meters), acquired from on-site sources.*Granular road base: 7600 cubic yards (5810 cubic meters).*Asphaltic pavement: 2200 cubic yards (1682 cubic meters). | |||
*Gravel surfacing: 8500 cubic yards (6499 cubic meters).*Underground utilities: 3500 cubic yards (2676 cubic meters) for backfill (reuse of suitable material excavated on-site). | *Gravel surfacing: 8500 cubic yards (6499 cubic meters).*Underground utilities: 3500 cubic yards (2676 cubic meters) for backfill (reuse of suitable material excavated on-site). | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewGeologic EnvironmentSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewGeologic EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-33Rev. 0*Site grading: 10,000 cubic yards (7645 cubic meters), to be acquired from material excavated on-site.In order to reduce impacts, on-site materials will be utilized as appropriate and no off-site borrow areas are anticipated. Consequently, direct impacts to the geologic environment are SMALL and no indirect (off-site) impacts are identified.No impacts have been identified due to large scale or local hazards which require mitigation measures beyond compliance with local building codes. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-34Rev. 019.4.4WATER RESOURCES19.4.4.1Hydrology19.4.4.1.1Surface Water19.4.4.1.1.1Facility Construction No surface water features such as creeks, streams or ponds are present on or in the immediate area surrounding the SHINE site. As a result, there are no direct effects to surface water | ||
resources. Federal, state and local regulations and permit procedures provide minimum requirements for stormwater management during construction activities to prohibit adverse impacts on surface water, or stormwater. A sediment and erosion control plan is required and mitigates the potential indirect impacts associated with the release of sediment or other runoff constituents to off-site areas. An assessment of stormwater runoff patterns in the vicinity of the SHINE site indicates that the drainage area upstream of the site is approximately 100 ac. (40.4 ha), based on City of Janesville 2-ft. (0.6-m) contour interval mapping. Due to the area being very flat (0 to 1 percent slopes), having high-permeability subsoils, and being continuously tilled for agricultural use, no dendritic flow patterns develop. In addition, because of the flat terrain, it is difficult to accurately identify the exact drainage area, and tilled rows in the fields could direct flow to other basins. Runoff from this area is diverted around the site using appropriate measures as required by state and local authorities. There are no impoundments or significant detention/retention areas on the site currently that provide detention/reduction of storm runoff. Construction-phase dewatering is not required, because the measured groundwater level is well below the deepest excavation. Thus, there is no effect on surface water quantity or flow characteristics due to drawdown of groundwater or discharge of construction phase dewatering effluent. Consequently, indirect impacts of construction of the SHINE facility on surface water are SMALL. 19.4.4.1.1.2Facility OperationsAs is described in Section 19.2, all water used at the SHINE site is obtained from the City of Janesville municipal water supply system and all sanitary waste water is discharged directly to the City of Janesville sanitary sewer system. Additionally, the facility is designed to have zero liquid discharge from the radiologically controlled area (RCA). Consequently, there is no use or release of water from the facility to the adjacent environment that would affect surface water hydrologic systems. Direct impacts to surface water from plant operations are, therefore, SMALL. The SHINE facility site layout is illustrated in Figure 19.2.1-1. The site plan includes a low degree of impervious areas that are associated with rooftops, paved drives, and parking lots, etc. Additionally, the impervious surfaces are not "directly connected," and stormwater instead flows across or through pervious areas as it drains across the site. These pervious areas, including vegetated swales, provide control of stormwater quantity (volume and peak rate) as well as quality. The state requirements (Wisconsin Administrative Natural Resources Code, Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-35Rev. 0ChaptersNR 151 and NR 216); the City of Janesville requirements (Ordinances Chapter 15, Sections 15.05 [construction erosion and sediment control]; and 15.06 [post-construction stormwater management]) for maintenance of on-site infiltration and phosphorous removal by use of best management practices (BMPs) will be met or exceeded.SHINE has coordinated with the City of Janesville stormwater staff regarding requirements for stormwater management. As a result of that coordination, the stormwater plan for the site incorporates the use of vegetated drainage swales for control of both stormwater quantity and quality. No retention or detention "pond" is to be constructed at the site to avoid larger water surface areas (even during temporary periods of storm runoff), thereby avoiding the potential for glare from the surface that might affect aircraft at the adjacent Southwestern Wisconsin Regional Airport. The absence of permanent or occasional water, as well as food sources, also minimizes frequenting of the site by waterfowl, such as Canada geese, which could otherwise be a concern for both the airport (bird aircraft hazard) and for stormwater quality due to the introduction of fecal material, a common concern for urban stormwater management ponds in the region.Most areas of the site that are not impervious are either landscaped with native vegetation, cool-season grasses, or continue agricultural row-crop production. Use of native vegetation rather than turf grass eliminates or greatly reduces irrigation needs and maintains a low surface runoff and natural (i.e., higher than turf grass) evapotranspiration condition. All of these practices result in minimal impact to surface water downstream of the site, or even a reduction in surface runoff, compared to the current row-crop agricultural use which involves annual tillage practices. During operation, dewatering is not required because the measured groundwater level is well below the deepest basement. Thus, there is no effect on surface water quantity or flow characteristics due to drawdown of groundwater or discharge of operation phase dewatering effluent. Indirect impacts of site runoff on surface waters are, therefore, SMALL. | |||
19.4.4.1.1.3Facility DecommissioningAs described above, no surface water features are present on or in the immediate area surrounding the SHINE site. As a result, there are no direct effects from decommissioning to surface water resources. Federal, state and local regulations and permit procedures provide minimum requirements for stormwater management during decommissioning activities to prohibit adverse impacts on surface water, or stormwater. A stormwater pollution prevention plan, including a sediment and erosion control plan, is required and mitigates the potential indirect impacts associated with the release of sediment or other runoff constituents to off-site areas. There are no impoundments or significant detention/retention areas on the site currently, or as a component of the site plan, that provide retention of storm runoff. During decommissioning, dewatering is not required because the measured groundwater level is well below the deepest basement. Thus, there is no effect on surface water quantity or flow characteristics due to drawdown of groundwater or discharge of decommissioning phase dewatering effluent. Consequently, indirect impacts of decommissioning of the SHINE facility on surface water are SMALL. | 19.4.4.1.1.3Facility DecommissioningAs described above, no surface water features are present on or in the immediate area surrounding the SHINE site. As a result, there are no direct effects from decommissioning to surface water resources. Federal, state and local regulations and permit procedures provide minimum requirements for stormwater management during decommissioning activities to prohibit adverse impacts on surface water, or stormwater. A stormwater pollution prevention plan, including a sediment and erosion control plan, is required and mitigates the potential indirect impacts associated with the release of sediment or other runoff constituents to off-site areas. There are no impoundments or significant detention/retention areas on the site currently, or as a component of the site plan, that provide retention of storm runoff. During decommissioning, dewatering is not required because the measured groundwater level is well below the deepest basement. Thus, there is no effect on surface water quantity or flow characteristics due to drawdown of groundwater or discharge of decommissioning phase dewatering effluent. Consequently, indirect impacts of decommissioning of the SHINE facility on surface water are SMALL. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-36Rev. 019.4.4.1.2Groundwater19.4.4.1.2.1Construction, Operations and DecommissioningThe construction of the facility includes the excavation of the RCA to an approximate depth no greater than approximately 39 ft. (11.9m) below final grade of 827.0 ft. (252.1m) (Section 19.4.3.2). The resulting final elevation of the base of the excavation is 788 ft. (240m), more than 20 ft. (6m) higher than the measured high groundwater elevation of 765.92 ft. (233.45m). All elevations are referenced to North American Vertical Datum 88 (NAVD 88). Consequently, there is no direct impact to groundwater flow. All water used by the SHINE facility is obtained from the City of Janesville municipal water supply system and all sanitary wastes are discharged directly to the City of Janesville sanitary sewer system. No groundwater withdrawals and no groundwater returns are required during the construction, operation, or decommissioning of the facility, with no direct or indirect impacts to groundwater. Consequently, direct and indirect impacts to groundwater are SMALL. | ||
19.4.4.2Water Use19.4.4.2.1Surface WaterAll water used at the SHINE site during construction, operation, and decommissioning is obtained from the City of Janesville municipal water supply system and all waste water discharges go directly to the City of Janesville sanitary sewer system. Additionally, the facility is designed such that there is no liquid discharge from the RCA. Consequently, there is no use or release of water from the facility to the adjacent environment that would affect surface water hydrologic systems. Direct impacts to surface water from plant operations are, therefore, SMALL.19.4.4.2.2GroundwaterConstruction, operation, and decommissioning activities do not involve the use of groundwater. Any water utilized on-site is obtained from the City of Janesville Public Water Utility. Consequently, direct impacts of water use on groundwater are SMALL. The average estimated water usage by the SHINE facility during operations is 6070 gallons (22,977 liters) per day and a consumptive water use of 1560 gallons (5905 liters) per week. As noted in Subsection 19.3.4.2.2, the Janesville Water Utility provides water supply for both public drinking water and for fire protection, utilizing eight wells. The water supply system for the City of Janesville includes two water storage reservoirs and one water tower. According to the City of Janesville, the total pumping capacity of its eight groundwater wells is 29 million gallons per day (Mgd) (109.8million liters per day [Mld]). Average water usage is about 11Mgd (41.6Mld) with a maximum recorded daily demand of 25.8Mgd (97.7 Mld). Accordingly, the excess capacity of the Janesville water supply system is approximately 3.2Mgd (12.1 Mld). Because there is excess capacity within the Janesville water supply system, potential indirect effects from the demand from the SHINE facility are also SMALL. | 19.4.4.2Water Use19.4.4.2.1Surface WaterAll water used at the SHINE site during construction, operation, and decommissioning is obtained from the City of Janesville municipal water supply system and all waste water discharges go directly to the City of Janesville sanitary sewer system. Additionally, the facility is designed such that there is no liquid discharge from the RCA. Consequently, there is no use or release of water from the facility to the adjacent environment that would affect surface water hydrologic systems. Direct impacts to surface water from plant operations are, therefore, SMALL.19.4.4.2.2GroundwaterConstruction, operation, and decommissioning activities do not involve the use of groundwater. Any water utilized on-site is obtained from the City of Janesville Public Water Utility. Consequently, direct impacts of water use on groundwater are SMALL. The average estimated water usage by the SHINE facility during operations is 6070 gallons (22,977 liters) per day and a consumptive water use of 1560 gallons (5905 liters) per week. As noted in Subsection 19.3.4.2.2, the Janesville Water Utility provides water supply for both public drinking water and for fire protection, utilizing eight wells. The water supply system for the City of Janesville includes two water storage reservoirs and one water tower. According to the City of Janesville, the total pumping capacity of its eight groundwater wells is 29 million gallons per day (Mgd) (109.8million liters per day [Mld]). Average water usage is about 11Mgd (41.6Mld) with a maximum recorded daily demand of 25.8Mgd (97.7 Mld). Accordingly, the excess capacity of the Janesville water supply system is approximately 3.2Mgd (12.1 Mld). Because there is excess capacity within the Janesville water supply system, potential indirect effects from the demand from the SHINE facility are also SMALL. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-37Rev. 019.4.4.3Water QualityPotential surface water and groundwater quality impacts of site construction and operation are discussed in this section.19.4.4.3.1Surface Water19.4.4.3.1.1Facility Construction and DecommissioningNo surface water features are present on or in the immediate area surrounding the SHINE site. As a result, there are no direct effects to water quality. Potential indirect surface water quality impacts from facility construction and decommissioning are similar to those of construction of any typical industrial or commercial facility in the area. Erosion and sediment control for ground disturbing activities will meet or exceed the regulatory requirements, including Clean Water Act National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) regulations and Wisconsin regulations (NR 151.11). | ||
In addition to soil erosion and sedimentation, potential release of other potential construction activity pollutants (petroleum products, adhesives, paint, etc.), is minimized by SHINE's waste management and minimization program (Subsection 19.4.8.1.2.3 and 19.2.5.6). 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.Construction- and decommissioning-phase dewatering is not required because the measured groundwater level is well below the deepest excavation. Thus, there is no effect on surface water quality due to drawdown of groundwater or discharge of construction phase and decommissioning phase dewatering effluent. Therefore, indirect impacts to water quality from construction and decommissioning are SMALL.19.4.4.3.1.2Facility Operation As described in Subsection 19.4.1.1, meeting the requirements of state and local stormwater management requirements minimizes potential impacts associated with site development. One of the most significant indicators of urban stormwater quality is imperviousness. The site has a low percentage of imperviousness (Figure 19.2.1-1) and the impervious areas discharge to vegetated pervious areas where treatment of runoff occurs, including infiltration, filtering, and biological uptake of pollutants. According to state permitting requirement at NR151.12, SHINE must complete a detailed simulation of hydrology and pollutant discharges with and without use of stormwater BMPs to show 80 percent removal of total suspended solids by the BMPs to be implemented. As appropriate and as required by permit, the SHINE site design will maintain a minimum site infiltration amount, defined as either: (1)at least 60percent of the pre-development infiltration based on average annual rainfall, or (2)at least 10percent of the 2-year, 24-hour duration storm runoff. | In addition to soil erosion and sedimentation, potential release of other potential construction activity pollutants (petroleum products, adhesives | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | , paint, etc.), is minimized by SHINE's waste management and minimization program (Subsection 19.4.8.1.2.3 and 19.2.5.6). 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.Construction- and decommissioning-phase dewatering is not required because the measured groundwater level is well below the deepest excavation. Thus, there is no effect on surface water quality due to drawdown of groundwater or discharge of construction phase and decommissioning phase dewatering effluent. Therefore, indirect impacts to water quality from construction and decommissioning are SMALL.19.4.4.3.1.2Facility Operation As described in Subsection 19.4.1.1, meeting the requirements of state and local stormwater management requirements minimizes potential impacts associated with site development. One of the most significant indicators of urban stormwater quality is imperviousness. The site has a low percentage of imperviousness (Figure 19.2.1-1) and the impervious areas discharge to vegetated pervious areas where treatment of runoff occurs, including infiltration, filtering, and biological uptake of pollutants. According to state permitting requirement at NR151.12, SHINE must complete a detailed simulation of hydrology and pollutant discharges with and without use of stormwater BMPs to show 80 percent removal of total suspended solids by the BMPs to be implemented. As appropriate and as required by permit, the SHINE site design will maintain a minimum site infiltration amount, defined as either: (1)at least 60percent of the pre-development infiltration based on average annual rainfall, or (2)at least 10percent of the 2-year, 24-hour duration storm runoff. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-38Rev. 0Approximately 53.75 ac. (21.75 ha) of the total site may remain in row-crop agricultural use where applications of chemicals in accordance with best agricultural practices would continue. Alternatively, all or a portion of the existing agricultural use area of the site may be converted to native vegetation, reducing chemical applications and other associated existing agricultural practices that have a higher potential for affecting surface water quality.Additionally, extensive use of native landscaping or cool-season grasses at the site minimizes the need for applications of herbicides, pesticides, and fertilizer at the site. Small areas of turf grass are maintained, and applications of any of these chemicals or fertilizers are performed in a manner consistent with product label instructions to minimize potential impacts. The oil stored on-site, which assumes a bounding value of an approximately 30,000-gallon (113,562 L) underground storage tank containing fuel oil for the standby generator, requires a Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan in accordance with 40 CFR Part 112. The SPCC Plan details requirements for oil spill prevention, preparedness, and response to prevent oil discharges to navigable waters and adjoining shorelines. The implementation of the SPCC Plan prevents releases from the aboveground oil storage from impacting surface waters.During operation, dewatering is not required because the measured groundwater level is well below the deepest basement. Thus, there is no effect on surface water quality due to drawdown of groundwater or discharge of operation phase dewatering effluent. Therefore, impacts to water quality from operation of the SHINE facility are SMALL.19.4.4.3.2Groundwater 19.4.4.3.2.1Construction, Operation, and DecommissioningPossible indirect impacts on groundwater quality can occur during construction, operation or decommissioning if spills from vehicles, equipment, or storage areas penetrate hard surfaces (asphalt or concrete) or are accidentally released to pervious surfaces and migrate to groundwater prior to detection and remediation of the release. All equipment and material storage areas are in compliance with appropriate regulations requiring secondary containment of stored liquids and materials. Oil storage associated with the operation of the facility includes an approximately 30,000-gallon (113,562 L) underground storage tank containing fuel oil for the standby diesel generator. Fuel storage associated with the construction/decommissioning is within secondary containment and the implementation of the SPCC Plan prevents releases from migrating through the subsurface and impacting groundwater. Measured groundwater levels are below the deepest excavation during construction and decommissioning, and below the base of the lowest basement, which prevents any direct impacts to groundwater. Because of the depth of groundwater below the SHINE site, and the use of appropriate management and control measures as stated above, direct and indirect impacts to groundwater quality are SMALL. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-39Rev. 019.4.4.4MonitoringThe facility is eligible for a WPDES stormwater discharge permit exclusion under Wisconsin Administrative Code NR 216.21(3). The stormwater discharge permit exclusion does not include any stormwater monitoring requirements. Because of the absence of direct impacts to surface water, the low potential for indirect impacts, and the use of management measures and controls to prevent releases to surface water, no surface water monitoring activities are planned for the site.Because of the absence of direct impacts to groundwater, the low potential for indirect impacts, and the use of management measures and controls to prevent releases to groundwater, no non-radiological groundwater monitoring activities are planned for the site. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-40Rev. 019.4.5ECOLOGICAL RESOURCESThis subsection addresses the impacts of construction and operation on the ecological resources on and within the vicinity of the SHINE site. The impacts discussed below are based on the characterization and description of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems within the SHINE site and near site region from Subsection 19.3.5. The region surrounding the SHINE site is defined in Subsection19.3.1.1.2 as the area within a 5 mi (8-km) radius of the site centerpoint and is located entirely within Rock County, Wisconsin. The ecological resources described in Subsection19.3.5 are based on recorded information provided by resource agencies (WDNR and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [USFWS]) and supplemental quarterly field surveys conducted in 2011 and 2012. Although the region is defined as the area within a 5 mi (8-km) radius of the site centerpoint, protected species information was provided by the USFWS and WDNR within a 6 mi (9.7 km) radius of the site.Impacts include effects from activities associated with construction and operation, including excavation, grading, placement of fill material, temporary staging and construction laydown, construction of permanent features, and potential operational disturbances. This evaluation indicates the magnitude of potential impacts and whether mitigation measures are required.As described in Subsection 19.3.5, the SHINE site consists of a 91.27-ac. (36.94ha) parcel that has been farmed for the past several decades and is routinely disturbed by the disking, plowing, herbicide application and harvesting activities associated with row crop production. Ecological resources at the SHINE site, therefore, are limited by the active agricultural practices on the site and by a complete lack of surface water resources. Because baseline conditions consist solely of agricultural land lacking native terrestrial or aquatic habitat, post construction ecological monitoring and maintenance plans are not deemed necessary. 19.4.5.1Impacts from Construction This subsection describes the potential construction-related ecological impacts to the SHINE site and near off-site areas based on the SHINE facility site layout (see Figure 19.2.1-1). Activities such as earthmoving, excavation, erection, batch plant operation, and construction-related traffic generate potential disturbances to ecological resources during the construction phase of the SHINE project. Direct and indirect impacts associated with construction-related disturbance to the site and near-site areas is limited to the agricultural lands on-site. Figure 19.2.1-1 depicts the proposed buildings for site construction. Given the agricultural nature of the site, land clearing is not necessary. Furthermore, the project does not involve clearing along stream banks, dredging, disposal of dredged material, or waste disposal areas. On the 91.27-ac. (36.94 ha) SHINE site, direct impacts from construction permanently converts 25.67ac. (10.39ha) of agricultural lands to industrial facilities. Although the entire site is in agricultural production, 0.18 ac. (0.07 ha) of permanent impacts are technically mapped as Developed, Open Space (Table 19.4.5-1). Permanent conversion to industrial facilities include the construction of facility buildings, employee parking lot, facility access road/driveway, stormwater detention area, access road drainage ditches, and US 51 drainage ditches. Construction impacts also include the temporary impact of 14.54 ac. (5.88 ha) of agricultural Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-41Rev. 0lands used for the construction parking area, construction material staging or lay down area, and temporary disturbance from water and sewer line installation. Temporary impact areas are either returned to agriculture or restored with either cool season grasses or native prairie. Construction impacts are summarized in Table 19.4.5-1. 19.4.5.1.1Places and Entities of Special InterestThere are no places or entities of special interest on-site, including wetlands. Habitats of special interest off-site include wetlands and endangered resources identified by the WDNR near the SHINE site. As described in Subsection 19.3.5.6, mapped wetland land cover within a 5-mi. (8-km) radius includes just 722 ac. (292 ha) of woody wetlands and 787 ac. (318ha) of emergent herbaceous wetlands (see Table19.3.1-1). None of these wetland resources are impacted by construction at the SHINE site. As part of a WDNR endangered resources review letter, six habitats of special interest were identified near (within 6mi. [9.6km]) the SHINE site (WDNR, 2012b) including dry prairie, dry-mesic prairie, mesic prairie, Southern dry-mesic forest, Southern mesic forest, and wet prairie (see Subsection 19.3.5.4.1). These habitats are not located on the SHINE site and none of these habitats near the site are either directly or indirectly impacted by construction. Happy Hollow County Park (southwest of the site) was also identified by WDNR near the SHINE site but is not impacted by construction. As discussed in Subsection 19.3.5.4.3, Rock County is located along a principal route of the Mississippi Flyway and, therefore, the natural habitats along the Rock River are particularly useful to migrating birds for resting, feeding and foraging. As stated in Subsection19.3.5.5, the Rock River is 1.9 mi. (3.1 km) southwest of the SHINE site. Although the site may be used occasionally for resting or foraging by migratory birds, habitat on-site and in adjacent lands are dominated by agricultural and developed uses that are not considered high value or important ecological systems. Although the project permanently converts 25.67 ac. (10.39 ha) of agricultural lands to industrial facilities, this direct impact is not significant when compared to the vast amount of agricultural land remaining in the region (see Table 19.4.5-1).In summary, impacts to places and entities of special interest from construction are SMALL because such ecological resources are not present on-site and because the identified off-site resources are distant from the site and are not impacted by construction on the SHINE site. | |||
Specific mitigation measures and management controls are not needed.19.4.5.1.2Aquatic Communities and Wetlands There are no streams, ponds, wetlands, or other aquatic communities present on the SHINE site. Because the site lacks wetlands and aquatic resources, and because dewatering of groundwater in excavations is not anticipated, any potential construction-related impacts to wetlands and aquatic resources are limited to indirect off-site impacts associated with runoff and siltation. As stated in Subsection 19.3.5.5, the nearest water feature is a small intermittent stream 1.6 mi. (2.6 km) south of the site and the Rock River is 1.9 mi. (3.1 km) southwest of the site. However, this intermittent stream receives drainage from lands east of the SHINE site and does not receive runoff from the site. Runoff from the site flows southwest toward the Rock River. However, because of the high infiltration rate of the soils on the SHINE site, no organized stream channel and associated aquatic habitats are present. | Specific mitigation measures and management controls are not needed.19.4.5.1.2Aquatic Communities and Wetlands There are no streams, ponds, wetlands, or other aquatic communities present on the SHINE site. Because the site lacks wetlands and aquatic resources, and because dewatering of groundwater in excavations is not anticipated, any potential construction-related impacts to wetlands and aquatic resources are limited to indirect off-site impacts associated with runoff and siltation. As stated in Subsection 19.3.5.5, the nearest water feature is a small intermittent stream 1.6 mi. (2.6 km) south of the site and the Rock River is 1.9 mi. (3.1 km) southwest of the site. However, this intermittent stream receives drainage from lands east of the SHINE site and does not receive runoff from the site. Runoff from the site flows southwest toward the Rock River. However, because of the high infiltration rate of the soils on the SHINE site, no organized stream channel and associated aquatic habitats are present. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-42Rev. 0BMPs are used in accordance with the SWPPP, as required by the WDNR, to prevent sediment runoff and subsequent siltation in receiving streams during construction. Because of the absence of on-site aquatic communities and wetlands, the distance to off-site streams, the high infiltration rate of the soils near the SHINE site, and the implementation of BMPs on-site, direct and indirect impacts to aquatic communities and wetlands from construction are SMALL. Specific mitigation measures and management controls are not needed.19.4.5.1.3Terrestrial CommunitiesAs summarized in Table 19.4.5-1, direct construction impacts permanently convert 25.67 ac. (10.39 ha) of agricultural lands to industrial facilities including the construction of facility buildings, employee parking lot, facility access road/driveway, vegetated stormwater drainage swales, access road drainage ditches and US 51drainage ditches. Construction impacts also include the direct temporary impact of 14.54ac. (5.88ha) of agricultural lands used for the construction parking area, construction material staging or lay down area, and temporary disturbance from water and sewer line installation. Temporary impact areas are either returned to agriculture or restored with either cool season grasses or native prairie. The terrestrial communities on the SHINE site and near site areas are described in Subsection19.3.5.7. Wildlife potentially affected by construction includes bird, mammal and/or herpetofauna species that occasionally use the site as a travel corridor or for foraging or resting. Given the routine agricultural disturbance and lack of water resources on-site, wildlife occurrence on the SHINE site is relatively infrequent. Mammals were not commonly observed on-site. Their use of the site is sporadic given the lack of cover, shelter, and water supply. Furthermore, there were no amphibians or reptiles observed on the SHINE site. With the dominance of agriculture on the SHINE site and lack of other wildlife habitat, wildlife use on the SHINE site is minimal. The minor loss of agricultural lands to industrial facilities is not significant when compared to the 25,236 ac. (10,213 ha) of agricultural land remaining within a 5-mi. (8-km) radius of the site (seeTable 19.4.5-1). Furthermore, lands on-site not utilized for development of industrial facilities are returned to agriculture or restored using cool season grasses or native prairie species. As such, impacts to wildlife and terrestrial communities from construction are SMALL. Specific mitigation measures and management controls are not needed.White-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus), eastern cottontail (Sylvilagus floridanus), and Canada goose are identified in Subsection 19.3.5 as recreationally valuable game species observed on-site. Their use of the site, however, is infrequent given the lack of cover, shelter, and water supply. As such, impacts to recreationally important species from construction are SMALL and specific mitigation measures and management controls are not necessary. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | 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. The number of bird collisions with construction equipment, such as cranes, or new structures has not been quantitatively assessed. However, based on the findings of NUREG-1437 which demonstrated that the effects of avian collisions with existing structures at nuclear power plants is SMALL, the impacts of such collisions during the construction phase are considered SMALL and specific mitigation measures and management controls are not needed. | ||
Furthermore, no designated critical habitat was identified on-site or within 6 mi. (9.6 km) of the SHINE site. | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-43Rev. 0Wildlife 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, Ron, 2009). Amphibian and bat species, however, are generally lacking from the SHINE site due to the lack of appropriate habitat. In addition, artificial lighting could create or exacerbate an avian-collision hazard if tall cranes are illuminated for work during nighttime construction. According to Ogden, a large proportion of migrating birds affected by human-built structures are songbirds, apparently because of their propensity to migrate at night, their low flight altitudes, and their tendency to be trapped and disoriented by artificial light, making them vulnerable to collision with obstructions (Ogden, L.J.E., 1996). For any nighttime construction at the SHINE site, BMPs such as light source shielding and appropriate directional lighting are used to mitigate the hazards to wildlife associated with artificial nighttime illumination. Based on the general lack of appropriate habitat at the SHINE site for amphibians, bats, and most bird species, and the BMPs to mitigate effects to wildlife, the direct and indirect impacts of artificial illumination at nighttime during the construction phase are SMALL thus specific mitigation measures and management controls are not needed.19.4.5.1.4Invasive SpeciesAlthough several "restricted" or "prohibited" weedy invasive species were observed in various land cover types off-site, as discussed in Subsection 19.3.5.8, no invasive species listed by the WDNR were observed on the SHINE site. Disturbanc e associated with construction activities such as earthmoving and excavation, however, can create conditions for opportunistic invasive species to become established. Temporary impact areas and other areas not permanently converted to industrial uses are either returned to agriculture or restored with either cool season grasses or native prairie species. Invasive species are controlled in areas restored to agriculture as has been done in agricultural fields on-site for the past several decades. If restored to cool-season lawn or native prairie, invasive species are controlled through mowing or similar maintenance activities. Thus, the invasive species impacts from construction are considered SMALL and monitoring or maintenance plans are not anticipated at this time. 19.4.5.1.5Protected SpeciesConsultation letters from the WDNR and USFWS were acquired to provide information regarding ecological resources near (within 6 mi. [9.6 km]) the SHINE site (WDNR, 2012b; USFWS, 2012). This consultation process was used to obtain agency input regarding threatened and endangered species, sensitive habitats, and other ecological characteristics for the site and near-site areas. A list of threatened/endangered species or species of special concern identified within 6 mi. (9.6km) of the SHINE site is provided in Table 19.3.5-7. Terrestrial and aquatic listed species include five fish species, five mussel species, one turtle species, and 27 plant species as identified in Subsection 19.3.5.11. WDNR identified the Blanding's turtle (Emydoidea blandingii) as state threatened and potentially occurring near the site. Blanding's turtles were not observed during field reconnaissance. Given the absence of wetlands and open water habitat on the site or its immediate near-site environs, Blanding's turtles are not expected to occur on-site. Agency consultation did not identify any state or federally listed species on the SHINE site. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Furthermore, no designated critical habitat was identified on-site or within 6 mi. (9.6 km) of the | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | SHINE site. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-44Rev. 0The listed fish, mussel and turtle species inhabit aquatic areas such as rivers, streams, ponds, and/or wetlands which are absent from the site. BMPs are used in accordance with the SWPPP, as required by the WDNR, to prevent sediment runoff and subsequent siltation in receiving streams during construction. As stated in Subsection 19.3.5.5, potential receiving streams such as the Rock River are distant from the SHINE site. The use of proper BMPs combined with the distance to the nearest receiving waters and the high infiltration rate of the soils near the SHINE site minimizes impacts to protected species during construction. As such, construction-related impacts to the nearest receiving waters would be negligible and essentially would eliminate the potential for impacts to protected aquatic species.The listed plant species inhabit forests or woodlands, riparian areas, and prairies. These habitat types are absent from the agricultural SHINE site and none of the listed plant species were observed during field reconnaissance surveys on-site. In addition, protected plants were not observed in riparian areas of nearby streams. Thus, construction would not impact protected woodland or prairie plants on or near the site. As discussed in Subsection 19.3.5.5, receiving streams and their associated riparian zones are distant from the SHINE site. Because of the absence of on-site aquatic communities and wetlands, the distance to off-site streams, the high infiltration rate of the soils near the SHINE site, and the implementation of BMPs on-site, direct and indirect impacts to any protected plant species associated with riparian areas from construction are SMALL. As such, construction-related impacts to protected species on the SHINE site or in near off-site areas are SMALL. Specific mitigation measures and management controls are not needed.19.4.5.2Impacts from OperationsThis subsection provides a description of the potential impacts of operation of the SHINE facility on terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. 19.4.5.2.1Places and Entities of Special Interest Places and entities of special interest, as described in Subsection 19.3.5.4, include a description of communities and habitats of special interest, other sensitive or susceptible areas, and important ecological systems. Communities and habitats of special interest near the SHINE site (within 6 mi. [9.6km]) include wetlands, six endangered resources (habitats) identified by the WDNR, and state designated natural areas of Rock County. Other sensitive or susceptible areas near the SHINE site include Happy Hollow County Park (southwest of the site). Important ecological systems near the SHINE site include the Mississippi Flyway. Due to the complete conversion of the lands of the SHINE site and its immediate environs to cultivated fields or other developed uses, none of the described places and entities of special interest are present either on-site or in adjacent off-site areas. Habitats of the SHINE site and adjacent lands are dominated by agricultural and developed uses and are not considered to be high value or important ecological systems. Although air emissions from natural gas heating facilities are expected, such emissions are not expected to impact agricultural lands on-site or communities and habitats of special interest off site. Additionally, the SHINE facility does not utilize cooling towers. Consequently, there are no operational impacts associated with drift (i.e., gaseous or particulate emissions to the air from cooling towers). Herbicide application for lawn maintenance is minimal and is only used on the SHINE site, thus operational impacts to off-site areas identified as places and entities of special Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-45Rev. 0interest are minimized. The operation of the SHINE facility results in a localized minor increase in noise but noise levels are similar to that of the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport that is immediately adjacent to the SHINE site. Thus, operation impacts to the off-site areas identified as places and entities of special interest are SMALL. Mitigation measures and management controls are not needed.19.4.5.2.2Aquatic Communities and Wetlands Aquatic resources and wetlands near the SHINE site are described in Subsections 19.3.5.5 and 19.3.5.6, respectively. Aquatic resources near the SHINE site include the Rock River and an unnamed stream which is a tributary of the Rock River. In accordance with Subsection 19.3.5.5, the Rock River is 1.9 mi. (3.1 km) from the SHINE site. There are no aquatic resources or water bodies present on the SHINE site and there are no jurisdictional wetlands identified on the | ||
SHINE site.The SHINE facility does not withdraw water from any surface water body or from groundwater. Rather, water is provided by the Janesville Public Water Supply. Thus, there are no operational impacts associated with impingement or entrainment of aquatic biota. Furthermore, the SHINE facility does not discharge directly into the Rock River or any other nearby water body thus avoiding any pollutant or thermal affects to aquatic resources. In addition, a vegetated on-site detention swale is used to control stormwater runoff which, when combined with the distance to the nearest off-site water bodies minimizes runoff and siltation to off-site receiving streams. Thus, operational impacts on aquatic communities or wetlands are SMALL. Specific mitigation measures and management controls are not needed.19.4.5.2.3Terrestrial Communities Terrestrial plant communities are characterized in Subsection 19.3.5.7.1 for the SHINE site and areas in proximity of the SHINE site. The terrestrial communities of the site and areas in proximity to the site are mainly agricultural areas cultivated for crops, hay, and pasture. No federal or state-listed threatened, endangered or special concern plant species have been observed on or in the proximity of the SHINE site. Herbicide application is occasionally used around buildings and driveways as part of lawn maintenance activities to c ontrol weedy species. Thus, operational impacts to plant communities are SMALL.Wildlife communities for the SHINE site and near site areas are described in Subsection19.3.5.7.2. With the dominance of agriculture on the SHINE site and lack of other wildlife habitat, wildlife use is on the SHINE site is minimal. Additionally, there are no known occurrences of threatened or endangered species on the SHINE site. Thus, operational impacts to wildlife are SMALL.The SHINE facility and associated buildings do not result in significant bird mortality from bird collisions, though infrequent bird collisions with buildings resulting in mortality can occur. As is discussed in Subsection 19.4.1 most buildings on the SHINE site have a relatively low profile. Consequently, effects on bird populations from collisions with build ings are minimized. Therefore, the operational impacts to bird species and populations from collisions are SMALL. Specific mitigation measures and management controls are not needed. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-46Rev. 0The operation of the SHINE facility results in a localized minor increase in noise (Subsection19.4.2). But noise levels are localized to the SHINE site and not elevated above background noise emissions from US 51 immediately adjacent to the SHINE site. Thus, operation impacts to wildlife from noise are SMALL. Specific measures and controls are not needed.19.4.5.2.4Invasive Species There were nine "restricted" or "prohibited" weedy invasive species observed off-site in various land cover types including developed lands, agricultural lands, and riparian corridors. Information on these species can be found in Subsection 19.3.5.8. No invasive species listed by the WDNR (neither restricted nor prohibited) were observed on the SHINE site. Additionally, there are no existing plans to implement invasive species management/control activities at the facility. Thus, operational impacts associated with invasive species are SMALL. Specific measures and controls are not needed.19.4.5.2.5Protected SpeciesA list of threatened/endangered species or species of special concern identified near the SHINE site is provided in Table 19.3.5-7. Terrestrial and aquatic listed species include five fish species, five mussel species, one turtle species, and 27 plant species. WDNR identified the Blanding's turtle (Emydoidea blandingii) as state threatened and potentially occurring near the site. Blanding's turtles were not observed during field reconnaissance. Given the absence of wetlands and open water habitat on the site or its immediate near-site environs, Blanding's turtles are not expected to occur on-site. Agency consultation did not identify any state or federally listed mammal, bird, or insect species within 6 mi. (9.6km) of the SHINE site. Furthermore, no designated critical habitat was identified on-site or within 6 mi. (9.6 km) of the SHINE site.The listed fish, mussel and turtle species inhabit aquatic areas such as rivers, streams, ponds, and/or wetlands. Because these habitats are absent from the site, these species are not expected to occur on the SHINE site. Furthermore, the lack of intake and discharge structures on the Rock River or any other nearby water body avoids operational impacts to the aquatic habitats of protected species. The listed plant species inhabit the three general habitat types of forests/woodlands, riparian areas, and prairies. There is no forested, riparian, or prairie habitat on the SHINE site nor were any of the listed plant species observed during any of the vegetation surveys within the site or near the site. Furthermore, the entire SHINE site is composed of agricultural land and does not include the preferred habitat of the listed species. In accordance with Subsection 19.3.5.5, the nearest receiving stream and associated riparian areas are more than a mile from the SHINE site. Although protected plant species were not observed in nearby riparian areas during field reconnaissance, these are areas where protected plant species could become established. The use of appropriate stormwater controls comlow enrichedbined with the distance to the nearest receiving stream minimizes impacts to any protected plant species that could potentially be associated with near site riparian areas. As such, operational impacts to protected species on the SHINE site or in near off-site areas are SMALL. Specific mitigation measures and management controls are not needed. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-47Rev. 019.4.5.3Impacts from DecommissioningConstruction of the SHINE facility is expected to begin in 2015. Following the cessation of operations the facility will be decommissioned. Decommissioning activities, however, are similar to construction activities, and involve heavy equipment to dismantle buildings and remove roadway and parking facilities. As such, impacts from decommissioning are anticipated to be similar to the impacts associated with construction and SMALL. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-48Rev. 0Table 19.4.5-1 Summary of Impacts to 2006 Land Use/Land Cover (a)a)2006 Land Use/Land Cover is the most recent data availableb)Total may add up to more or less than 100 percent due to rounding. | |||
c) | c) | ||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
Fry et al., 2011NLCD 2006 Land Cover ClassPermanent Site ImpactsTemporary Site ImpactsTotal Land Cover Within the Region(c)ac.haac.haac.haPercentOpen Water7963221.6Developed, Open Space0.180.07304312316.1Developed, Low Intensity5858237111.7Developed, Medium Intensity19687963.9Developed, High Intensity9924012.0Barren43170.1Deciduous Forest329813356.6Evergreen Forest68280.1 Mixed Forest100.0Shrub/Scrub5052041.0Grassland10494252.1 Pasture/Hay5896238611.7Cultivated Crops25.6710.3914.545.8825,23610,21350.2Woody Wetlands7222921.4 Emergent Herbaceous Wetland7873181.6Total(b)28.8510.4614.545.8850,26220,339100.0 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical | Fry et al., 2011NLCD 2006 Land Cover ClassPermanent Site ImpactsTemporary Site ImpactsTotal Land Cover Within the Region (c)ac.haac.haac.haPercentOpen Water7963221.6Developed, Open Space0.180.07304312316.1Developed, Low Intensity5858237111.7Developed, Medium Intensity19687963.9Developed, High Intensity9924012.0Barren43170.1Deciduous Forest329813356.6Evergreen Forest68280.1 Mixed Forest100.0Shrub/Scrub5052041.0Grassland10494252.1 Pasture/Hay5896238611.7Cultivated Crops25.6710.3914.545.8825,23610,21350.2Woody Wetlands7222921.4 Emergent Herbaceous Wetland7873181.6Total(b)28.8510.4614.545.8850,26220,339100.0 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-49Rev. 019.4.6HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES19.4.6.1Impacts to Historic PropertiesAs is described in Subsection 19.3.6.3, no on-site historic properties are associated with the SHINE site. No archaeological sites or evidence of cultural resources were identified within the survey area. The Wisconsin Historical Society (WHS) has also reviewed the findings of the Phase I archaeological survey and has indicated that no further consultation with the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) regarding the SHINE facility is required (WHS, 2012).As discussed in Subsection 19.3.6.4, SHINE initiated consultation with 13 federally recognized tribes regarding the proposed development. A single response letter was received from the Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska who indicated that they have cultural properties of interest in the project area, but had no concerns regarding the project. However, they did indicate the desire to be contacted in the event burial sites or other cultural materials were discovered during construction. Follow-up calls were made to representatives of the remaining 12 tribes; however, no return calls to SHINE were received. Prior to construction, SHINE will develop a Cultural Resource Management Plan that will contain procedures governing notification and management of cultural resources during both construction and operations.The nearest listed National Register of Historic Properties (NRHP) property is the Hugunin House located approximately 1.1 mi. (1.7 km) from the SHINE site (see Figure19.3.6-1). No direct impacts occur to this property by either construction or operational activities. Additionally, given the distance of the listed property and the low profile of the proposed structures on the SHINE site, no visual or other indirect impacts occur. Therefore, potential impacts to historic and archaeological resources are SMALL. Due to the absence of historic cemeteries and prehistoric mounds within the boundaries of the SHINE site, the potential for the presence of human burials or human remains is SMALL. | ||
However, if human burials or human remains are identified at any time, work will immediately stop with no further disturbance of the human remains. If human remains are discovered, the construction personnel will contact a representative of SHINE. The representative of SHINE will contact the appropriate local law enforcement and the WHS and communicate that human remains have been discovered. If the human remains are determined to be archaeological in nature, the WHS in conjunction with SHINE will determine what further actions will be taken.Other past, present and reasonably foreseeable Federal and non-Federal projects identified in the immediate area around the SHINE site include the planned development of lands immediately north of the site as part of the Janesville Tax Increment Financing District No. 35 Project Plan (City of Janesville, 2012a). However, because no historic properties are impacted by the SHINE site, no additional cumulative impacts historic and cultural resources would occur. Consequently, potential cumulative impacts of the SHINE project are SMALL. | However, if human burials or human remains are identified at any time, work will immediately stop with no further disturbance of the human remains. If human remains are discovered, the construction personnel will contact a representative of SHINE. The representative of SHINE will contact the appropriate local law enforcement and the WHS and communicate that human remains have been discovered. If the human remains are determined to be archaeological in nature, the WHS in conjunction with SHINE will determine what further actions will be taken.Other past, present and reasonably foreseeable Federal and non-Federal projects identified in the immediate area around the SHINE site include the planned development of lands immediately north of the site as part of the Janesville Tax Increment Financing District No. 35 Project Plan (City of Janesville, 2012a). However, because no historic properties are impacted by the SHINE site, no additional cumulative impacts historic and cultural resources would occur. Consequently, potential cumulative impacts of the SHINE project are SMALL. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-50Rev. 019.4.7SOCIOECONOMICSThis subsection describes potential impacts to the socioeconomic environment, including transportation system impacts associated with the construction, operation and decommissioning of the SHINE facility. The evaluation of potential socioeconomics impacts addresses potential changes in the regional population, economy, housing availability, and public services. The evaluation of transportation system impacts addresses routes and modes that are involved with transporting materials, workers, and equipment to the SHINE site. | ||
19.4.7.1Socioeconomics Impacts This subsection evaluates impacts to the population, housing, public services (i.e. water supply), public education, and tax-revenues in the region of influence (ROI), Rock County, that result from constructing, operating, and decommissioning the SHINE facility. Potential impacts of constructing the facility are attributable to the size of the construction workforce, the expenditures needed to support the construction program, and the tax payments made to political jurisdictions. Because direct impacts are those that occur on-site, the only direct impacts are associated with the presence of the workforce at the SHINE site. All other socioeconomic impacts are considered to be indirect, as they occur off-site. The analysis presented in this subsection is based on the bounding parameters for the projected workforces for construction, operation, and decommissioning. As noted in Table 19.4.7-1, the peak on-site construction phase (contractor) workforce is 420workers, and the maximum on-site operational phase workforce is 150 workers. This analysis assumes a 24-month schedule of construction-related activities. Decommissioning is estimated to start in the year 2046, and will involve a peak month on-site workforce of 261 workers.19.4.7.1.1Population ImpactsThe ROI population is 160,331 (USCB, 2010a). Growth projections show that the population in 2015 is 165,354, and the population in 2045 is 191,703 (see Table 19.3.7-4). The analysis of population impacts considers the population growth potential due to the SHINE workforce requirements for construction, operational and decommissioning phases. As shown in Table 19.4.7-1, a large construction trade workforce is available in the ROI for the major labor categories (those for which a peak labor force need of at least 20workers is projected). Therefore, the potential for large numbers of trade workers moving into the ROI is lessened by the extent to which the estimated local labor force meets construction workforce needs. Because the ROI labor force in the construction trades is demonstrated to be abundant relative to construction workforce requirements (except for boilermakers and iron workers for whom data are not available from the Bureau of Labor Statistics [BLS]), it is estimated that approximately 60percent of the required construction workforce for these trades come from within the ROI. It is conservatively assumed that 20 percent of the required boilermakers and iron workers are available from within the ROI. Similarly, based on the large ROI labor force in the major occupation categories, it is expected that approximately 60 percent of the required operations workforce comes from within the ROI. Furthermore, due to the more specialized nature of some trades required for the decommissioning workforce, it is expected that just over 50 percent of that workforce comes from within the ROI (estimates based on current ROI labor force levels). | 19.4.7.1Socioeconomics Impacts This subsection evaluates impacts to the population, housing, public services (i.e. water supply), public education, and tax-revenues in the region of influence (ROI), Rock County, that result from constructing, operating, and decommissioning the SHINE facility. Potential impacts of constructing the facility are attributable to the size of the construction workforce, the expenditures needed to support the construction program, and the tax payments made to political jurisdictions. Because direct impacts are those that occur on-site, the only direct impacts are associated with the presence of the workforce at the SHINE site. All other socioeconomic impacts are considered to be indirect, as they occur off-site. The analysis presented in this subsection is based on the bounding parameters for the projected workforces for construction, operation, and decommissioning. As noted in Table 19.4.7-1, the peak on-site construction phase (contractor) workforce is 420workers, and the maximum on-site operational phase workforce is 150 workers. This analysis assumes a 24-month schedule of construction-related activities. Decommissioning is estimated to start in the year 2046, and will involve a peak month on-site workforce of 261 | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical | workers.19.4.7.1.1Population ImpactsThe ROI population is 160,331 (USCB, 2010a). Growth projections show that the population in 2015 is 165,354, and the population in 2045 is 191,703 (see Table 19.3.7-4). The analysis of population impacts considers the population growth potential due to the SHINE workforce requirements for construction, operational and decommissioning phases. As shown in Table 19.4.7-1, a large construction trade workforce is available in the ROI for the major labor categories (those for which a peak labor force need of at least 20workers is projected). Therefore, the potential for large numbers of trade workers moving into the ROI is lessened by the extent to which the estimated local labor force meets construction workforce needs. Because the ROI labor force in the construction trades is demonstrated to be abundant relative to construction workforce requirements (except for boilermakers and iron workers for whom data are not available from the Bureau of Labor Statistics [BLS]), it is estimated that approximately 60percent of the required construction workforce for these trades come from within the ROI. It is conservatively assumed that 20 percent of the required boilermakers and iron workers are available from within the ROI. Similarly, based on the large ROI labor force in the major occupation categories, it is expected that approximately 60 percent of the required operations workforce comes from within the ROI. Furthermore, due to the more specialized nature of some trades required for the decommissioning workforce, it is expected that just over 50 percent of that workforce comes from within the ROI (estimates based on current ROI labor force levels). | ||
19.4.7.1.3Public Services Impacts Public services impacts | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-51Rev. 0The estimated numbers of construction workers, operational workers and decommissioning workers that are available locally, and the estimated labor force deficiencies by occupation are shown in Table 19.4.7-1. These estimates show that 248 out of the peak requirement of 420construction workers are present within the ROI labor force. Therefore, 172 construction workers come either from the labor force of the surrounding 50-mi. (80km) radius or relocate from outside the 50-mi. (80-km) radius. The 172 construction workers estimated to be not available within the ROI labor force equates to 41 percent of the peak month construction workforce. Based on analysis of the overall Rock County labor force as shown in Table19.3.7-1, it is estimated that 17 percent of the existing labor force commutes to Rock County from other counties. Consistent with this estimate, it is assumed that 17 percent of the 172 construction workers to be added to the ROI labor force reside in counties outside of Rock County and commute to the ROI. The remainder, 143 construction workers and their families, are assumed to relocate to reside within the ROI. The average household size in the ROI is 2.5persons per household (USCB, 2010a). Therefore, 143 workers relocating to the various communities within the ROI increases the population in the ROI by approximately 358 people. This estimated population increase constitutes 0.22 percent of the ROI's population of 160,331. Therefore, the impact of the construction of the SHINE facility on population is SMALL.Table 19.4.7-1 shows the estimate that 88 out of the required 150 permanent operations workers are available in the ROI. It is assumed that 17 percent of the additional required 62operations workers commute to Rock County from adjacent counties, and that the other 51workers and their families relocate to reside in the ROI. Using the ROI average of 2.5persons per household, the total population increase in the various communities within the ROI due to operational workforce requirements is 128 people. This estimated population increase constitutes 0.08 percent of the projected 2015 population of the ROI. Therefore, the impact of the operation of the SHINE facility on population is SMALL.An estimated 132 of the required 261 decommissioning workers are available in the ROI (see Table19.4.7-1). It is assumed that 17 percent of the additional required 129 decommissioning workers commute to Rock County from adjacent counties, and that the other 107decommissioning workers and their families relocate to the ROI. Based on the ROI average of 2.5persons per household, the ROI population increases by 268 due to the decommissioning workforce. This estimated population increase constitutes 0.14 percent of the projected population of the various communities within the ROI at the end of the 30-year license period. Therefore, the impact of decommissioning of the SHINE facility on population is SMALL.19.4.7.1.2Housing ImpactsSubsection 19.3.7.2.2 and Table 19.3.7-12 provide a summary of the 2010 USCB data concerning availability of housing in the ROI that is used as a basis for estimating the number of housing units that may be available to accommodate housing demands resulting from construction, operation and decommissioni ng. NUREG-1437 presents criteria for the assessment of housing impacts based on the discernible changes in housing availability, prices, and changes in housing construction or conversions. These criteria are:*SMALL: Small and not easily discernible change in housing availability; increases in rental rates or housing values equal or slightly exceed the statewide inflation rate; and no extraordinary construction or conversion of housing. | ||
19.4.7.2.1Construction/Modification of Transportation InfrastructureA traffic analysis was performed to assess the construction-period traffic conditions and the post-development operations-related traffic conditions at the SHINE site. The construction entrance to the site is located along US 51. The peak construction traffic volume is estimated to be 14heavy vehicles (dump truck/deliveries) and 451 vehicles (pick-up trucks and cars) per day in 2015. A summary of the effect of construction traffic volumes on the transportation infrastructure is provided in Table 19.4.7-2. The level of construction-related traffic does not affect the level of service anywhere in the transportation infrastructure and no modifications to the infrastructure are necessary. Based on this projected level of construction traffic to and from the site, the level of impact to the transportation infrastructure is SMALL. The traffic analysis also assesses the traffic associated with the operations of the SHINE facility after construction is complete, which is assumed to be in 2016. The entrance to the site is located along US 51 with 75 percent of site-related traffic assumed to be coming from and going to the north and 25percent to/from the south. The traffic volume generated by employees working at the facility is estimated to be 118 vehicles per day. A summary of the effect of these Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-52Rev. 0*MODERATE: Discernible but short-lived change in housing availability; rental rates or housing values increase slightly faster than state inflation rate with rates realigning as new housing added; and minor and temporary conversions of non-living space to living space.*LARGE: Very limited housing availability; rental rates or housing values increase well above normal inflation rate for state; and substantial conversions of housing units and overbuilding of new housing units. In 2010, there were 5986 vacant housing units in the ROI (see Table 19.3.7-12). This amount of housing available within the ROI at the time the portion of the construction workforce that is non-resident moves into the area is substantially greater than the total estimated demand for housing due to construction of the SHINE facility. For purposes of analysis, the estimates of 143workers relocating to the ROI for construction phase peak, 51 workers relocating to the ROI to meet operational workforce needs, and 107 workers relocating to the ROI to meet decommissioning workforce needs equates to a total of 301 additional households in the ROI. The 5986 vacant housing units in Rock County in 2010 equal approximately 20 times the total estimated demand for housing. There is clearly an adequate supply of vacant housing to accommodate the requirements of new families for temporary or permanent housing. Further, the decommissioning workforce, which represents approximately one-third of the estimated housing demand, does not relocate to the ROI until the end of the 30-year licensing period.The potential impacts on housing are SMALL due to the large number of available vacant housing units in the ROI and the relatively small requirements for the construction, operations and decommissioning workforce. | ||
19.4.7.1.3Public Services Impacts Public services impacts analys is as directed by Final IS G Augmenting NUREG-1537 concerns water supply facilities. NUREG-1437 presents criteria for the assessment of public services impacts based on the ability to respond to the level of demand and need for additional capacity. These criteria are:*SMALL: Little or no change occurs in ability to respond to level of demand and therefore there is no need to add capital facilities.*MODERATE: There is overtaxing of facilities during peak demand.*LARGE: Existing service levels are substantially degraded and additional capacity is needed.Construction of the SHINE facility requires quantities of potable water to support the needs of the construction work force. During construction and operations, the Janesville Water Utility supplies water to the SHINE site, including potable water uses, fire protection uses, and typical construction uses (e.g. dust suppression and concrete mixing). The average per capita water usage in the United States is 90 gallons per day (gpd) (340.7 liters per day [lpd]) per person including personal use, bathing, laundry and other household uses (USGS, 2012). At a conservatively assumed 30gpd (113.6 lpd) for each construction worker who is on-site for 8 to 12 hours per day, an on-site workforce of 420 needs 12,600 gpd (47,696 lpd) for potable and sanitary use. As discussed in Subsection19.3.7.2.5.1, the Janesville Water Utility has excess Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-53Rev. 0water capacity of 18 Mgd (68.1 Mld). Therefore, impacts on public water supply by the on-site construction workforce are SMALL.The impact to the local water supply systems from SHINE-related population growth can be estimated by multiplying the amount of water that is required per capita by the estimated number of individuals who relocate to the ROI. Subsection 19.3.7.2.5.1 describes the public water supply systems in the area, permitted capacities, and current demands. The average per capita water usage in the United States is 90 gpd (340.7 lpd) per person including personal use, bathing, laundry and other household uses (USGS, 2012). The estimated total construction and operation-related population increase within the ROI of 486 people (construction and operations workforces and their families) increases consumption by 43,740 gpd (165,574 lpd). The excess public water supply capacity in Janesville is 18 Mgd (68.1 Mld). Therefore, impacts to the municipal water supplier due to the estimated population increase are SMALL.Public wastewater treatment facilities are directly related to public water supply facilities. The impact to the local wastewater treatment systems from SHINE-related population increases can be determined by calculating the amount of water that is used and disposed of by these individuals. The average person in the United States uses 90 gpd (340.7 lpd) (USGS, 2012). All wastewater from the SHINE facility is disposed of and treated by the City of Janesville wastewater treatment facilities. The total construction and operation-related population increase of 486 people requires 43,740gpd (165,574 lpd) of additional wastewater treatment demand. The excess treatment capacity in the City of Janesville is 12 Mgd (45.4 Mld). Therefore, based on this excess treatment capacity, impacts to wastewater treatment facilities are SMALL.19.4.7.1.4Public Education ImpactsSchools and student populations are discussed in Subsection 19.3.7.2.5.2. For the ROI, the numbers and types of schools and the numbers of students by district are summarized in Table19.3.7-17. NUREG-1437 presents criteria for the assessment of public education impacts based on changes in student enrollment and the number of teaching staff and classrooms. These criteria are:*SMALL: Project-related enrollment increase is less than or equal to 3 percent, there is no change in the school system's ability to provide educational services, and no additional teaching staff or classroom space is needed.*MODERATE: Student enrollment increases between 4 and 8 percent, and there is an increase in the number of teachers or classrooms.*LARGE: Student enrollment increases by more than 8 percent and current institutions are not adequate to accommodate the influx of students. The Janesville School District (JSD) is the largest school district in the ROI by measure of student enrollment, and the public schools in the ROI that are in closest proximity to the SHINE site are units of the JSD. According to its current Strategic Plan, the JSD is officially seeking to grow its student enrollment. More specifically, it is the JSD Board of Education's goal to increase the net open enrollment gain/loss by 15 percent in the 2011-12 school year (JSD,2011a.). The student to teacher ratio is a common evaluation factor with regards to the capacity of a school, or school district, to accommodate student enrollment growth. In the JSD, the reported ratio is 12.8 students per licensed teacher full time equivalency which compares to the WI Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-54Rev. 0statewide ratio of 13.3 students per teacher full time equivalency (DPI, 2012a). The JSD's school enrollment for the 2011-2012 school year was 10,325 (DPI, 2012b). The district could increase its student enrollment by 412 students without adding any licensed teachers and still not exceed the statewide ratio. A 3percent increase in student enrollment would equate to an additional 310 students.The student age cohort (age 5 to 18) accounts for 20percent of the ROI total population (USCB,2010a and USCB, 2010b). The combination of estimated population increase due to construction workforce and operational workforce requirements results in a net construction and operations related population increase of 486 which contributes 97school-aged children within the ROI. If all students are added in the JSD, enrollment would neither exceed 3percent nor cause the JSD to exceed the statewide student to teacher ratio. No professional staff or classroom additions are needed. Beginning in 2046, an estimated population increase of 268 associated with decommissioning workforce demand contributes 54 school-aged children, assuming the student aged population remains 20percent of the total population. No professional staff or classroom additions would be needed based on that level of increased enrollment. Therefore, the level of impact to the local public education system is SMALL. 19.4.7.1.5Tax Revenue Related ImpactsThe U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) defined the magnitude of license renewal-related tax impacts based on previous case-study analysis as described in NUREG-1437 as:*SMALL if the payments are less than 10percent of revenue of the taxing jurisdiction.*MODERATE if the payments are between 10 and 20percent of revenue of the taxing jurisdiction.*LARGE if the payments are greater than 20percent of revenue of the taxing jurisdiction.Additionally, the NRC determined that if a facility's tax payments are projected to be a dominant source of the community's total revenue, new tax-driven land-use changes are LARGE. This is especially true where the community has no pre-established pattern of development or has not provided adequate public services to support and guide development in the past.Tax revenues associated with the construction, operation and decommissioning of the SHINE facility include payroll taxes on wages and salaries of the construction and operations work forces, sales and use taxes on purchases made by SHINE and the construction, operations and decommissioning workforces, and property taxes on owned real property and improvements. Increased tax collections are a benefit to the state, county and municipal-level jurisdictions as well as school districts.19.4.7.1.6Personal and Corporate Income TaxesWorkforce payroll taxes (federal and state) are generated by construction, operations and decommissioning activities and purchases as well as taxes generated by workforce expenditures. State tax payments are distributed throughout the ROI and extend beyond the ROI, based on the expectation that some construction, operations and decommissioning employees reside outside of Rock County. The relocation of workers to Rock County and Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-55Rev. 0surrounding counties, including some expected to relocate to Wisconsin from other states, results in an increase in payroll taxes paid to Wisconsin.19.4.7.1.7Sales Taxes Workers commuting to the SHINE site from within and outside of the ROI contribute sales tax revenues to the State of Wisconsin and to Rock County and any other counties where they live. The vast majority of sales tax revenues from the ROI are collected by the State, as Rock County's sales tax rate is very low. But the ROI does experience an increase in the amount of sales taxes collected, reflecting the concentration of re-located workers. Sales tax revenues also result from direct purchases by SHINE for materials, equipment and services supporting the construction project, long term operations, and decommissioning. The distribution of these tax revenues is determined by the business locations of the material and service providers and likely reflects a broad area including the ROI and beyond to multiple states. The amount of sales taxes collected over a potential 30-year operating period that are attributable to the SHINE facility is significant, but is relatively minor when compared to the total amount of taxes collected in the ROI.19.4.7.1.8Property TaxesThe SHINE facility is located in the City of Janesville in Rock County. As such, property taxes are paid to Janesville and Rock County as well as the JSD. These jurisdictions all provide public services that benefit SHINE's business and employees. It is SHINE's intent to enter into a Tax Increment Financing (TIF) agreement with the City of Janesville. The TIF agreement allows SHINE to make payments in lieu of taxes to Janesville for a period of 10years at the outset of the license period. These payments, estimated to total $600,000 per year, will be directed to offset infrastructure expenses associated with the SHINE development. During the ten year TIF time period, SHINE pays property taxes based on the assessed value of the property prior to improvements, estimated to be $35,000 per year. Following the 10-year TIF time period, property taxes paid by SHINE are based on the assessed value of real property and improvements, using the property tax rates in place at that time. Comparison of the estimated annual SHINE property tax payment (after expiration of the 10-year TIF time period) with the individual property tax revenues of Janesville and Rock County (using 2010 data available from Wisconsin Department of Revenue [DOR]) and the Janesville School District Board of Education shows that the annual portion of total property tax revenues paid by SHINE equates to approximately 0.30percent of total Rock County general property tax revenues, 0.66 percent of total Janesville general property tax revenues, and 0.99 percent of total Janesville School District general property tax revenues (DOR, 2012 and JSD, 2011b). The effect of property taxes paid by the construction, operations and decommissioning workforces is dispersed across the ROI and beyond. Construction workers commuting to the SHINE site from their homes continue to pay existing property taxes. Workers relocating to the ROI also contribute to increased property tax revenues.19.4.7.1.9Summary of Tax ImpactsOverall tax revenues generated by construction, operation and decommissioning of SHINE will be significant in absolute dollars across the lifetime of the facility, even with consideration of the TIF agreement that allows payment in lieu of taxes for 10years. However, the overall tax revenues are relatively small in comparison to the established tax base of Janesville and Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-56Rev. 0RockCounty. The maximum increase in property tax revenues after expiration of the TIF agreement is expected to be substantially less than 10 percent of the total tax revenue at the city and county levels. Therefore, total tax revenues from SHINE result in SMALL positive impacts at the community level. 19.4.7.1.10Other Socioeconomics Related ImpactsSocioeconomics related impacts in addition to those specifically described above include the potential for supportive business expansion and associated land use changes in the Janesville community as a result of the investments from SHINE. Land use changes due to housing needs are not expected due to the large number of existing vacant housing units. Potential land use changes include those to provide for expansion of existing small businesses or locations for new small businesses that might support SHINE and SHINE employees. If realized, such business expansions and/or new business developments are likely to occur in the southern area of the City of Janesville near the SHINE site in locations where conditions are appropriate for business development, including within the TIF district to the north of the SHINE site. Any such land use changes are subject to local zoning regulations and associated impacts on socioeconomic conditions are expected to be SMALL. 19.4.7.1.11Mitigation Measures to Minimize Socioeconomic ImpactsAs described in the subsections above, the socioeconomic impacts on the ROI resulting from construction, operation, and decommissioning of the SHINE facility are SMALL and no mitigation measures are required to minimize socioeconomic impacts.19.4.7.2TransportationConstruction-related and operations-related effects on the transportation network are provided in this subsection. The effects on the local transportation infrastructure as a result of construction and operations are measured against the existing traffic conditions and the future no-build traffic conditions in Table 19.4.7-2. All goods and services to support the SHINE facility will reach the site using existing roadway networks. | |||
19.4.7.2.1Construction/Modification of Transportation InfrastructureA traffic analysis was performed to assess the construction-period traffic conditions and the post-development operations-related traffic conditions at the SHINE site. The construction entrance to the site is located along US 51. The peak construction traffic volume is estimated to be 14heavy vehicles (dump truck/deliveries) and 451 vehicles (pick-up trucks and cars) per day in 2015. A summary of the effect of construction traffic volumes on the transportation infrastructure is provided in Table 19.4.7-2. The level of construction-related traffic does not affect the level of service anywhere in the transportation infrastructure and no modifications to the infrastructure are necessary. Based on this projected level of construction traffic to and from the site, the level of impact to the transportation infrastructure is SMALL. The traffic analysis also assesses the traffic associated with the operations of the SHINE facility after construction is complete, which is assumed to be in 2016. The entrance to the site is located along US 51 with 75 percent of site-related traffic assumed to be coming from and going to the north and 25percent to/from the south. The traffic volume generated by employees working at the facility is estimated to be 118 vehicles per day. A summary of the effect of these Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-57Rev. 0operations volumes on the transportation infrastructure is provided in Table19.4.7-2. The operation of the facility results in a slight degradation in the level of service (from a level of service [LOS] C to an LOS D) at the intersection of US51 and State Highway11 (SH11) during the morning peak hour resulting in an increased delay at the intersection. This can be easily mitigated by optimizing the signal timing at the intersection to accommodate a greater turning movement from westbound SH11 to southbound US 51 as demonstrated in Table 19.4.7-3. | |||
Additionally, the nearby Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport does not need to modify current infrastructure in order to accommodate additional air traffic caused by shipments to and from the SHINE facility. Consequently, there are no impacts to airport facilities. Because traffic conditions during construction are not degraded, and the minor reduction in LOS at SH 11, the transportation impacts are considered to be SMALL and mitigable. 19.4.7.2.2Transportation Routes for Conveying Materials and Personnel to the Site The construction and operation of the SHINE facility does not alter any existing transportation routes for conveying materials and/or personnel to the site. Therefore, the impacts to transportation routes are considered to be SMALL.19.4.7.2.3Traffic Patterns ImpactsThe construction and operation of the SHINE facility does not alter any existing traffic patterns to and from the site. Therefore, the impacts to traffic patterns are considered to be SMALL.19.4.7.2.4Mitigation Measures to Minimize Transportation ImpactsAs mentioned above, the operation of the SHINE facility results in a slight degradation in the LOS at the signalized intersection of US 51 and SH 11. Specifically, the westbound SH 11 to southbound US 51 left-turning movement is affected during the morning peak hour. This condition can be easily mitigated by optimizing the signal timing for this turning movement. A summary of the effect of this mitigated condition is provided in Table 19.4.7-3. By optimizing signal timing for this movement at the intersection, the level of service for the intersection can be improved to its existing level. There are no other transportation infrastructure mitigation requirements in the vicinity of the SHINE site. | Additionally, the nearby Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport does not need to modify current infrastructure in order to accommodate additional air traffic caused by shipments to and from the SHINE facility. Consequently, there are no impacts to airport facilities. Because traffic conditions during construction are not degraded, and the minor reduction in LOS at SH 11, the transportation impacts are considered to be SMALL and mitigable. 19.4.7.2.2Transportation Routes for Conveying Materials and Personnel to the Site The construction and operation of the SHINE facility does not alter any existing transportation routes for conveying materials and/or personnel to the site. Therefore, the impacts to transportation routes are considered to be SMALL.19.4.7.2.3Traffic Patterns ImpactsThe construction and operation of the SHINE facility does not alter any existing traffic patterns to and from the site. Therefore, the impacts to traffic patterns are considered to be SMALL.19.4.7.2.4Mitigation Measures to Minimize Transportation ImpactsAs mentioned above, the operation of the SHINE facility results in a slight degradation in the LOS at the signalized intersection of US 51 and SH 11. Specifically, the westbound SH 11 to southbound US 51 left-turning movement is affected during the morning peak hour. This condition can be easily mitigated by optimizing the signal timing for this turning movement. A summary of the effect of this mitigated condition is provided in Table 19.4.7-3. By optimizing signal timing for this movement at the intersection, the level of service for the intersection can be improved to its existing level. There are no other transportation infrastructure mitigation requirements in the vicinity of the SHINE site. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-58Rev. 0Table 19.4.7-1 Projected ROI Labor Availability and On-site Labor Requirements at Peak Month of Construction, Operations and Decommissioning SchedulesOccupation SHINE Peak Need(a)Estimate of Labor Force by Occupation in Rock County (b)Available Labor Force in Rock County(c)Rock County Labor Force Deficiency(d)Estimated AvailableNeeded for SHINEConstruction PhaseBoilermaker24ND5519 Carpenter4536072450Electrician55190383817Ironworker50ND101040 Laborer7034068682Equipment Operator/Eng.2613026260Plumber/Pipefitter7070141456Sheet Metal Worker3080(e)161614Construction Supervisor 2016032200Other30ND6624TOTAL420248172TOTAL, Percent 5941Operational PhaseOperation Support 4034034346Productions/Operations37110111126Tech Support 402590(f)259400Other33ND3330TOTAL1508862TOTAL, Percent 5941Decommissioning Phase Carpenter2036072200Ironworker 20ND4416Laborer100340686832Equipment Operator/Eng.2013026200Plumber/Pipefitter3070141416Radiation Technicians30ND6624Other41ND0NA41Total261132129Total, Percent 5149a)Peak month estimated need of labor categories where need is greater than or equal to 20b)Rock County labor force estimate from BLS, 2011 unless otherwise notedc)Left column: Estimated available construction and decommissioning labor force based on 20 percent of BLS estimated labor force; Available operational labor force based on 10percent of BLS estimated labor force. Right column: Total reflects the total estimated labor force available to meet the SHINE Peak Need.d)Rock County labor force deficiency determined by subtracting estimated Available Labor Force from SHINE Peak Neede)Labor force estimates from BLS, 2009; no data available for 2011 f)Tech support subcategories include: maintenance (machinery maintenance workers and general maintenance and repair workers), engineers (industrial engineers and mechanical drafters), and craftspeople (janitors and cleaners, landscaping and groundskeepers, electricians, plumbers and pipefitters, industrial machinery mechanics, and machinists)ND = No data, NA = Not available | ||
==References:== | ==References:== | ||
BLS, 2009; BLS, 2011. | BLS, 2009; BLS, 2011. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-59Rev. 0Table 19.4.7-2 Summary of Traffic Impacts during Construction and Operationsa) LOS degraded during operations only due to greater volume during peak hour. Total construction traffic volumne higher, but not at peak hourExisting Level of Service Summary - Weekday Peak-HourIntersections ExistingConditions - AM ExistingConditions - PMLOSDelayLOSDelaySH 11 at County Highway GC23.3 sec.C22.4 sec.US 51 at Highway 11C27.6 sec.C25.6 sec. | ||
US 51 at Town Line RdB10.2 sec.B10.4 sec.Future (2015) No-Build Level of Service Summary - Weekday Peak-HourIntersectionsFuture No-Build - | US 51 at Town Line RdB10.2 sec.B10.4 sec.Future (2015) No-Build Level of Service Summary - Weekday Peak-HourIntersectionsFuture No-Build - AM Future No-Build - PMLOSDelayLOSDelaySH 11 at County Highway GC24.1 sec.C22.8 sec. | ||
US 51 at Highway 11C29.3 sec.C26.3 sec. | US 51 at Highway 11C29.3 sec.C26.3 sec. | ||
US 51 at Town Line RdB10.5 sec.B10.6 sec.Future (2015) Construction Level of Service Summary - Weekday Peak- | US 51 at Town Line RdB10.5 sec.B10.6 sec.Future (2015) Construction Level of Service Summary - Weekday Peak-HourIntersections Future Construction Phase - AMFuture ConstructionPhase - PMLOSDelayLOSDelaySH 11 at County Highway GC24.0 sec.C22.9 sec. | ||
US 51 at Highway 11C31.7 sec.C26.3 sec.US 51 at Town Line RdB10.5 sec.B10.6 sec.US 51 at SHINE siteA0.4 sec.A0.9 sec.Future (2016) Operations Level of Service Summary - Weekday Peak-HourIntersectionsFuture OperationsPhase - AMFuture OperationsPhase - PMLOSDelayLOSDelaySH 11 at County Highway GC24.3 sec.C23.3 sec. | US 51 at Highway 11C31.7 sec.C26.3 sec.US 51 at Town Line RdB10.5 sec.B10.6 sec.US 51 at SHINE siteA0.4 sec.A0.9 sec.Future (2016) Operations Level of Service Summary - Weekday Peak-HourIntersectionsFuture OperationsPhase - AMFuture OperationsPhase - PMLOSDelayLOSDelaySH 11 at County Highway GC24.3 sec.C23.3 sec. | ||
US 51 at Highway | US 51 at Highway 11 D(a)42.9 sec.C26.5 sec.US 51 at Town Line RdB10.5 sec.B10.7 sec. | ||
US 51 at SHINE siteA1.1 sec.A1.5 sec. | US 51 at SHINE siteA1.1 sec.A1.5 sec. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-60Rev. 0Table 19.4.7-3 Summary of the Effects of Mitigative Measures on Traffic ConditionsduringOperationsFuture (2016) Build-Out Mitigated Level of Service Summary - Weekday Peak-HourIntersectionFuture OperationsPhase (Mitigated) - AM Future Operations Phase(Mitigated) - PMLOSDelayLOSDelaySH 11 at County Highway GC20.5 sec.C23.3 sec.US 51 at Highway 11 (a)C27.9 sec.C26.5 sec.US 51 at Town Line RdB10.5 sec.B10.7 sec.US 51 at Project SiteA1.1 sec.A1.5 sec.a) Mitigation consists of signal improvements only Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-61Rev. 019.4.8HUMAN HEALTH19.4.8.1Nonradiological ImpactsThe following subsections discuss the potential nonradiological public and occupational hazards as they pertain to the operation of the SHINE facility. Regulations for generating, managing, handling, storing, treating, protecting, and disposing of wastes during construction, operation, and decommissioning are contained in federal regulations issued and overseen by the NRC and USEPA, and in WDNR. These regulations include comp liance with provisions of the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Atomic Energy Act, and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), among others. Specific ally for Wisconsin, the potentially applic able Environmental Management Regulations are provided in statutes (including Chapters 166, 254, 280, 281, 283, 285, 287, 291, 292 and 299) and the Wisconsin Administrative Code (NR series).Nonradiological hazards are associated with emissions, discharges, and waste from processes within the facility as well as accidental spills/releases. Nonradioactive wastes generated by construction, operation, and decommissioning of the new plant, including solid wastes, liquid wastes, discharges and air emissions, are managed in accordance with applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations, and applicable permit requirements. 19.4.8.1.1Nonradioactive Chemical SourcesDuring construction nonradioactive chemical sources are expected to be on-site in liquid, gaseous and solid forms including fuels, oils, solvents, and other materials necessary for site preparation and construction. During operation, in addition to radioactive chemical sources, production processes include nonradioactive chemical sources in liquid, gaseous and solid forms. For a given industrial facility, pollutants may be present in wastewater and air emissions associated with the production facility. Solid wastes are also generated. The great majority of chemicals in the SHINE facility are either reused or shipped off-site as radioactive waste. Consequently, the focus of the following subsections are impacts of air emissions and solid waste.The bounding inventory of major chemicals (i.e., those in excess of 1000 pounds [454kilograms]) used during operations at the SHINE facility are provided in Table 19.4.8-1. Additionally, Table19.4.8-2 provides information regarding the characteristics of storage of these chemicals by chemical group and maximum inventory.19.4.8.1.2Nonradioactive Liquid, Gaseous, and Solid Waste Management and Control Systems19.4.8.1.2.1Liquid Wastes The great majority of chemical processes at the SHINE facility are conducted inside of the RCA. Any wastes created by these processes are disposed of as radioactive waste and shipped off-site. Some lab-scale chemical use occurs outside the RCA. Liquid wastes produced as a result of these activities are treated to ensure they meet the requirements of the Janesville wastewater treatment facility before being discharged to the municipal sewer. Facility sanitary wastewater is also sent to the Janesville wastewater treatment facility. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-62Rev. 019.4.8.1.2.2Gaseous WastesThe SHINE facility generates gaseous effluents resulting from process operations and the ventilation of operating areas. The non-radiological contaminants associated with this discharge are described and assessed in Subsection 19.4.2. The gaseous effluent from ventilation of operating areas includes the following control systems: *The Zone 1 exhaust airstream passes through two stages of HEPA filtration and a single stage activated carbon bed prior to discharge from the stack*The Zone 2 and Zone 3 exhaust airstreams pass through two stages of HEPA filtration prior to discharge from the stack*Additional controls may be implemented as required by local permit conditions. All the gaseous effluents from the main facility building are vented to the atmosphere through the main stack. | ||
19.4.8.1.2.3Solid WastesThe following is a representative list of nonradioactive solid wastes that are anticipated to be generated by the project during construction, operation, and decommissioning: *Wood from crates*Packaging from receiving activities*Spent personal protective equipment (PPE)*Broken mechanical parts | 19.4.8.1.2.3Solid WastesThe following is a representative list of nonradioactive solid wastes that are anticipated to be generated by the project during construction, operation, and decommissioning: *Wood from crates*Packaging from receiving activities*Spent personal protective equipment (PPE)*Broken mechanical parts | ||
*Metal shavings*Piping*Wires | *Metal shavings*Piping*Wires | ||
| Line 455: | Line 888: | ||
*Paper*Hoses*Empty plastic containers | *Paper*Hoses*Empty plastic containers | ||
*Expired ink cartridgesOther nonradioactive solid wastes are anticipated to be generated in conjunction with routine operations (e.g, office and cleaning supplies, etc.). Solid waste management and control measures for the SHINE facility include waste reduction, recycling and waste minimization practices that are employed during all project phases (construction, operation, decommissioning). Management practices that are used by SHINE include the following:a)Nonradioactive solid wastes (e.g., office waste, recyclables) are collected and stored temporarily on the SHINE site and disposed of or recycled locally.b)Scrap metal, universal wastes (federally designated as universal waste including batteries, pesticides, mercury-containing equipment and bulbs [lamps]), used oil and antifreeze are collected and stored, and recycled or recovered at an off-site permitted recycling or recovery facility, as appropriate. | *Expired ink cartridgesOther nonradioactive solid wastes are anticipated to be generated in conjunction with routine operations (e.g, office and cleaning supplies, etc.). Solid waste management and control measures for the SHINE facility include waste reduction, recycling and waste minimization practices that are employed during all project phases (construction, operation, decommissioning). Management practices that are used by SHINE include the following:a)Nonradioactive solid wastes (e.g., office waste, recyclables) are collected and stored temporarily on the SHINE site and disposed of or recycled locally.b)Scrap metal, universal wastes (federally designated as universal waste including batteries, pesticides, mercury-containing equipment and bulbs [lamps]), used oil and antifreeze are collected and stored, and recycled or recovered at an off-site permitted recycling or recovery facility, as appropriate. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-63Rev. 019.4.8.1.3Nonradioactive Effluents ReleasedA list of chemicals released as air emissions during operation to the on-site and off-site environment are provided in Subsection 19.4.2. This subsection provides information regarding the sources, composition and quantity of the air emissions from the SHINE facility.The SHINE facility releases small amounts of maintenance and lab chemicals to the city sewer from outside the RCA. Administrative controls ensure that these effluents meet the requirements of the Janesville wastewater treatment facility before they are released. Additionally, the facility sanitary wastewater is treated by the Janesville wastewater treatment facility.19.4.8.1.4Chemical Exposure to the Public19.4.8.1.4.1Air EmissionsCalculated chemical exposure to the public is described and discussed in Subsection 19.4.2.1 regarding air emissions from the SHINE facility. Potential air emissions effects to the public are limited to indirect impacts as they are off-site. Consequently, there are no direct impacts to the public from air emissions. To estimate the impacts of non-radiological pollutants from the boiler and heaters, the AERMOD Modeling System is used. The AERMOD system is a state-of-the-science dispersion model system that the USEPA promulgated in 2005 to replace the ISC model. Table 19.4.2-10 shows that the total concentration, with background included, is no more than 32percent of the NAAQS for CO, NO 2, PM10, and SO2. The total concentration for PM2.5 is 68percent and 83percent of the NAAQS for the 24-hr. | ||
and annual average, respectively. However, most of that is consumed by the background concentration.No impacts exceed the primary ambient air quality standards that have been established to protect public health, including the health of sensitive populations such as children, the elderly, and those with respiratory problems. Therefore, pollutant impacts within a reasonable area that could be impacted and at points of the maximum individual exposure are SMALL.19.4.8.1.4.2Liquid EffluentsAs described in Subsection 19.4.8.1.3 the SHINE facility does not result in point source releases to the environment, as wastewater discharges are sent to the City of Janesville for treatment. The RCA, which contains the majority of SHINE processes, is zero discharge. There are no direct or indirect impacts of liquid effluents from the SHINE facility. Therefore, the impact on human health from liquid discharges is SMALL. 19.4.8.1.5Physical Occupational Hazards The exposure characteristics of the workforce for non-radiological hazards will be defined when the operating strategies are finalized. Because occupational hazards occur on-site and during construction, operation and decommissioning of the SHINE facility they are considered direct impacts. No indirect impacts (off-site) are identified. Table 19.4.8.1-3 lists the general types of occupational physical hazards that may be present at the SHINE facility. Occupational physical hazards are addressed and managed to be reduced or eliminated through implementation of safety practices, training and control measures. In summary, occupational hazards are managed Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-64Rev. 0and minimized by compliance with Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations and therefore impacts from physical occupational hazards are SMALL.19.4.8.1.6Chemical Exposure to the WorkforceAs planned, the SHINE facility will not store or use highly hazardous chemicals in quantities above the Threshold Quantities in Appendix A to 29 CFR 1910.119 during construction. During operation, quantities of nitric acid above the Threshold Quantity will be present on-site and therefore, the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.119 Process Safety Management of Highly Hazardous Chemicals apply to the facility. The majority of process chemicals are used in liquid form and contained in tanks, pipes and hot cells, limiting workforce exposure. Because potential chemical exposure to the workforce during operation of the SHINE facility occurs on-site, they are considered direct impacts. No indirect impacts (off-site) are identified. The facility is designed and practices are applied to keep air contaminants below the limits in 29CFR 1910.1000. In summary, occupational hazards are managed and minimized by compliance with OSHA regulations and therefore impacts from chemical occupational hazards are SMALL.19.4.8.1.7Environmental Monitoring ProgramsApplicable regulations and attending administrative codes that prescribe monitoring requirements may include those associated with emergency management, environmental health, drinking water, water and sewage, pollution discharge, air pollution, hazardous waste management and remedial action. The following statutes are included in Wisconsin's Environmental Management Regulations: *Chapter 166Emergency Management - Emergency planning and Community Right-to-Know Act planning, notification and reporting*Chapter 254Environmental Health - Lead, asbestos, radiation protection, recreational sanitation, animal-borne and vector-borne disease control*Chapter 280Pure Drinking Water - Groundwater and water wells*Chapter 281Water and Sewage - General water resource statute | |||
*Chapter 283Pollution Discharge Elimination - Water pollutant discharge systems *Chapter 285Air Pollution - Air pollution statute*Chapter 291Hazardous Waste Management - Hazardous waste statute | *Chapter 283Pollution Discharge Elimination - Water pollutant discharge systems *Chapter 285Air Pollution - Air pollution statute*Chapter 291Hazardous Waste Management - Hazardous waste statute | ||
*Chapter 292Remedial Action - Includes hazardous substance releases and reportingSpecifically, regulations cited Chapters 283, 285, and 291 and attending administrative codes will be operative and SHINE is committed to complying with all applicable regulations and monitoring requirements as determined by permitting process. The SHINE facility generates gaseous effluents resulting from process operations, the ventilation of operating areas and boiler emissions from facility buildings. Specific monitoring requirements in support of required air permits will be determined through the permitting process.19.4.8.1.8Mitigation MeasuresMitigative measures are used to ensure protection of human health including workplace and environmental regulations. SHINE is committed to best management practices during construction, operation, and decommissioning to minimize pollutant releases to on-site and Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical | *Chapter 292Remedial Action - Includes hazardous substance releases and reportingSpecifically, regulations cited Chapters 283, 285, and 291 and attending administrative codes will be operative and SHINE is committed to complying with all applicable regulations and monitoring requirements as determined by permitting process. The SHINE facility generates gaseous effluents resulting from process operations, the ventilation of operating areas and boiler emissions from facility buildings. Specific monitoring requirements in support of required air permits will be determined through the permitting process.19.4.8.1.8Mitigation MeasuresMitigative measures are used to ensure protection of human health including workplace and environmental regulations. SHINE is committed to best management practices during construction, operation, and decommissioning to minimize pollutant releases to on-site and Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-65Rev. 0off-site areas, delivery of all facility wastewater to the Janesville wastewater treatment facility, and air emission controls, as appropriate. The facility is designed such that there is no liquid discharge from the RCA. Required permits will be obtained for effluents and emissions. Furthermore, waste reduction practices are employed including recycling and waste minimization.19.4.8.2Radiological Impacts This subsection describes the public and occupational heath impacts from radioactive material due to normal operational activities at the SHINE facility. | ||
19.4.8.2.1Layout and Location of Radioactive MaterialFigure19.2.1-1 depicts the physical layout of the site with labeled buildings, site features, and designated areas. | 19.4.8.2.1Layout and Location of Radioactive MaterialFigure19.2.1-1 depicts the physical layout of the site with labeled buildings, site features, and designated areas. | ||
Radioactive material is expected within the following buildings:*Production facility building-Receiving area-Rejected material-Receipt inspection | Radioactive material is expected within the following buildings:*Production facility building-Receiving area-Rejected material-Receipt inspection | ||
-Target solution preparation-Target solution cleanup area-Noble gas storage | -Target solution preparation-Target solution cleanup area-Noble gas storage | ||
-Hot cells-Gloveboxes-Irradiation Unit cells | -Hot cells-Gloveboxes-Irradiation Unit cells | ||
-Health physics (hot)-Hot lab-Radioactive waste packaging*Waste staging and shipping building19.4.8.2.2Characteristics of Radiation Sources and Expected Radioactive EffluentsThe three common sources of radiation for operating nuclear facilities and the expected effluents released from the SHINE facility are discussed in this subsection.19.4.8.2.2.1Gaseous Sources of RadiationThe radioactive gaseous effluent exhaust from the vent stack is expected to contain measurable quantities of the noble gases krypton and xenon, in addition to iodine. Some particulate activity (other than iodine) and tritium could also be released in airborne effluents; however, most of the off-site exposure due to airborne effluent releases is expected to be associated with noble gas and radioactive iodine releases. | -Health physics (hot)-Hot lab-Radioactive waste packaging*Waste staging and shipping building19.4.8.2.2Characteristics of Radiation Sources and Expected Radioactive EffluentsThe three common sources of radiation for operating nuclear facilities and the expected effluents | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical | |||
released from the SHINE facility are discussed in this subsection.19.4.8.2.2.1Gaseous Sources of RadiationThe radioactive gaseous effluent exhaust from the vent stack is expected to contain measurable quantities of the noble gases krypton and xenon, in addition to iodine. Some particulate activity (other than iodine) and tritium could also be released in airborne effluents; however, most of the off-site exposure due to airborne effluent releases is expected to be associated with noble gas and radioactive iodine releases. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-66Rev. 0Radioactive gaseous effluents produced in the SHINE facility due to normal operations consist of off-gas from the irradiated target solution. In addition, maintenance operations on the accelerator are expected to result in the release of some tritium gas, which is used as the accelerator target. All gaseous effluents rel eased from the SHINE facility are combined and released through a single vent stack. 19.4.8.2.2.2Liquid Sources of Radiation As stated in Subsection 19.2.5.3.4, the radioactive liquid waste produced due to normal operations at the SHINE facility is solidified and shipped off-site. No radioactive liquid waste is discharged from the SHINE facility. Therefore, there are no liquid sources of radiation released to the environment due to normal operations at the SHINE facility. 19.4.8.2.2.3Fixed Sources of RadiationThere are two buildings that contain fixed sources of radiation that contribute to direct dose: the production facility building, which contains sources created during production operations within the RCA (e.g., TSV irradiation, molybdenum-99 [Mo-99] separation), and the waste staging and shipping building, which contains sources associated with staging of solidified radioactive waste prior to shipment off-site.19.4.8.2.3Baseline Radiation LevelsBaseline radiation levels on-site and in the vicinity of the SHINE site are discussed in Subsection 19.3.8. There are no identified abnormal sources of radiation on-site or within the vicinity of the SHINE site that would cause radiation levels to be any higher than the expected natural background radiation level. Therefore, the annual background dose at the site due to terrestrial and cosmic radiation is approximately 279 millirem per year (mrem/yr) (2.79 millisievert per year [mSv/yr]) (Subsection 19.3.8.2).19.4.8.2.4Calculated Annual Total Effective Dose Equivalent, Annual Average Airborne Radioactivity Concentration, and Annual Average Waterborne Radioactivity ConcentrationThis subsection discusses the calculated annual total effective dose equivalent (TEDE), annual average airborne radioactivity concentration, and annual average waterborne radioactivity concentration at the dose receptor corresponding to the maximally exposed individual (MEI). | |||
The MEI is located at the site boundary where the doses due to normal operations are expected to be maximized. Additionally, TEDE, annual average airborne radioactivity concentration, and annual average waterborne radioactivity concentration to the nearest full-time resident is discussed. The doses to the public calculated in the following subsections are considered direct effects of operation of the SHINE facility. The radiation dose to the public due to transportation of radioactive waste is discussed in Subsection 19.4.10. The dose to the public due to the transportation of radioactive waste is considered an indirect effect of SHINE facility operation. | The MEI is located at the site boundary where the doses due to normal operations are expected to be maximized. Additionally, TEDE, annual average airborne radioactivity concentration, and annual average waterborne radioactivity concentration to the nearest full-time resident is discussed. The doses to the public calculated in the following subsections are considered direct effects of operation of the SHINE facility. The radiation dose to the public due to transportation of radioactive waste is discussed in Subsection 19.4.10. The dose to the public due to the transportation of radioactive waste is considered an indirect effect of SHINE facility operation. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-67Rev. 119.4.8.2.4.1Gaseous EffluentsSources of radioactive gaseous effluents are discussed in Subsection 19.4.8.2.2.1. The effluents, which consist of the noble gases krypton and xenon, in addition to iodine and tritium, are released to the environment through the production facility building vent stack. Prior to release to the environment, gaseous effluents are held up to allow for decay.The methodologies used to calculate the annual TEDE to a maximally exposed member of the public and the nearest full-time resident are discussed here.Annual off-site doses due to the normal operation of the SHINE facility have been calculated using the computer code GENII2 (PNNL, 2012). The GENII2 computer code was developed for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), and is distributed by the Radiation Safety Information Computational Center (RSICC). Annual average relative atmospheric concentration (/Q) values were determined using the methodology in Regulatory Guide 1.111 (NRC, 1977) with the meteorological data in Section 2.3. The limit on calculated dose is the annual limit of 0.1 rem in a year to an individual member of the public as specified in 10 CFR 20.1301. Also, a dose constraint of 10 mrem TEDE per year due to air emissions is specified in 10 CFR 20.1101(d). The calculated dose is compared to the acceptance criteria of the 10 CFR 20.1301 dose limit and the 10 CFR 20.1101(d) dose constraint.The dose analysis using the GENII2 code considered the release of airborne radionuclides and exposure to off-site individuals through direct exposure and potential environmental pathways, such as leafy vegetable ingestion, meat ingestion, and milk ingestion. The analysis considered variations in consumption and other parameters by age group, and considered potential doses in each of the 16 meteorological sectors. The doses from each pathway were summed and compared to the acceptance criteria.Dose due to the deposition and ingestion pathways are less than the dose due to airborne sources of radiation. Annual TEDE due to gaseous effluents released from the SHINE facility at the location of the MEI and nearest full-time resident are listed in Table 19.4.8-5.As discussed in the following Subsections 19.4.8.2.4.2 and 19.4.8.2.4.3, the doses due to liquid effluents and direct dose from fixed radiation sources are negligible compared to the airborne sources of radiation. The results contained in Table 19.4.8-5 represent the annual TEDE to the MEI and nearest full-time resident for the sources of radiation due to normal operations at the SHINE facility.Because the results in Table 19.4.8-5 are within the dose constraints explained earlier in this subsection, the radiological impacts to members of the public due to operation of the SHINE facility are SMALL. | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-67Rev. 119.4.8.2.4.1Gaseous EffluentsSources of radioactive gaseous effluents are discussed in Subsection 19.4.8.2.2.1. The effluents, which consist of the noble gases krypton and xenon, in addition to iodine and tritium, are released to the environment through the production facility building vent stack. Prior to release to the environment, gaseous effluents are held up to allow for decay.The methodologies used to calculate the annual TEDE to a maximally exposed member of the public and the nearest full-time resident are discussed here.Annual off-site doses due to the normal operation of the SHINE facility have been calculated using the computer code GENII2 (PNNL, 2012). The GENII2 computer code was developed for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), and is distributed by the Radiation Safety Information Computational Center (RSICC). Annual average relative atmospheric concentration (/Q) values were determined using the methodology in Regulatory Guide 1.111 (NRC, 1977) with the meteorological data in Section 2.3. The limit on calculated dose is the annual limit of 0.1 rem in a year to an individual member of the public as specified in 10 CFR 20.1301. Also, a dose constraint of 10 mrem TEDE per year due to air emissions is specified in 10 CFR 20.1101(d). The calculated dose is compared to the acceptance criteria of the 10 CFR 20.1301 dose limit and the 10 CFR 20.1101(d) dose constraint.The dose analysis using the GENII2 code considered the release of airborne radionuclides and exposure to off-site individuals through direct exposure and potential environmental pathways, such as leafy vegetable ingestion, meat ingestion, and milk ingestion. The analysis considered variations in consumption and other parameters by age group, and considered potential doses in each of the 16 meteorological sectors. The doses from each pathway were summed and compared to the acceptance criteria.Dose due to the deposition and ingestion pathways are less than the dose due to airborne sources of radiation. Annual TEDE due to gaseous effluents released from the SHINE facility at the location of the MEI and nearest full-time resident are listed in Table 19.4.8-5.As discussed in the following Subsections 19.4.8.2.4.2 and 19.4.8.2.4.3, the doses due to liquid effluents and direct dose from fixed radiation sources are negligible compared to the airborne sources of radiation. The results contained in Table 19.4.8-5 represent the annual TEDE to the MEI and nearest full-time resident for the sources of radiation due to normal operations at the SHINE facility.Because the results in Table 19.4.8-5 are within the dose constraints explained earlier in this subsection, the radiological impacts to members of the public due to operation of the SHINE facility are SMALL. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-68Rev. 019.4.8.2.4.2Liquid EffluentsAs described in Subsection 19.4.8.2.2.2, the SHINE facility does not generate radioactive liquid waste as candidate material for effluent release. As a result, there are no liquid effluent pathways that contribute to waterborne radioactivity concentrations. Because there are no discharges of radioactive liquid effluent at the SHINE site, the annual averaged waterborne radioactivity concentration is not expected to be greater than the baseline concentration.19.4.8.2.4.3Direct DoseFrom Subsection 19.4.8.2.2.3, fixed sources of radiation inside the production facility building are due to the radioactive materials used for solution preparation, Mo-99 production operations (e.g.,TSV irradiation, holding tanks), and the staging of radioactive waste. The source of radiation inside the waste staging and shipping building is solidified radioactive waste. | ||
Both the production facility and the waste staging and shipping building are designed with appropriate shielding to meet the 10 percent of 10 CFR 20.1301 limits on the outer wall of the RCA in the production facility and at the outer wall of the waste staging and shipping building.The direct dose to a member of the public at the boundary of the unrestricted area (the site boundary) is due to gamma radiation penetrating the walls of the production facility and the waste staging and shipping facility. The direct dose is small outside of the buildings, due to site shielding design, and the dose will decrease with increasing distance. Because the nearest site boundary is located at an appreciable distance from both fixed sources, the dose is negligible at the site boundary.19.4.8.2.5Annual Dose to Maximally Exposed Worker Administrative dose limits are occupational radiation exposure limits that radiation workers at SHINE shall not exceed without prior management approval. Table 19.4.8-7 gives SHINE administrative dose limits. 10 CFR Part 20 limits are also provided for reference. | Both the production facility and the waste staging and shipping building are designed with appropriate shielding to meet the 10 percent of 10 CFR 20.1301 limits on the outer wall of the RCA in the production facility and at the outer wall of the waste staging and shipping building.The direct dose to a member of the public at the boundary of the unrestricted area (the site boundary) is due to gamma radiation penetrating the walls of the production facility and the waste staging and shipping facility. The direct dose is small outside of the buildings, due to site shielding design, and the dose will decrease with increasing distance. Because the nearest site boundary is located at an appreciable distance from both fixed sources, the dose is negligible at the site boundary.19.4.8.2.5Annual Dose to Maximally Exposed Worker Administrative dose limits are occupational radiation exposure limits that radiation workers at SHINE shall not exceed without prior management approval. Table 19.4.8-7 gives SHINE administrative dose limits. 10 CFR Part 20 limits are also provided for reference. | ||
19.4.8.2.6Radiation Exposure Mitigation Measures Occupational and public exposures due to operations at the SHINE site are ALARA. This exposure minimization goal is met through both engineered and administrative controls. The following subsections discuss each individually.19.4.8.2.6.1Engineered ControlsThe SHINE facility utilizes the following engineered controls to minimize radiation exposure to the public and workers:*Radiation source identification*Shielding around radiation sources | 19.4.8.2.6Radiation Exposure Mitigation Measures Occupational and public exposures due to operations at the SHINE site are ALARA. This exposure minimization goal is met through both engineered and administrative controls. The following subsections discuss each individually.19.4.8.2.6.1Engineered ControlsThe SHINE facility utilizes the following engineered controls to minimize radiation exposure to the public and workers:*Radiation source identification*Shielding around radiation sources | ||
*Ventilation control*Access control to radiation areas*Contamination control Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical | *Ventilation control*Access control to radiation areas*Contamination control Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-69Rev. 0*Remote operation*Waste minimization19.4.8.2.6.2Administrative ControlsTo minimize radiation exposure to the public and workers, the SHINE facility utilizes administrative controls, which 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 | *General environmental hazards regarding the facility*Waste minimization requirements | ||
*Waste minimization goals | *Waste minimization goals | ||
*Waste minimization accomplishments*Specific environmental issues*Responsibilities for environmental stewardship | *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 activities19.4.8.3Radiological MonitoringRadiological monitoring includes effluent monitoring and environmental monitoring.19.4.8.3.1Radiological Effluent MonitoringThe radiological effluent monitoring program is established to identify and quantify principal radionuclides in effluents (Regulatory Position C.1 of Regulatory Guide 1.21). This can be used to verify that the SHINE facility is performing as expected and within its design parameters so that doses to individual members of the public remain within 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. All effluent pathways that could be a significant release pathway for radioactive material from the SHINE facility include radiological effluent monitoring. 19.4.8.3.1.1Gaseous Effluent MonitoringAll gaseous effluents released from the SHINE facility (i.e., TSV off-gas, PVVS exhaust, and ventilation exhaust) are combined and released through a single vent stack. The airborne effluent exhaust from the vent stack is expected to contain measurable quantities of noble gas radioactivity (i.e., xenon and krypton). There could also be radioactive iodine, radioactive particulates, and tritium in the airborne effluent exhaust. Due to the expectation of having measurable quantities of radioactivity in the airborne effluent and since malfunction of the exhaust carbon filtration system could result in a change in iodine radioactivity releases, the combined exhaust in the vent stack is continuously monitored for gross gamma radioactivity using an off-line gas monitor. There are also grab sampling provisions to routinely collect and analyze gas, particulate, iodine, and tritium samples from the combined exhaust in the vent stack in order to identify radionuclides, identify | *Employee recognition for efforts to improve environmental conditions*Requirements for employees to consider environmental issues in day-to-day activities19.4.8.3Radiological MonitoringRadiological monitoring includes effluent monitoring and environmental monitoring.19.4.8.3.1Radiological Effluent MonitoringThe radiological effluent monitoring program is established to identify and quantify principal radionuclides in effluents (Regulatory Position C.1 of Regulatory Guide 1.21). This can be used to verify that the SHINE facility is performing as expected and within its design parameters so that doses to individual members of the public remain within 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. All effluent pathways that could be a significant release pathway for radioactive material from the SHINE facility include radiological effluent monitoring. 19.4.8.3.1.1Gaseous Effluent MonitoringAll gaseous effluents released from the SHINE facility (i.e., TSV off-gas, PVVS exhaust, and ventilation exhaust) are combined and released through a single vent stack. The airborne effluent exhaust from the vent stack is expected to contain measurable quantities of noble gas radioactivity (i.e., xenon and krypton). There could also be radioactive iodine, radioactive particulates, and tritium in the airborne effluent exhaust. Due to the expectation of having measurable quantities of radioactivity in the airborne effluent and since malfunction of the exhaust carbon filtration system could result in a change in iodine radioactivity releases, the combined exhaust in the vent stack is continuously monitored for gross gamma radioactivity using an off-line gas monitor. There are also grab sampling provisions to routinely collect and analyze gas, particulate, iodine, and tritium samples from the combined exhaust in the vent stack in order to identify radionuclides, identify relati ve concentrations of radionuclides in the airborne effluent, and quantify radionuclide releases. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-70Rev. 019.4.8.3.1.2Liquid Effluent MonitoringThe SHINE facility releases no radioactive liquid effluent due to extensive reuse of process liquids. As such, there are no defined liquid effluent release pathways from the RCA and no requirement for radiation monitoring of liquid effluent release pathways.19.4.8.3.2Radiological Environmental Monitoring The requirement to have a radiological environmental monitoring program is documented in 10CFR 20.1302. The radiological environmental monitoring program 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. Methods for establishing and conducting environmental monitoring are provided in Regulatory Guide 4.1. Regulatory Guide 4.1 refers to NUREG-1301 for detailed guidance for conducting effluent and environmental monitoring. Although Regulatory Guide 4.1 and NUREG-1301 are written for nuclear power plants, due to the similarities between airborne releases of radioactivity from nuclear power plants and those released from the SHINE facility, guidance provided in Regulatory Guide 4.1 and NUREG-1301 was considered when developing radiological environmental monitoring for the SHINE facility. Specifically, guidance provided in Figure 1 of Regulatory Guide 4.1 and Table 3.12-1 of NUREG-1301 was considered when determining which exposure pathways to sample, sample locations, types of samples, and sample frequencies for the SHINE facility. The following radiation exposure pathways are considered for monitoring under the radiological environmental monitoring program: *Waterborne exposure pathway. | ||
*Direct radiation exposure pathway monitored using thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs). *Airborne exposure pathway | *Direct radiation exposure pathway monitored using thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs). *Airborne exposure pathway monitore d using continuous air samples. *Ingestion exposure pathway (monitored only if triggered).19.4.8.3.2.1Waterborne Exposure Pathway (Groundwater Sampling)There is no liquid effluent release pathway from the RCA associated with the SHINE facility and thus surface waters of the rivers in the vicinity of the plant (e.g.,the Rock River and its tributaries) are not expected to accumulate detectable levels of radioactivity. As such, surface water sampling is not included in the radiological environmental monitoring plan. Similarly marine life in the rivers is not expected to accumulate detectable levels of radioactivity and thus sampling of fish or other marine creatures for the ingestion pathway is not included in the radiological environmental monitoring plan. Measured local water table elevations for the site identify the groundwater gradient and indicate that the groundwater flow is to the west and to the south. The nearest drinking water source is a well which is located approximately a third of a mile (0.54 km) to the northwest of the facility. There are four test wells within the property boundary (see Figure 19.3.4-4) for the SHINE facility that were used for monitoring groundwater in support of a hydrological assessment of the site. One test well is located north, one south, one east, and one west of the SHINE facility building. | ||
Although there are no defined liquid effluent release pathways and the groundwater is not Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical | Although there are no defined liquid effluent release pathways and the groundwater is not Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-71Rev. 0expected to be contaminated due to operation of the SHINE facility, in accordance with NUREG-1301 recommendations, the test wells to the west and the south are sampled for the presence of radionuclide contaminants. Sampling is in accordance with the recommendations in Table 3.12-1 of NUREG-1301, i.e., quarterly with gamma isotopic and tritium analysis. The rationale for sampling the test wells to the west and south of the SHINE facility is provided in Table19.4.8-6. 19.4.8.3.2.2Direct Exposure Pathway (Thermoluminescent Dosimeters)TLDs provide indication of direct radiation from contained radiation sources within the SHINE facility building, from radiation sources contained within the waste storage and shipping facility, from radioactivity in the airborne effluent, and from deposition of airborne radioactivity onto the ground. A description of TLD locations and the rationale for TLD locations are provided in Table19.4.8-6. TLD locations are shown on Figure19.4.8-1. Table 3.12-1 of NUREG-1301 recommends 40 TLD locations, i.e., an inner ring and an outer ring of TLDs with one TLD in each ring at each of the 16 meteorological sectors and the balance of TLDs to be located at special interest areas. At least one TLD is to serve as a control, i.e., located a significant distance from the facility such that it represents a background dose. Considering the size of the SHINE facility and the low power level of the SHINE subcritical irradiation units (IUs), a minimum number of TLD locations (i.e., nine) are specified. These are located in order to provide annual direct dose information at on-site locations which are expected to have significant occupancy and at property line locations in the north, south, east, and west directions (to ensure all directions are monitored). These property line locations include the direction of the theoretical MEI and the direction of the nearest occupied structure. In addition, at least one location includes a paired TLD so that data quality can be determined.19.4.8.3.2.3Airborne Exposure Pathway (Airborne Sampling)Airborne effluent releases from the SHINE facility contribute to off-site doses. Effluent streams from the SHINE facility that have the potential to include radioactive iodine are treated (e.g.,using silver-impregnated zeolite and/or carbon filters) to remove the iodine. Some particulate activity (other than iodine) and tritium could also be released in airborne effluents; however, most of the off-site exposure due to airborne effluent releases is associated with noble gas and radioactive iodine releases. Environmental airborne sampling is performed to identify and quantify particulates and radioiodine in airborne effluents. Regulatory Position C.3.b of Regulatory Guide 4.1 indicates that airborne sampling should always be included in the environmental monitoring programs for nuclear power plants since the airborne effluent pathway exists at all sites. Since the SHINE facility includes airborne effluent releases and radioactivity in the airborne effluent can result in measurable off-site doses and since there is a potential for a portion of the dose to be attributable to radioactive iodine and possibly airborne particulate radioactivity releases, the radiological environmental monitoring program includes airborne sampling. The guidance provided in Table 3.12-1 of NUREG-1301 is used to establish locations for airborne sample acquisition, sampling frequency, and type of sample analysis. Continuous air sample locations are specified in accordance with guidance provided in Table 3.12-1 of NUREG-1301. The continuous air monitors (CAM) that are used to obtain continuous air samples include a radioiodine canister for weekly I-131 analysis and a particulate sampler which is analyzed for gross beta radioactivity and for quarterly isotopic analysis. Four CAM locations Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-72Rev. 1are near the facility property line in the north, south, east, and west direction sectors to ensure all directions are monitored. The north and east direction sectors (from the SHINE facility vent stack) have some of the highest calculated annual ground level deposition factor (D/Q) values. | ||
There is also a CAM located a sufficient distance from the SHINE facility to provide background information for airborne activity. Table 3.12-1 of NUREG-1301 suggests an additional CAM location in the vicinity of a community having the highest calculated annual average ground-level D/Q. This CAM requirement is combined with the CAM located at the site boundary in the north direction (refer to Table19.4.8-6). A description of air sample locations and the rationale for air sample locations are provided in Table19.4.8-6. CAM locations are shown on Figure19.4.8-1.19.4.8.3.2.4Ingestion Exposure PathwayNUREG-1301 suggests sampling of various biological media (biota monitoring) as a means to indirectly assess doses due to particulate and iodine ingestion. This type of monitoring may include sampling of soils, broad-leafed plants, fish, meat, or milk. Nuclear power plants have long monitored this pathway and have seen neither appreciable dose nor upward tending. Considering the size of the SHINE facility and the low power level of the SHINE irradiation units, in comparison to nuclear power plants, and that particulate and iodine radionuclides are not normally expected to be present in significant quantities within airborne effluent releases from the SHINE facility, biota monitoring is normally limited to monitoring of the milk pathway, as this pathway is most sensitive for detection of iodine releases. In the event that the results of environmental airborne samples, effluent monitor sample results, or milk sampling results indicate iodine or particulates in quantities large enough to result in a calculated dose greater than that predicted for normal releases (e.g., from GENII models used to show compliance with the 10 CFR 20.1101(d) dose constraint), then a more comprehensive sampling campaign is undertaken.Milk is one of the most important foods contributing to the radiation dose to people if milk animals are pastured in an area near a facility that releases radioactive material. Dairy production takes place approximately one-half mile (0.8 km) to the east of the SHINE facility and goat production takes place at approximately 0.69mi. (1.1km) northeast of the facility. Milk sampling will be performed following guidance (i.e., sampling frequency and type of sample analysis) provided in Table 3.12-1 of NUREG-1301. Cow and goat milk samples would be obtained from the dairy production site and the goat production site, respectively, on a semi-monthly basis (when animals are pastured) and on a monthly basis (at other times). An I-131 analysis and a gamma isotopic analysis would be performed on the samples. Since milk samples are considered a better indicator of radioiodine in the environment than vegetation, as long as milk samples are obtained, it is expected that vegetation sampling (e.g., broad leaf vegetables) would not be included in the exposure pathway sampling (in accordance with guidance provided in Table3.12-1 of NUREG-1301). | There is also a CAM located a sufficient distance from the SHINE facility to provide background information for airborne activity. Table 3.12-1 of NUREG-1301 suggests an additional CAM location in the vicinity of a community having the highest calculated annual average ground-level D/Q. This CAM requirement is combined with the CAM located at the site boundary in the north direction (refer to Table19.4.8-6). A description of air sample locations and the rationale for air sample locations are provided in Table19.4.8-6. CAM locations are shown on Figure19.4.8-1.19.4.8.3.2.4Ingestion Exposure PathwayNUREG-1301 suggests sampling of various biological media (biota monitoring) as a means to indirectly assess doses due to particulate and iodine ingestion. This type of monitoring may include sampling of soils, broad-leafed plants, fish, meat, or milk. Nuclear power plants have long monitored this pathway and have seen neither appreciable dose nor upward tending. Considering the size of the SHINE facility and the low power level of the SHINE irradiation units, in comparison to nuclear power plants, and that particulate and iodine radionuclides are not normally expected to be present in significant quantities within airborne effluent releases from the SHINE facility, biota monitoring is normally limited to monitoring of the milk pathway, as this pathway is most sensitive for detection of iodine releases. In the event that the results of environmental airborne samples, effluent monitor sample results, or milk sampling results indicate iodine or particulates in quantities large enough to result in a calculated dose greater than that predicted for normal releases (e.g., from GENII models used to show compliance with the 10 CFR 20.1101(d) dose constraint), then a more comprehensive sampling campaign is undertaken.Milk is one of the most important foods contributing to the radiation dose to people if milk animals are pastured in an area near a facility that releases radioactive material. Dairy production takes place approximately one-half mile (0.8 km) to the east of the SHINE facility and goat production takes place at approximately 0.69mi. (1.1km) northeast of the facility. Milk sampling will be performed following guidance (i.e., sampling frequency and type of sample analysis) provided in Table 3.12-1 of NUREG-1301. Cow and goat milk samples would be obtained from the dairy production site and the goat production site, respectively, on a semi-monthly basis (when animals are pastured) and on a monthly basis (at other times). An I-131 analysis and a gamma isotopic analysis would be performed on the samples. Since milk samples are considered a better indicator of radioiodine in the environment than vegetation, as long as milk samples are obtained, it is expected that vegetation sampling (e.g., broad leaf vegetables) would not be included in the exposure pathway sampling (in accordance with guidance provided in Table3.12-1 of NUREG-1301). | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-73Rev. 0[Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]Table 19.4.8-1 Summary of Major (a) Chemical Inventory and Quantitya) In excess of 1000 poundsChemicalApproximate Bounding Inventory, lb.Chemical Grouping[Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information] | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical | Nitric Acid 17,600Group 4 - Acids | ||
Organic and Mineral (Large Quantity) Nitric Acid Sulfuric Acid Total 11,600370015,300Stored in mini-bulk plastic tanks Group 5 Bases (Large Quantity)Calcium Hydroxide Caustic (NaOH) | -Organic/Mineral Sulfuric Acid 8100Group 4 - Acids | ||
-Organic/Mineral Calcium Hydroxide4800Group 5 - Bases Caustic (NaOH)1500Group 5 - Basesn-dodecane1600Group 2 - Flammable LiquidsNitrogen20,000 - -Ordinary Portland Cement20,000 - - | |||
Uranyl Sulfate3100 - - | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-74Rev. 0[Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]Table 19.4.8-2 Chemical Storage Area CharacteristicsChemical GroupChemicalApproximate Bounding Inventory of Chemical Reagents, lbs.Storage AreaGroup 2 Flammable Liquids(Large Quantity)n-dodecane1600Stored in accordance with NFPA 30 Requirements.[Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information] [Proprietary Information]Group 4 Acids - | |||
Organic and Mineral (Large Quantity) Nitric Acid Sulfuric Acid Total 11,600370015,300Stored in mini-bulk plastic tanks Group 5 Bases (Large Quantity)Calcium Hydroxide | |||
Caustic (NaOH) | |||
Total4800 1500 6300Stored in dedicated corrosive chemicals cabinet that is coated with corrosion resistant material. | Total4800 1500 6300Stored in dedicated corrosive chemicals cabinet that is coated with corrosion resistant material. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-75Rev. 0Table 19.4.8-3 Potential Occupational HazardsElectricalBattery banks (type unknown) Cable runs Diesel generator Electrical equipment (various) Heaters High voltage | ||
Motors Power tools Pumps Service outlets, fittings Switchgear Transformers Distribution lines\wiring underground wiring Hazardous MaterialsAsphyxiants (inert gas) | |||
Carcinogens (lead shielding) | Carcinogens (lead shielding) | ||
Decontamination materialsFluoridesHydrides LeadOxidizersPoisons (herbicides, insecticides)Thermal Boilers (modular) Bunsen burner/hot plates Electrical wiring Possible exhaust (forklifts) Welding surfaces Welding torch Internal Flooding | Decontamination materialsFluoridesHydrides LeadOxidizersPoisons (herbicides, insecticides)Thermal Boilers (modular) Bunsen burner/hot plates Electrical wiring Possible exhaust (forklifts) Welding surfaces Welding torch Internal Flooding Sources Domestic water Fire suppression piping/process waterLight water poolIonizing Radiation SourcesContamination Neutron beams Radioactive materialRadioactive sources Assay equipmentCriticality eventsSpontaneous CombustionCleaning/decontamination solventsDiesel fuel Grease Nitric acid Paint solvents Open FlameBunsen burnersWelding cutting torches Flammables Cleaning decontamination solvents Hydrogen gasesFlammable liquids Natural gas Paint/paint solvent Propane (forklift) PhysicalSharp edges or pointsPinch points Confined spaceTrippingCombustiblesPaper products (filters) | ||
Wood products (crate/packaging)Plastics (pallets)Chemical ReactionsConcentrationDisassociation ExothermicIncompatible chemical mixingUncontrolled chemical reactionsPyrophoric Material UraniumExplosive Materials Dust (without housekeeping)Explosive gas (hydrogen)Hydrogen (batteries) | Wood products (crate/packaging)Plastics (pallets)Chemical ReactionsConcentrationDisassociation | ||
ExothermicIncompatible chemical mixingUncontrolled chemical reactionsPyrophoric Material UraniumExplosive Materials Dust (without housekeeping)Explosive gas (hydrogen)Hydrogen (batteries) | |||
NitratesPeroxidesPropaneKinetic (Linear and Rotational)Acceleration/deceleration (lifted loads)Bearings (UREX)Belts (fan units) | NitratesPeroxidesPropaneKinetic (Linear and Rotational)Acceleration/deceleration (lifted loads)Bearings (UREX)Belts (fan units) | ||
Carts/dolliesCentrifugal (UREX 3-4000 RPM)Drills (trade shops) | Carts/dolliesCentrifugal (UREX 3-4000 RPM)Drills (trade shops) | ||
FansFork liftsGrinders MotorsPower toolsRail cars (depends on movement option)SawsPotential (Pressure)Autoclaves BoilersCoiled springs (overhead doors)Gas bottles Gas | FansFork liftsGrinders MotorsPower toolsRail cars (depends on movement option)SawsPotential (Pressure)Autoclaves | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical | BoilersCoiled springs (overhead doors)Gas bottles Gas receivers Pressure vessels Pressurized airPotential (Height/Mass)Cranes/hoists Elevated doorsElevated work surfacesElevators LiftLoading dockMezzanines Floor pitsScaffolds and ladders Stacked material | ||
Stairs Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-76Rev. 1Table 19.4.8-4 This table number not used Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-77Rev. 1Table 19.4.8-5 Annual Total Effective Dose Equivalent to the Public at Bounding Dose Receptors (b)Dose ReceptorAnnual TEDE Annual TEDEDose Constraint (a)MEI9.0 mrem(9.0 x 10 | |||
-2 mSv)10 mrem(1.0 x 10 | |||
-1 mSv)Nearest Full-Time Resident6.3 x 10-1 mrem(6.3 x 10 | |||
-3 mSv)a) Dose constraint based on 10 CFR 20.1101(d)b) Values do not include contributions from tritium Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-78Rev. 0Table 19.4.8-6 Environmental Monitoring Locations(Sheet 1 of 2)Monitoring TypeLocationRationaleGroundwater Sampling Locations Test Well SM-GW4A SamplingTest well located directly west of the SHINE facility.The groundwater gradient is to the west and the south and thus any groundwater contamination is likely to flow to the west and to the south. | |||
Test Well SM-GW2A SamplingTest well located directly south of the SHINE facility.The groundwater gradient is to the west and the south and thus any groundwater contamination is likely to flow to the west and to the south. | |||
TLD Locations(a) TLD #1Control TLD at Off-site Location Distance is sufficiently large such that it represents a background dose, i.e., there is no significant dose rate associated with SHINE facility activities or associated with airborne effluents.TLD #2Southeast Corner of Administration BuildingAdministrative Building is expected to be an on-site area with regular occupancy outside the SHINE facility. The southeast corner of the building is closest to the SHINE facility.TLD #3North Side of the support facility buildingThe support facility building is expected to be an on-site area with regular occupancy outside the SHINE facility. The north side of the support facility building is closest to the SHINE facility.TLD #4Operating Area Boundary Fence Directly East of the Waste Staging and Shipping | |||
BuildingTLD is positioned to detect direct radiation from the Waste Staging and Shipping Building.TLD #5Security StationThe Security Station is expected to be normally occupied.TLD #6Property Line to the East of the SHINE facility Vent StackThis location is in the direction of dairy production and the horse pasture. Also the prevailing wind is from the west as indicated by the annual wind rose so this is the location of the MEI. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-79Rev. 0Table 19.4.8-6 Environmental Monitoring Locations(Sheet 2 of 2)a)At least one TLD location includes a paired TLD for data quality determinationMonitoring TypeLocationRationaleTLD #7Property Line to the West of the SHINE facilityThis location ensures all directions are monitored.TLD #8Property Line to the North of the SHINE facility Vent StackThis location is in the direction of Janesville.TLD #9Property Line to the South of the SHINE facility Vent StackThis location is in the direction of the nearest occupied structure. | |||
Air Sampler (CAM) Locations Air Sampler (CAM #1)Off-site LocationControl air sampler located a sufficient distance from the SHINE facility such that airborne samples are unaffected by airborne effluent releases from the facility. | |||
Air Sampler (CAM #2)Close to Property Line, Directly North of the SHINE facility Vent StackThis direction has high D/Q and is in the direction of Janesville. Since the community of Janesville is relatively close to the site boundary, this air sampler location is credited with satisfying two of the conditions for air sample location recommendations in Table 3.12-1 of NUREG-1301. | |||
Air Sampler (CAM #3)Close to Property Line, East of the SHINE facility Vent | |||
StackThis direction has high D/Q and is in the direction of dairy production and the horse pasture. | |||
Air Sampler (CAM #4)Close to Property Line, West of the SHINE facility Vent | |||
StackThis location ensures all directions are monitored. | |||
Air Sampler (CAM #5)Close to Property Line, South of the SHINE facility Vent | |||
StackThis location is in the direction of the nearest occupied structure. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-80Rev. 0Table 19.4.8-7 Administrative Dose LimitsType of Dose10 CFR Part 20 Limit (rem/year) | |||
SHINE Annual Administrative Limit (rem/year)Adult Radiological WorkerThe more limiting of: Total effective dose equivalent to whole body, or Sum of deep-dose equivalent and committed dose equivalent to any organ or tissue other than lens of eye 5500.55Eye dose equivalent to lens of eye 151.5Shallow-dose equivalent to skin of the whole body or any extremity 505Declared Pregnant WorkerDose to embryo/fetus during the entire pregnancy: taken as the sum of the deep-dose equivalent to the woman and the dose to the embryo/fetus from radionuclides in the embryo/fetus and the woman0.5 rem per gestation period0.5 rem per gestation periodIndividual Members of the PublicTotal effective dose equivalent0.10.1 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewWaste ManagementSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-81Rev. 0[Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]19.4.9WASTE MANAGEMENT19.4.9.1Sources and Types of Waste CreatedThe following subsections discuss hazardous, radioactive and mixed wastes associated with the SHINE facility. Nonradioactive wastes are discussed in Subsection 19.4.8.1. | |||
19.4.9.1.1Sources of Hazardous, Radioactive and Mixed WastesThe sources of radioactive liquid, solid, and gaseous waste generated by the operation of the SHINE facility are found in Subsection 19.2.5.1.The only hazardous (or potentially hazardous) materials are [Proprietary Information] and the zeolite beds. Although small quantities of [Proprietary Information] will be used in the sulfate to nitrate conversion process, the [Proprietary Information] sludge is expected to pass TCLP, and is not considered hazardous waste. Waste streams with a hazardous component are mixed low-level waste such as the zeolite beds and are handled as described in Subsection 19.2.5.3.1.19.4.9.1.2Type and Quantity of Hazardous, Radioactive, and Mixed WastesThe type and quantity of radioactive and mixed wastes are provided in Table19.2.5-1. Discussion of nonradiological waste is provided in Subsection 19.4.8.1.19.4.9.2Description of Waste Management SystemsWaste systems designed to collect, store, and process the waste from the SHINE facility are discussed in Subsection 19.2.5.3.19.4.9.3Waste Disposal PlansWaste streams with a hazardous component are mixed low-level waste and are handled as described in Subsection 19.2.5.3.1.The radiological wastes listed in Table 19.2.5-1 are stored on-site for a period of time before they are shipped off-site. The frequency of shipment of each type of waste is provided in Table19.2.5-1. Enough storage capacity is provided on-site to accommodate the amount of waste between shipments to the off-site repositories. How solid and liquid radwaste is handled is discussed in Subsections 19.2.5.3.1 and 19.2.5.3.2. Radioactive waste gases are discussed in Subsections 19.4.8.2.2.1 and 19.4.8.2.4.1.The radioactive wastes will be transported to the destinations listed on Table 19.2.5-1.19.4.9.4Waste-Minimization PlanThe waste minimization plan to reduce the generation of waste from the SHINE facility is discussed in Subsection 19.2.5.6. | 19.4.9.1.1Sources of Hazardous, Radioactive and Mixed WastesThe sources of radioactive liquid, solid, and gaseous waste generated by the operation of the SHINE facility are found in Subsection 19.2.5.1.The only hazardous (or potentially hazardous) materials are [Proprietary Information] and the zeolite beds. Although small quantities of [Proprietary Information] will be used in the sulfate to nitrate conversion process, the [Proprietary Information] sludge is expected to pass TCLP, and is not considered hazardous waste. Waste streams with a hazardous component are mixed low-level waste such as the zeolite beds and are handled as described in Subsection 19.2.5.3.1.19.4.9.1.2Type and Quantity of Hazardous, Radioactive, and Mixed WastesThe type and quantity of radioactive and mixed wastes are provided in Table19.2.5-1. Discussion of nonradiological waste is provided in Subsection 19.4.8.1.19.4.9.2Description of Waste Management SystemsWaste systems designed to collect, store, and process the waste from the SHINE facility are discussed in Subsection 19.2.5.3.19.4.9.3Waste Disposal PlansWaste streams with a hazardous component are mixed low-level waste and are handled as described in Subsection 19.2.5.3.1.The radiological wastes listed in Table 19.2.5-1 are stored on-site for a period of time before they are shipped off-site. The frequency of shipment of each type of waste is provided in Table19.2.5-1. Enough storage capacity is provided on-site to accommodate the amount of waste between shipments to the off-site repositories. How solid and liquid radwaste is handled is discussed in Subsections 19.2.5.3.1 and 19.2.5.3.2. Radioactive waste gases are discussed in Subsections 19.4.8.2.2.1 and 19.4.8.2.4.1.The radioactive wastes will be transported to the destinations listed on Table 19.2.5-1.19.4.9.4Waste-Minimization PlanThe waste minimization plan to reduce the generation of waste from the SHINE facility is discussed in Subsection 19.2.5.6. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewWaste ManagementSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewWaste ManagementSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-82Rev. 019.4.9.5Environmental ImpactsSHINE facility wastes are managed as described in the previous subsections 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. Cumulative impacts are discussed in Subsection 19.4.13.8.2. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-83Rev. 019.4.10TRANSPORTATION19.4.10.1Nuclear Materials TransportedNuclear materials are transported to and from the SHINE facility located in Janesville, Wisconsin. The nuclear material transported to the SHINE facility consists of low enriched uranium (LEU) metal and tritium. The nuclear materials transported from the SHINE facility consist of generated medical isotopes Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133, and the radioactive wastes generated during the production of the medical isotopes. 19.4.10.1.1Transportation Mode and Projected DestinationsThe LEU metal is transported by truck to the SHINE facility from the Y-12 facility located in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. The Y-12 facility is approximately 650 mi. (1046.1 km) by road from Janesville, Wisconsin.The radioactive wastes are transported by truck to various disposal facilities. The highway distances from Janesville, Wisconsin, to the disposal facilities are as follows:*Approximately 1450 mi. (2333.6 km) to the EnergySolutions facility in Clive, Utah.*Approximately 1305 mi. (2100.2 km) to the Waste Control Specialists (WCS) facility in Andrews, Texas.*Approximately 660 mi. (1062.2 km) to the Diversified Scientific Services, Inc. (DSSI) facility in Kingston, Tennessee.The medical isotopes produced at the SHINE facility are transported by air to the various facilities for final processing and distribution to medical facilities. Transportation by truck is used as a back-up in cases where inclement weather does not permit air delivery. The highway distances from Janesville, Wisconsin, to these facilities are as follows:*Approximately 330 mi. (531.1 km) to the Covidien facility in Hazelwood, Missouri.*Approximately 1100 mi. (1770.3 km) to the Lantheus Medical Imaging facility in North Billerica, Massachusetts. *Approximately 975 mi. (1569.1 km) to the Nordion facility in Kanata, Ontario, Canada.19.4.10.1.2Treatment and PackagingThe radioactive wastes generated at the SHINE facility are treated and packaged as discussed in Subsection 19.2.5.3. Solid waste includes used components and equipment. This material is collected, stored in the facility to allow for radioactive decay, and then size-reduced and consolidated for shipment as low specific activity (LSA) material. Higher activity waste is processed and solidified prior to shipment. Liquid waste that cannot be reused is held for radioactive decay and then solidified before shipment.The medical isotopes are extracted from the LEU target solution at the end of each irradiation cycle. The target solution is removed from the TSV and transferred to a hot cell where isotopes are selectively extracted. Purified Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133 are tested by quality control before being packaged for shipment to the various processing facilities. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-84Rev. 0Prior to shipment, all radioactive material is packaged to meet the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) and NRC requirements for the transportation of radioactive materials.19.4.10.1.3Incident-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 medical isotopes and the radioactive wastes (transportation workers and handling workers).The calculation of the incident-free radiological doses is performed using RADCAT/RADTRAN and TRAGIS computer codes. The RADCAT/RADTRAN computer code is used to calculate the doses to the workers and the members of the public using the routes defined by TRAGIS and population data from the USCB. Most of the medical isotopes will be shipped by air, and the doses associated with this transport mode are smaller than the transportation via land routes due to shorter exposure time to the workers and the smaller number of exposed members of the public during air transportation. As described below, transportation scenarios based on land routes are used to conservatively estimate the radiological doses due to medical isotope transport.The TRAGIS computer code is used to determine the highway route distance traveled for a shipment from the SHINE facility to a destination facility. TRAGIS also provides the population density along the route, which is required for calculating the dose to members of the public. However, the version of the TRAGIS computer code used in this analysis (WebTRAGIS 5.0 Beta) did not have the capability to provide population density data. Therefore, the population density data is estimated using the following approach. The state-level mileage distributions for rural, suburban, and urban population density zones are conservatively estimated by superimposing the routes from TRAGIS on the population profile maps (year 2010) from the USCB. The maps that show the routes from TRAGIS and the associated population densities from the USCB are shown in Figures 19.4.10-1 through 19.4.10-4. The summary of the population densities along the transportation routes analyzed are provided in Tables 19.4.10-1 through 19.4.10-4. Using the TRAGIS output, the regions that contain segments of each transportation route are classified as rural, suburban, or urban population zones. In TRAGIS, a population density less than 139 people per square mile is considered a rural population. A population density between 139 and 3326 people per square mile is considered a suburban population. A population density greater than 3326 people per square mile is considered an urban population. The ranges provided on the maps obtained from the USCB do not match these ranges. Therefore, in cases where there are multiple population zones in a region of the transportation route, the population zone with the highest population density is identified and assumed for the region. The TRAGIS Beta release provides a population count of the total exposed population within 800m (243.8ft.) of the route. Adjustment factors are calculated based on the exposed population using the population count from TRAGIS and the exposed population based on the population densities from Figures 19.4.10-1 through 19.4.10-4. Tables 19.4.10-1 through 19.4.10-4 provide the exposed populations along the transportation routes and the associated adjustment factors. The analysis for determining the exposed populations along the transportation routes is performed in a conservative method to ensure the calculated dose values will bound the TRAGIS values once the computer code is updated to internally include the population density data. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-85Rev. 0The doses due to transportation of the radioactive wastes are calculated for shipments to the WCS facility in Andrews, Texas (bounded at 12 shipments/year) and the EnergySolutions facility in Clive, Utah (bounded at 22 shipments/year). The doses due to transportation of radioactive wastes to other disposal facilities, such as the DSSI facility in Kingston, Tennessee, are not calculated because they are bounded by the doses associated with transportation of radioactive wastes to the WCS and EnergySolutions facilities, primarily due to the smaller travel distance which reduces the exposure time to the workers and the members of the public. The doses due to the transportation of the medical isotopes are calculated using scenarios based on truck shipments to the Covidien facility in Hazelwood, Missouri and the Lantheus Medical Imaging facility in North Billerica, Massachusetts. The estimated total number of shipments per year is 468, or nine shipments per week. Most of these shipments will be by air, but to estimate the effect of a combination of shipments by air and ground transportation it is assumed that approximately one quarter of the shipments (two per week) are shipped by truck. This is more truck shipments than is expected, but the use of this larger number of truck shipments conservatively accounts for the dose due to air shipments. Most of the truck shipments would be sent to the closest facility, which is Covidien, because of the short half-life of the medical isotopes. However, shipment by truck of the longer lived isotopes to other facilities may occur. Therefore it is assumed that half of the truck shipments (52 shipments/year) are to Covidien and an equal number of shipments (52 shipments/year) are to the Lantheus Medical Imaging facility. The doses due to the transportation of medical isotopes to other processing facilities, such as the Nordion facility in Kanata, Ontario, Canada, are not calculated because they are bounded by the doses associated with the transportation of medical isotopes to the Lantheus facility, primarily because the transportation route is longer and its path is through areas with a higher population density. The use of these scenarios will bound the shipment by air because the exposed population is smaller and the exposure time for the crew is shorter for each shipment. The dose due to package handling will increase for air shipments, so a conservatively large dose is calculated for the handlers in order to conservatively estimate the dose component for air shipments.The doses associated with the transportation of the LEU metal and tritium gas are much smaller than the doses associated with the transportation of other radioactive materials and are not calculated. The doses associated with the transportation of the LEU metal are much smaller because of the infrequent shipments (less than one per year) and the low activity in each shipment. The doses associated with the transportation of the tritium gas are negligible because, as a beta emitter, the dose rate outside a container of tritium is practically zero, independent of the quantity of tritium.The annual incident-free radiological doses due to transportation of radioactive materials from the SHINE facility are summarized in Table 19.4.10-5. These doses are calculated assuming the dose rates due to the shipping containers are equal to typical dose rates based on reported dose rates from historical shipments of medical isotopes and low-level waste. The dose to the workers due to the transportation of radioactive material from the SHINE facility is 9.63 person-rem/year. The dose to the members of the public due to the transportation of radioactive material from the SHINE facility is 0.350 person-rem/year. As indicated in Subsection 19.4.3.7, the population in the region around the facility is 160,331, and the background dose rate identified in Subsection 19.4.3.8.2 is 620 mrem/yr (6.2 mSv/yr). Therefore, the population dose in the vicinity of the SHINE facility due to background radiation is approximately 1E+05 person-rem/year. Compared to the background dose in the vicinity of the SHINE facility, the effect of incident-free transportation is SMALL. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-86Rev. 019.4.10.2Non-Nuclear Materials TransportedGeneral office supplies and industrial supplies supporting the maintenance and day-to-day operations of the SHINE facility are transported to the site. Office waste is generated at the site and transported from the site by City of Janesville without being treated or packaged. These activities are typical for a general commercial facility within City of Janesville. The associated incident-free transportation activities do not have an adverse impact on the environment, workers, or the members of the public. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-87Rev. 0Table 19.4.10-1 Population Density, Exposed Population, and the Adjustment Factor for Transportation Route to Andrews, Texas StateZoneDistance Traveled (mi.)Distance Traveled (km)PopulationDensity(persons/km 2)Population Along Route SegmentWIRural0.00.06.60E+010.00E+00Suburban3.2 5.11.67E+031.36E+04Urban12.019.33.86E+031.19E+05ILRural94.3151.76.60E+011.60E+04Suburban127.0204.31.67E+035.46E+05Urban86.8139.73.86E+038.63E+05MORural39.263.16.60E+016.66E+03Suburban170.8274.81.67E+037.34E+05Urban80.5129.53.86E+038.00E+05OKRural184.6297.06.60E+013.14E+04Suburban126.8204.01.67E+035.45E+05Urban32.852.83.86E+033.26E+05TXRural238.6383.96.60E+014.05E+04Suburban97.6157.01.67E+034.20E+05Urban10.817.43.86E+031.07E+05Total1305.02099.64.57E+06Population from TRAGIS128,667Adjustment Factor2.82E-02 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-88Rev. 0Table 19.4.10-2 Population Density, Exposed Population, and the Adjustment Factor for Transportation Route to Clive, UtahStateZoneDistance Traveled (mi.)Distance Traveled (km)PopulationDensity(persons/km 2)Population Along Route SegmentWIRural0.00.06.60E+010.00E+00Suburban3.25.11.67E+031.36E+04Urban12.019.33.86E+031.19E+05ILRural36.158.16.60E+016.14E+03Suburban51.783.21.67E+032.22E+05Urban38.361.63.86E+033.80E+05IARural142.8229.86.60E+012.43E+04Suburban44.671.81.67E+031.92E+05Urban117.5189.13.86E+031.17E+06NERural249.6401.66.60E+014.24E+04Suburban165.7266.61.67E+037.12E+05Urban27.844.73.86E+032.76E+05WYRural259.1416.96.60E+014.40E+04Suburban52.183.81.67E+032.24E+05Urban90.4145.53.86E+038.99E+05UTRural59.094.96.60E+011.00E+04Suburban12.119.51.67E+035.21E+04Urban87.9141.43.86E+038.73E+05 Total1449.92332.95.26E+06Population from TRAGIS68,655Adjustment Factor1.31E-02 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-89Rev. 0Table 19.4.10-3 Population Density, Exposed Population, and the Adjustment Factor for Transportation Route to Hazelwood, MissouriStateZoneDistance Traveled (mi.)Distance Traveled (km)Population Density(persons/km 2)Population Along Route SegmentWIRural0.00.06.60E+010.00E+00Suburban3.2 5.11.67E+031.36E+04Urban12.019.33.86E+031.19E+05ILRural94.3151.76.60E+011.60E+04Suburban122.0196.31.67E+035.25E+05Urban85.9138.23.86E+038.54E+05MORural0.00.06.60E+010.00E+00Suburban0.0 0.01.67E+030.00E+00Urban11.518.53.86E+031.14E+05Total328.9529.1 1.64E+06Population from TRAGIS24,272Adjustment Factor 1.48E-02 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-90Rev. 0Table 19.4.10-4 Population Density, Exposed Population, and the Adjustment Factor for Transportation Route to North Billerica, MassachusettsStateZoneDistance Traveled (mi.)Distance Traveled (km)Population Density(persons/km 2)Population Along Route SegmentWIRural0.00.06.60E+010.00E+00Suburban3.25.11.67E+031.36E+04Urban12.019.33.86E+031.19E+05ILRural0.00.06.60E+010.00E+00Suburban30.549.11.67E+031.31E+05Urban87.8141.33.86E+038.73E+05INRural13.321.46.60E+012.26E+03Suburban62.8101.01.67E+032.70E+05Urban70.3113.13.86E+036.99E+05OHRural20.432.86.60E+013.46E+03Suburban139.2224.01.67E+035.99E+05Urban88.3142.13.86E+038.78E+05PARural0.00.06.60E+010.00E+00Suburban13.321.41.67E+035.72E+04Urban33.453.73.86E+033.32E+05NYRural13.321.46.60E+012.26E+03Suburban245.0394.21.67E+031.05E+06Urban119.4192.13.86E+031.19E+06MARural8.914.36.60E+011.51E+03Suburban63.8102.71.67E+032.74E+05Urban76.1122.43.86E+037.56E+05 Total1101.01771.47.25E+06Population from TRAGIS215,374Adjustment Factor2.97E-02 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-91Rev. 0Table 19.4.10-5 Incident-Free Radiological Dose Summary (Person-Rem/Year)Destination FacilityReceptorWCSEnergySolutionsCovidienLantheusTotalWorkers(Transportation)1.44E-012.93E-016.92E-012.31E+003.44E+00Workers(Handling)1.51E-012.77E-012.88E+002.88E+006.19E+00Members of the Public1.48E-021.22E-023.61E-022.87E-013.5E-01 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-92Rev. 019.4.11POSTULATED ACCIDENTSThis subsection identifies the postulated initiating events (IEs) and credible accidents for the SHINE facility that were selected to drive the design of the facility; designated herein as design basis accidents (DBAs). This subsection also describes the maximum hypothetical accident (MHA).The major hazards associated with the SHINE facility are: *Fissile material as either feed or in target solution. *Irradiated fissile solution and corresponding fission products present not only within the TSV but throughout the SHINE facility.*Neutrons produced by the accelerator. | ||
*Radioactive waste.*Production of hydrogen by radiolytic decomposition of irradiated fissile solution.*Failure of tanks and/or vessels with significant quantities of hazardous chemicals.*Exothermic reactions between chemicals leading to damage to tanks or vessels containing significant quantities of hazardous materials.*Mishap during handling of chemicals leads to breach or spill of chemicals from tanks or vessels.*Mishap during handling of chemicals leads to spill of chemicals outside tanks or vessels within the facility.*Mishap during delivery of hazardous chemicals leads to spill of chemicals outside the facility.19.4.11.1Methodology for Identification of Design Basis AccidentsThe methodology for identifying DBAs is described in Chapter 13.The SHINE facility has been divided into two major areas: the Irradiation Facility (IF) and the Radioisotope Production Facility (RPF). The IF consists of the Irradiation Units (IUs) and supporting structures, systems, and components dedicated to the irradiation of target solution. | *Radioactive waste.*Production of hydrogen by radiolytic decomposition of irradiated fissile solution.*Failure of tanks and/or vessels with significant quantities of hazardous chemicals.*Exothermic reactions between chemicals leading to damage to tanks or vessels containing significant quantities of hazardous materials.*Mishap during handling of chemicals leads to breach or spill of chemicals from tanks or vessels.*Mishap during handling of chemicals leads to spill of chemicals outside tanks or vessels within the facility.*Mishap during delivery of hazardous chemicals leads to spill of chemicals outside the facility.19.4.11.1Methodology for Identification of Design Basis AccidentsThe methodology for identifying DBAs is described in Chapter 13.The SHINE facility has been divided into two major areas: the Irradiation Facility (IF) and the Radioisotope Production Facility (RPF). The IF consists of the Irradiation Units (IUs) and supporting structures, systems, and components dedicated to the irradiation of target solution. | ||
This includes the primary cooling systems and the tritium purification system. The RPF includes the isotope extraction and purification, target solution preparation and clean-up, radioactive waste handling and chemical storage systems and areas.According to the Final ISG Augmenting NUREG-1537, the following accident categories, as modified for the SHINE facility, are to be addressed for the IF and RPF:*MHA. | This includes the primary cooling systems and the tritium purification system. The RPF includes the isotope extraction and purification, target solution preparation and clean-up, radioactive waste handling and chemical storage systems and areas.According to the Final ISG Augmenting NUREG-1537, the following accident categories, as modified for the SHINE facility, are to be addressed for the IF and RPF:*MHA. | ||
| Line 504: | Line 974: | ||
*External events.*Mishandling or malfunction of equipment.*Large undamped power oscillations (fuel temperature/void-reactivity feedback). | *External events.*Mishandling or malfunction of equipment.*Large undamped power oscillations (fuel temperature/void-reactivity feedback). | ||
*Detonation and deflagration.*Unintended exothermic chemical reactions other than detonation.*Facility system interaction events. | *Detonation and deflagration.*Unintended exothermic chemical reactions other than detonation.*Facility system interaction events. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-93Rev. 0*Hazardous chemical releases.*Facility fire (RPF).*Unique facility IEs/DBAs.All IEs and scenarios applicable to the IF are evaluated in Section 13a2. Those applicable to the RPF areas are covered in Section 13b.Representative accident scenarios with bounding consequences for each of the above IEs/scenario categories are to be evaluated quantitatively in Sections 13a2.2, 13b.2, and 13b.3, per the guidance in NUREG-1537 and the Final ISG Augmenting NURE G-1537. The most bounding DBAs with respect to consequences for both the IF and the RPF are analytically evaluated in Subsection19.4.11.3 below. 19.4.11.2Identified Initiating Events and Design Basis AccidentsThis subsection gives a quantitative discussion of the consequences of the MHA. This subsection also briefly discusses IEs and DBAs as well as some of the controls that are being designed to prevent or mitigate the potential consequences to levels that are acceptable (i.e.,within regulatory criteria). These IEs and DBAs are designed to bound the potential accident scenarios in each of the accident categories of interest. Potential radiological consequences of DBAs are discussed qualitatively as a function of the source terms released during the postulated scenarios, and controls that mitigate the consequences. The consequences of the DBAs are bounded by the quantitative analysis performed for the MHA.19.4.11.2.1Maximum Hypothetical AccidentThe MHA is defined to be an event that results in radiological consequences that exceed those of any accident considered to be credible. The MHA therefore bounds the radiological consequences of postulated DBA scenarios at the SHINE facility. The MHA need not be a credible scenario but a failure assumed to establish an outer limit consequence.For the SHINE facility, the MHA is based on events unique to the facility that hypothetically could result in a release of radioactive materials. The SHINE facility is subdivided into two major process areas: the IF and the RPF. Processes in both areas of the facility are generally of low energy (i.e., subcritical, low heat generation). In addition, the facility is being designed to withstand credible external events. Therefore, an internal accident releasing the largest possible quantity of radioactive material is considered to be the initiating event that would result in the maximum bounding radiological consequence. The IF and RPF are designed to function as two independent areas within the facility. Though the IF and RPF have processes and systems that interact with each other, they are physically separated by concrete walls. Design features such as irradiation cell shielding, redundant isolation valves, ventilation dampers, and penetration seals in both areas, ensure that an accident in one area is highly unlikely to affect the other area. In addition, both areas are separated to ensure that a radiological release in one area does not have a significant effect on the other area. Because of this physical separation, it is necessary to analyze both the IF and RPF to determine the MHA. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-94Rev. 0The MHA is used to demonstrate that the maximum consequences of an accident at the SHINE facility are within the acceptable regulatory limits of 10 CFR 20.1301. The MHA assumes a failure that results in a radioactive release with radiological consequences that bound all credible DBAs.Because the SHINE facility is being designed to withstand external events such as tornadoes, seismic events, and man-made external events, scenarios that involve multiple irradiation units are not considered to be credible, and are not analyzed further. In addition, several internal events were eliminated as possible MHAs due to the design of facility. For example, a pipe break containing fissile inventory being transferred from a TSV dump tank to a supercell in the RPF was considered. Because all production piping is located in covered, concrete trenches that are designed to contain any rupture of inventory and drain to sumps that are geometrically designed to prevent an inadvertent criticality, this event was eliminated as a possible MHA. There is no credible internal event that will result in releases from multiple TSVs.A potential MHA considered was a rupture or leakage of the TSV or TSV dump tank resulting in a complete release of the target solution and fission product inventory into one IU cell. This potential MHA assumes zero hours of decay time. This event occurs within the confinement of the IU cell and is assumed to release the entire inventory of one TSV into the IU cell. The calculated radionuclide inventory released from the TSV to the IU cell represents the bounding source term for any other postulated accident in the IF. Any potential loss of TSV inventory within the IU is mitigated by several controls, namely: confinement provided by the IU cell and the RCA ventilation system zone (RVZ)1 (including the presence of bubble-tight dampers to isolate the cells upon detection of above-threshold radiation levels), radiation monitoring (to be interlocked with bubble-tight dampers), shielded pipe penetrations, and TSV off-gas system. Another potential MHA considered was a release of the inventory stored in the noble gas removal system (NGRS) storage tanks. This event occurs within the confinement of the noble gas storage tank room, located in the RPF. The calculated radionuclide inventory released from the NGRS storage tanks represents the bounding source term for any other postulated accident in the RPF.Controls to mitigate the consequences of the MHA in the RPF include: the NGRS room, radiation monitors, RCA ventilation system Zone 1 (RVZ1) (including the presence of bubble-tight dampers to isolate the cells upon detection of above-threshold radiation levels), radiation monitoring (to be interlocked with bubble-tight dampers), and RCA ventilation system Zone 2 (RVZ2).The evaluation of the inventory for the considered MHAs is based on a set of limiting initial conditions that were designed to maximize the potential source terms and to bound credible scenarios. This includes assumptions regarding the total time for irradiation, failure to decay target solution prior to processing, process faults that result in additional target solution cycles, and failure of fission product removal. | ||
The amount of radioactive material released to the environment (i.e., source term) was calculated for both MHAs based on the five factor formula:ST = MAR x DR x ARF x RF x LPF. (Equation 19.4.11-1) | The amount of radioactive material released to the environment (i.e., source term) was calculated for both MHAs based on the five factor formula:ST = MAR x DR x ARF x RF x LPF. (Equation 19.4.11-1) | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-95Rev. 0Where:ST refers to the source termMAR refers to the inventory of material-at-risk from the postulated scenarios. DR represents the fraction of the inventory impacted by the scenario (in the evaluated cases assumed to be 1.0).ARF/RF refer to the airborne release fractions and respirable fractions for the radionuclides assumed to be present in the inventory (based on published ARF/RF in NUREG-6410).LPF refers to the leak-path factor or fraction of the material that is airborne that is assumed to be released to the environment.For the postulated scenarios, the entire inventory of the TSV and the NGRS holding tanks are released to the IU cell and the noble gas storage cell, respectively. ARF x RF for solution spills for particulates from NUREG-6410 were selected. For halogens an ARF x RF of 0.25 was assumed, while an ARF x RF of 1.0 was assumed for noble gases. In-plant transport of the radionuclides was based on the assumptions concerning the functioning of available plant systems. Mitigated consequences are based on the assumption that the radioactive material will be released into the IU cell and that no more than 1 percent of the airborne radioactive material will be released by the IF before the cell is isolated by the RVZ1 isolation bubble-tight dampers. Any radioactive material that is released from the noble gas storage room before it is isolated is assumed to be filtered by the HEPA and charcoal filters. For dose calculations, all releases are assumed to be at ground level. These calculations are based on the 50 th percentile /Q. Doses are calculated using ICRP-30 dose conversion factors, and receptor locations are the closest point on the site boundary and the nearest permanent resident.The total effective dose equivalent (TEDE) and the thyroid doses for the postulated scenarios are:*Rupture or leakage of the TSV or TSV dump tank scenario: TEDE of 1.65E-02 rem at the site boundary and 2.30E-03 rem for the nearest residence.*Release of the inventory stored in the NGRS storage tanks scenario: TEDE of 7.98E-02 rem at the site boundary and 1.12E-02 rem for the nearest residence.Based on the calculated doses, the MHA for the SHINE facility is the release of the inventory stored in the NGRS storage tanks. The dose for the MHA is less than the dose criteria in 10 CFR 20.1301. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-96Rev. 019.4.11.2.2Insertion of Excess ReactivityExcess reactivity insertion in the subcritical assembly system (SCAS) is identified as a potential DBA that needs to be evaluated. This DBA covers events that can lead to an insertion of positive reactivity in the SCAS. Examples include:*Pressurization of target solution fluid. | ||
*Excessive cool down. | *Excessive cool down. | ||
*Target solution injection.*Geometry changes.*Reactivity insertion due to moderator lumping effects. | *Target solution injection.*Geometry changes.*Reactivity insertion due to moderator lumping effects. | ||
*Inadvertent introduction of other materials into the target solution.*Loss of water from the target solution during irradiation.This event is not applicable to the RPF.The SCAS has a TSV reactivity protection system (TRPS). Anticipated protective signals of the TRPS for TSV shutdown and dump valve actuation include a combination of high neutron flux levels, high flux rate, high TSV fill rate, high TSV level, or indication of a loss of cooling to the TSV. Shutdown of the TSV will limit the amount of power and pressure increase allowed in the TSV preventing PSB breach. Any potential releases from such events are further mitigated by the off-gas system, the facility ventilation system, and the passive nature of the confinement provided by the IU cells and facility itself. As such, release of the entire contents of one TSV bounds any radiological release from such a reactivity insertion event and is therefore bounded by the MHA.19.4.11.2.3Reduction or Loss of CoolingThe reduction or loss of cooling event is identified as a potential DBA. This scenario, however, is bounded and covered by the MHA event, since there is little or no consequence from loss of cooling in the IF or RPF.The design of the IF, including the intrinsic properties of the irradiated solution, are such that the reduction or loss of cooling (even without engineering features) will lead to a reduction in the neutron multiplication factor (keff), thus leading to a reduction in the amount of energy (or power) generated under this condition. Furthermore, just like for insertion of excess reactivity, the SCAS has a TRPS trip that serves as a defense-in-depth control to mitigate any potential consequences from this postulated scenario. Indication of a loss of cooling to the TSV results in TRPS shutdown of the TSV. This limits the amount of power and pressure increase allowed in the TSV, preventing PSB breach. Any potential | *Inadvertent introduction of other materials into the target solution.*Loss of water from the target solution during irradiation.This event is not applicable to the RPF.The SCAS has a TSV reactivity protection system (TRPS). Anticipated protective signals of the TRPS for TSV shutdown and dump valve actuation include a combination of high neutron flux levels, high flux rate, high TSV fill rate, high TSV level, or indication of a loss of cooling to the TSV. Shutdown of the TSV will limit the amount of power and pressure increase allowed in the TSV preventing PSB breach. Any potential releases from such events are further mitigated by the off-gas system, the facility ventilation system, and the passive nature of the confinement provided by the IU cells and facility itself. As such, release of the entire contents of one TSV bounds any radiological release from such a reactivity insertion event and is therefore bounded | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical | |||
by the MHA.19.4.11.2.3Reduction or Loss of CoolingThe reduction or loss of cooling event is identified as a potential DBA. This scenario, however, is bounded and covered by the MHA event, since there is little or no consequence from loss of cooling in the IF or RPF.The design of the IF, including the intrinsic properties of the irradiated solution, are such that the reduction or loss of cooling (even without engineering features) will lead to a reduction in the neutron multiplication factor (keff), thus leading to a reduction in the amount of energy (or power) generated under this condition. Furthermore, just like for insertion of excess reactivity, the SCAS has a TRPS trip that serves as a defense-in-depth control to mitigate any potential consequences from this postulated scenario. Indication of a loss of cooling to the TSV results in TRPS shutdown of the TSV. This limits the amount of power and pressure increase allowed in the TSV, preventing PSB breach. Any potential re leases from such events are further mitigated by the off-gas system, the facility ventilation system, and the passive nature of the confinement provided by the IU cells and facility itself. Finally, given the low decay heat production, the light water pool serves as a passive heat sink that prevents the temperature of the target solution from rising to any significant degree. As such, release of the entire contents of one TSV bounds any radiological release from a reduction or loss of cooling event and is therefore bounded by the MHA. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-97Rev. 019.4.11.2.4Mishandling or Malfunction of Target SolutionThe following events are identified as potential DBAs representing the mishandling or malfunction of target solution:*Loss of PSB in the IF.-Covers target solution spills and leaks (bounded by release of entire TSV contents).-Vessel/line failures in the RPF (to be covered under mishandling or malfunction of equipment).*Inadvertent criticality in the IF.-Covers IEs associated with failure to control pH in the target solution.-Failure to control target solution temperature and pressure is covered under the reactivity insertion DBA.*Inadvertent criticality in the RPF.-Covers IEs associated with failure to control pH or temperature in the target solution.Loss of PSB and an inadvertent nuclear criticality are prevented and/or mitigated by the design of robust and criticality safe geometry tanks, piping, and valves, along with the design of spill pits or berms around tanks containing significant quantities of fissile material. The TSV where irradiation operations take place is designed with features and safety controls such as dump valves to limit the duration of an inadvertent criticality. Furthermore, administrative controls on the concentration of fissile material in the TSV or tanks are implemented to prevent the occurrence of an inadvertent criticality within the facility. Tanks containing significant quantities of fissile material are seismically qualified to survive site-specific design basis seismic events. | |||
Any potential releases of radioac tive material, from either a loss of PSB or an inadvertent criticality, are mitigated by the off-gas system, the facility ventilation system, and the passive nature of the confinement provided by the IU cells and the facility itself. An inadvertent criticality is likely to generate source terms and doses that are equivalent to an insertion of excess reactivity. This is because these events would be limited to a single or small number of pulses. Thus, this event would be bounded by the MHA. | |||
19.4.11.2.5Loss of Normal Electrical Power The loss of normal electrical power affects both the IF and RPF, and has been identified as a potential DBA. | 19.4.11.2.5Loss of Normal Electrical Power The loss of normal electrical power affects both the IF and RPF, and has been identified as a potential DBA. | ||
A loss of normal electric power causes a shutdown of the TSV and thus reduces significantly the power and heat that could be generated. After shutdown of the TSV, decay heat levels are low enough to allow cooling to ambient, thus a loss of electric power does not cause a breach of the PSB. The loss of power also could lead to an initiating event that could result in various potential accident conditions, including the loss of ventilation and off-gas system, which in turn could lead to a deflagration event from the build-up of hydrogen on the top of the TSV cavity or in the off-gas Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical | A loss of normal electric power causes a shutdown of the TSV and thus reduces significantly the power and heat that could be generated. After shutdown of the TSV, decay heat levels are low enough to allow cooling to ambient, thus a loss of electric power does not cause a breach of the PSB. The loss of power also could lead to an initiating event that could result in various potential accident conditions, including the loss of ventilation and off-gas system, which in turn could lead to a deflagration event from the build-up of hydrogen on the top of the TSV cavity or in the off-gas Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-98Rev. 0system itself. This scenario is covered separately under detonation or deflagration due to the generation of hydrogen. 19.4.11.2.6External Events The following potential external events have been identified as DBAs for the SHINE facility: *Seismic event affecting the IF and RPF.*Tornado or high-winds affecting the IF and RPF.*Small aircraft crash into the IF or RPF.The facility structure, including the SCAS and critical process equipment (including tanks containing potentially significant quantities of fissile material) in the IF and RPF, are designed to survive the above external events. 19.4.11.2.7Mishandling or Malfunction of Equipment The potential DBAs that could be initiated by the mishandling or malfunction of equipment include:*Failure of the off-gas system leading to release of noble gases and halogens.*Loss of pressure boundary in PSB (covered under mishandling target solution).*Vessel/line failures in the RPF (e.g., Mo-99 extraction feed or raffinate tanks).The SHINE facility is designed with multiple engineering features and controls to prevent or mitigate the potential consequences from such mishandling or malfunction of equipment. Critical equipment are designed robustly with significant redundancy or fail safe features to prevent or mitigate the consequences from these events.The consequences from these scenarios are bounded by the release of the entire contents of one TSV and are therefore bounded by the MHA. For this DBA, the worst case condition is the loss of the PSB or a spill of radioactive material from tanks in the RPF.19.4.11.2.8Large Undamped Power OscillationsLarge undamped power oscillations are identified as potential DBAs to be considered. The TSV is designed for subcritical operation, low power density, and large negative temperature and void coefficients, resulting in a stable TSV with only self-limiting power oscillations. The low power density and subcritical operating conditions of the TSV will prevent the occurrence of any large undamped power oscillation. The source term and potential consequences from this type of event would be, however, bounded by the excess reactivity insertion scenario (see Subsection 19.4.11.2.2). 19.4.11.2.9Detonation and Deflagration Events (Due to Hydrogen Generation) | ||
The potential for detonation and deflagration due to hydrogen accumulation in the PSB (including in the cavity of the TSV or off-gas system) is identified as a potential DBA. Hydrogen accumulation in the RPF is not expected to exceed the lower explosive limit (LEL) or lower flammability limit (LFL). | The potential for detonation and deflagration due to hydrogen accumulation in the PSB (including in the cavity of the TSV or off-gas system) is identified as a potential DBA. Hydrogen accumulation in the RPF is not expected to exceed the lower explosive limit (LEL) or lower flammability limit (LFL). | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-99Rev. 0During operation and post TSV shutdown, the TSV solution generates hydrogen and oxygen. Analysis has shown that buildup of gas to a level that could cause a detonation or deflagration is possible. The off-gas system is engineered to prevent such an event. However, the failure of the off-gas system, combined with a buildup of hydrogen and oxygen in the TSV and an ignition | ||
source, could lead to a breach of the PSB. Many design fe atures and controls are designed to prevent or mitigate such events, including the design of a reliable and robust off-gas system that is interlocked upon failure of the TSV off-gas blower to immediately shutdown the irradiation operations and thus limit the amount of hydrogen being produced. The off-gas system is also designed to structurally survive a wide range of deflagration events (pressure pulses). Upon a deflagration, any releases of radioactive material are confined within the IU cell and are further mitigated by the confinement capability of the IU cell and by the facility ventilation systems. The consequences from this DBA are bounded by the release of the entire contents of one TSV and are therefore bounded by the MHA. 19.4.11.2.10Unintended Exothermic Chemical Reactions Other than DetonationA few potential exothermic chemical reactions were identified that, under very unlikely or incredible conditions, might challenge the PSB integrity. Exothermic reactions are more likely to result in fires. Detonations, deflagrations, or fires due to exothermic reactions other than hydrogen-related in the IF are not considered to be possible given the design of the process. There is the possibility under uncontrolled conditions that during solvent extraction a runaway tributyl phosphate (TBP)/nitric acid reaction could occur due to a number of unexpected events, such as the inadvertent heating of a tank. The design of the solvent extraction process, including the control of the fissile material concentration (protected through administrative controls), the minimization of dissolved solids, and the concentration of nitric acid is such that the maximum temperature achieved during this operation is significantly lower than that of the minimum initiation temperature for a runaway reaction (on the order of 130 oC [266 oF]). The most likely and bounding scenarios resulting from potential exothermic reactions are fires which could impact the RPF. RPF fires, bounding all exothermic chemical reactions that may take place in the area, are covered under facility fire events (see Subsection 19.4.11.2.12). 19.4.11.2.11Facility System Interaction EventsFacility system interaction events have been identified as DBAs that could result in radiological releases from various parts of the facility or multiple areas. The IF and the RPF include the following systems: target solution preparation, TSV, TSV dump tank, TSV off-gas system, molybdenum extraction, and UREX processing systems. System interactions have the potential to cause damage that may lead to the release of these radioactive materials. NUREG/CR-3922 defines a system interaction as "-an event in one system, train, component or structure propagates through unanticipated or inconspicuous dependencies to cause an action or inaction in other systems, trains, components or structures." | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-100Rev. 0There are three categories of system interactions between systems located within the IF and the RPF that are considered in this analysis. The three types of interactions include: 1) functional interactions, 2) spatial interactions, and 3) human-intervention interactions.At the SHINE facility, there are a number of shared system interactions that need to be considered in the context of functional system interactions. The shared systems that are considered:*Electrical power including the uninterruptable power supply system. | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-100Rev. 0There are three categories of system interactions between systems located within the IF and the RPF that are considered in this analysis. The three types of interactions include: 1) functional interactions, 2) spatial interactions, and 3) human-intervention interactions.At the SHINE facility, there are a number of shared system interactions that need to be considered in the context of functional system interactions. The shared systems that are considered:*Electrical power including the uninterruptable power supply system. | ||
*Radioisotope process facility cooling system (RPCS). | *Radioisotope process facility cooling system (RPCS). | ||
| Line 526: | Line 1,001: | ||
*Internal flooding scenarios. | *Internal flooding scenarios. | ||
*Pipe break scenarios (see Subsection 19.4.11.2.4).For each of the scenarios listed above, except for loss of ventilation and internal flooding, the consequences are discussed in the referenced subsections. The MHA bounds all of these scenarios as discussed in each subsection. Loss of ventilation does not initiate an accident that could result in a release of radioactive material or hazardous chemicals nor are the ventilation systems used to mitigate the consequences of an accident. Upon release of radioactive materials within the facility, the ventilation system is shut down and bubble-tight dampers are closed to isolate the impacted areas of the facility. Internal flooding as a result of the rupture of water lines in the facility or the inadvertent actuation of a fire suppression system would not result in the release of radioactive material to the environment. All water is collected and sampled for radioactive contamination. If radioactive material contamination is found, the water is treated as radioactive waste.19.4.11.2.12Facility Fire (RPF) | *Pipe break scenarios (see Subsection 19.4.11.2.4).For each of the scenarios listed above, except for loss of ventilation and internal flooding, the consequences are discussed in the referenced subsections. The MHA bounds all of these scenarios as discussed in each subsection. Loss of ventilation does not initiate an accident that could result in a release of radioactive material or hazardous chemicals nor are the ventilation systems used to mitigate the consequences of an accident. Upon release of radioactive materials within the facility, the ventilation system is shut down and bubble-tight dampers are closed to isolate the impacted areas of the facility. Internal flooding as a result of the rupture of water lines in the facility or the inadvertent actuation of a fire suppression system would not result in the release of radioactive material to the environment. All water is collected and sampled for radioactive contamination. If radioactive material contamination is found, the water is treated as radioactive waste.19.4.11.2.12Facility Fire (RPF) | ||
A fire in the RPF is identified as a possible DBA. Events that could lead to a fire in the RPF may be precipitated by failure of electrical or mechanical equipment or human error involving a loss of control of combustible materials or ignition sources or both. Facility fires are not expected to directly release significant amounts of radioactive material; however fires can lead to the release of radioactive material where fire damage to process equipment results in a loss of confinement through damage to system integrity, spurious equipment operation, or loss of equipment control. Fire damage to equipment typically results from direct exposure of equipment to the fire or exposure of equipment to elevated temperatures caused by the fire. Widespread fire damage to Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-101Rev. 1process equipment that could lead to a radiological release is most likely inside a confined enclosure such as a hot cell, glove box, or tank enclosure. Small spaces such as these provide the confinement of the products of combustion, which can lead to development of a damaging fire environment. Development of damaging fire environment in the general area of the RPF is much less likely due to the large volume of the area. Direct fire damage to important equipment which could lead to a significant radiological release is not likely because redundant control or power circuits are separated by distance to prevent such damage from a single fire, accordingly the DBA is considered to be a fire in an enclosure that may lead to the development of a damaging fire environment. The design basis fire accident is postulated to occur in an RPF supercell where it contributes to the release of the contents of the Mo extraction feed tank. Fire damage to the tank, associated valves, or process piping could lead to a release of Mo-99 eluate into the supercell enclosure. Release of this material into the enclosure could lead to an airborne release of radiological material into the cell enclosure and ultimately migration into the RCA ventilation system. The potential release would be mitigated by closure of the bubble-tight dampers in the RCA ventilation system in response to a smoke alarm signal or detection of the radioactive material by the radiation monitoring system. Isolation of the ventilation system would prevent significant release to the environment. Radiological release of this DBA is bounded by the MHA and contained by the facility and RCA ventilation system. Postulated fire strengths are insufficient to breach the credited facility barrier walls or components. The effects of this DBA and any associated radiological release will be contained by the facility construction and RCA ventilation system components.19.4.11.2.13Hazardous Chemical Releases The consequence of chemical releases are evaluated using dispersion models and/or computer codes that conform to NUREG/CR-6410 methodologies.Typical computer codes to model chemical releases and determine the chemical dose (orconcentration) are the ALOHA and EPICode; both computer codes are widely used for supporting accident analysis and emergency response evaluations. Both codes have been used and accepted by government agencies such as DOE. Verification and validation for both codes have been performed for modeling chemical hazards for the SHINE facility. Because ALOHA can readily model only about half of these chemicals, the EPICode was selected to perform chemical dose calculations in this subsection. Both computer codes give comparable results for the hazardous chemicals that they have in common and both codes implement release and dispersion models that are | A fire in the RPF is identified as a possible DBA. Events that could lead to a fire in the RPF may be precipitated by failure of electrical or mechanical equipment or human error involving a loss of control of combustible materials or ignition sources or both. Facility fires are not expected to directly release significant amounts of radioactive material; however fires can lead to the release of radioactive material where fire damage to process equipment results in a loss of confinement through damage to system integrity, spurious equipment operation, or loss of equipment control. Fire damage to equipment typically results from direct exposure of equipment to the fire or exposure of equipment to elevated temperatures caused by the fire. Widespread fire damage to Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-101Rev. 1process equipment that could lead to a radiological release is most likely inside a confined enclosure such as a hot cell, glove box, or tank enclosure. Small spaces such as these provide the confinement of the products of combustion, which can lead to development of a damaging fire environment. Development of damaging fire environment in the general area of the RPF is much less likely due to the large volume of the area. Direct fire damage to important equipment which could lead to a significant radiological release is not likely because redundant control or power circuits are separated by distance to prevent such damage from a single fire, accordingly the DBA is considered to be a fire in an enclosure that may lead to the development of a damaging fire environment. The design basis fire accident is postulated to occur in an RPF supercell where it contributes to the release of the contents of the Mo extraction feed tank. Fire damage to the tank, associated valves, or process piping could lead to a release of Mo-99 eluate into the supercell enclosure. Release of this material into the enclosure could lead to an airborne release of radiological material into the cell enclosure and ultimately migration into the RCA ventilation system. The potential release would be mitigated by closure of the bubble-tight dampers in the RCA ventilation system in response to a smoke alarm signal or detection of the radioactive material by the radiation monitoring system. Isolation of the ventilation system would prevent significant release to the environment. Radiological release of this DBA is bounded by the MHA and contained by the facility and RCA ventilation system. Postulated fire strengths are insufficient to breach the credited facility barrier walls or components. The effects of this DBA and any associated radiological release will be contained by the facility construction and RCA ventilation system components.19.4.11.2.13Hazardous Chemical Releases The consequence of chemical releases are evaluated using dispersion models and/or computer codes that conform to NUREG/CR-6410 methodologies.Typical computer codes to model chemical releases and determine the chemical dose (orconcentration) are the ALOHA and EPICode; both computer codes are widely used for supporting accident analysis and emergency response evaluations. Both codes have been used and accepted by government agencies such as DOE. Verification and validation for both codes have been performed for modeling chemical hazards for the SHINE facility. Because ALOHA can readily model only about half of these chemicals, the EPICode was selected to perform chemical dose calculations in this subsection. Both computer codes give comparable results for the hazardous chemicals that they have in common and both codes implement release and dispersion models that are consist ent with the guidance in NUREG/CR-6410.In running EPICode, no credit is taken for depletion or plate out of chemicals within the facility or during transport to the site boundary or nearest population location. All dispersion calculations performed are done assuming neutral meteorological conditions (i.e., Stability Class D) and 4.1m/s wind speed. These represent 50 th percentile meteorological conditions at the site. Ambient temperature was assumed to be 75 oF, no deposition of airborne material was assumed, and a receptor height of 1.5 m was used to simulate the height of an individual. Concentrations are plume centerline values. Releases were conservatively modeled as ground non-buoyant. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-102Rev. 1Chemical dose or concentrations were determined for the 11 chemicals at the site boundary and the nearest residence (249 and 788m, respectively). Table 19.4.11-1 summarizes the results of the source term and concentration calculations for the 11 chemicals. The material-at-risk (MAR) represents the inventory of hazardous material that is at risk from the postulated scenario. The MAR for most of the chemicals represents the amount of material in storage. In some cases, the MAR represents the total facility inventory. For other chemicals, the quantity assumed to be released is reduced to account for separate storage locations, or to account for normal industrial chemicals not interacting with licensed materials or affecting the safety of licensed materials. The 11 chemicals were selected for evaluation based on the combination of anticipated bounding facility inventory amounts and high toxicity characteristics (lowest PAC values). The acceptance limits were those identified in NUREG/CR-6410 and correspond to Protective Action Criteria (PAC) values corresponding to Acute Exposure Guideline Levels (AEGLs), Emergency Response Planning Guideline (ERPG), or Temporary Emergency Exposure Limits (TEEL) values for such chemicals.The results from the analysis indicate that the chemical dose or concentration for the MEI and the nearest residence is below the PAC-1, PAC-2, and PAC-3 levels (equivalent to ERPG-1, ERPG-2, and ERPG-3). These concentrations are conservatively calculated, and are based on the assumption that the entire inventory of liquid hazardous chemicals evaporates from a | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-102Rev. 1Chemical dose or concentrations were determined for the 11 chemicals at the site boundary and the nearest residence (249 and 788m, respectively). Table 19.4.11-1 summarizes the results of the source term and concentration calculations for the 11 chemicals. The material-at-risk (MAR) represents the inventory of hazardous material that is at risk from the postulated scenario. The MAR for most of the chemicals represents the amount of material in storage. In some cases, the MAR represents the total facility inventory. For other chemicals, the quantity assumed to be released is reduced to account for separate storage locations, or to account for normal industrial chemicals not interacting with licensed materials or affecting the safety of licensed materials. The 11 chemicals were selected for evaluation based on the combination of anticipated bounding facility inventory amounts and high toxicity characteristics (lowest PAC values). The acceptance limits were those identified in NUREG/CR-6410 and correspond to Protective Action Criteria (PAC) values corresponding to Acute Exposure Guideline Levels (AEGLs), Emergency Response Planning Guideline (ERPG), or Temporary Emergency Exposure Limits (TEEL) values for such chemicals.The results from the analysis indicate that the chemical dose or concentration for the MEI and the nearest residence is below the PAC-1, PAC-2, and PAC-3 levels (equivalent to ERPG-1, ERPG-2, and ERPG-3). These concentrations are conservatively calculated, and are based on the assumption that the entire inventory of liquid hazardous chemicals evaporates from a 100ft 2 pool, over a duration calculated by EPICode. Solid powder material release durations were assumed to be onehour to correspond with ERPG exposure times. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-103Rev. 1[Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]Table 19.4.11-1 SHINE Hazardous (Toxic) Chemical Source Terms and ConcentrationsHazardous Chemical/Release | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-103Rev. 1[Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]Table 19.4.11-1 SHINE Hazardous (Toxic) Chemical Source Terms and ConcentrationsHazardous Chemical/Release Mechanism MAR(lb)ARF/RFSource Term*(lb)PAC-1PAC-2PAC-3 SiteBoundaryConcentration(249 m)Nearest Residence Concentration (788 m)Nitric Acid, 12M, associated with licensed materials (Evaporating Liquid)7211.07210.53 ppm24 ppm92 ppm0.090 ppm0.012 ppmSulfuric Acid (Evaporating Liquid)7,7701.07,7700.20 mg/m 38.7mg/m3160 mg/m34.7E-07 mg/m 36.3E-08 mg/m 3Calcium Hydroxide (Dispersed Solid)3,1820.0013.182 15 mg/m3240 mg/m31,500 mg/m 30.16 mg/m 30.020 mg/m 3Caustic Soda (Dispersed Solid)1,4880.0011.4880.5 mg/m35 mg/m350 mg/m30.073 mg/m 30.010 mg/m 3[Proprietary Information] | ||
(Dispersed Solid)4,1040.0014.104[ProprietaryInformation][Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information]0.20 mg/ | (Dispersed Solid)4,1040.0014.104[ProprietaryInformation][Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information]0.20 mg/m 30.026 mg/m 3Ammonium Hydroxide(Dispersed Solid)590.0010.05961 ppm330 ppm2300 ppm2.0E-03 ppm2.6E-04 ppm[Proprietary Information] | ||
(Dispersed Solid)6060.0010.606[ProprietaryInformation][Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information]0.03 mg/ | (Dispersed Solid)6060.0010.606[ProprietaryInformation][Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information]0.03 mg/m 33.9E-03 mg/m 3Dodecane associated with licensed materials (Evaporating Liquid)3041.03040.0028 ppm0.031 ppm7.9 ppm4.4E-04 ppm5.9E-05 ppmPotassium Permanganate (Dispersed Solid)660.0010.0668.6 mg/m314 mg/m378 mg/m33.3E-03 mg/m 34.2E-04 mg/m 3Tributyl Phosphate (Dispersed Solid)3330.0010.3330.6 mg/m33.5 mg/m3125 mg/m31.5E-03 ppm2.0E-04 ppmUranyl Nitrate (Dispersed Solid) | ||
(Likely in solution at SHINE)4800.0010.4800.99 mg/ | (Likely in solution at SHINE)4800.0010.4800.99 mg/m 35.5 mg/m333 mg/m30.024 mg/m 33.1E-03 mg/m 3 | ||
(8-km) radius. The percentages of each minority category within the county and state are also presented as the basis for determining which block groups meet the criteria.None of the 48 census block groups within the 5-mi. (8-km) radius meet the NRC quantitative method for identifying a minority population. Generally, Hispanic or Latino, Black or African American, and Two or More Races (i.e. multiracial) classifications represent the predominant minority populations in the block groups within 5mi. (8-km) of the SHINE site; however, no block group contains a minority population (individual or aggregate) that either exceeds 50percent or significantly exceeds the comparative geographic areas. Overall, the percentage of minority groups in the 5-mi. (8-km) area of analysis is less than comparative figures for Rock County and Wisconsin. The aggregate minority population in the 5-mi. (8-km) study area is 11.1percent, compared to 15.5 percent in the county and 16.7 in the state. The aggregate minority population includes all minority populations, as defined by NRC (NRC, 2009) (seeSubsection19.4.12.1).Only a small percentage of the study area population is American Indian and Alaska native (0.3percent) in the study area, and there is no American Indian reservation within 5mi. (8km) of the SHINE site (Bureau of Indian Affairs, 2012). | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewEnvironmental JusticeSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-104Rev. 019.4.12ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICEOn February 11, 1994, President Clinton signed Executive Order 12898 Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations. Executive Order 12898 directs federal executive agencies to consider environmental justice under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). This Executive Order ensures that minority and/or low-income populations do not bear a disproportionate share of adverse health or environmental consequences of the building of the SHINE production facility.19.4.12.1Methodology Guidance for addressing environmental justice (EJ) is provided by the Council on Environmental Quality's Environmental Justice Guidance under the National Environmental Policy Act; NRC Policy Statement on the Treatment of Environmental Justice Matters in NRC Licensing Actions; and NRC Office Instruction No. LIC 203, Revision 2, Procedural Guidance for Preparing Environmental Assessments and Considering Environmental Issues. The NRC defines a "minority" by race and ethnicity, as classified by the USCB (NRC, 2009). Specifically, a minority is an individual whose race is: Black or African American; American Indian or Alaska Native; Asian; Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander; Some Other Race (not mentioned above); Two or More Races (i.e., multiracial); or whose ethnicity is Hispanic or Latino of any race. Determination of low-income populations is based on poverty thresholds as defined by the USCB.The geographic area of analysis is the 5-mi. (8-km) area around the SHINE site. The method to identify the locations of minority and low-income populations of the geographic area of analysis is the "block group" method recommended by the NRC. The block group is the smallest geographical unit for which the USCB tabulates data required for EJ analysis (NRC, 2004). The 2010 census data, along with geographic information system (GIS) software, are used to determine the minority characteristics of resident populations by block group. If any part of a block group is located within 5 mi. (8km) of the SHINE site, the entire block group is included in the analysis. A total of 48block groups meet this criteria and are evaluated as part of this analysis (Table 19.4.12-1).The following methodology is used to identify populations that may be the subject of EJ considerations.19.4.12.1.1Minority Populations NRC guidance requires analysis of individual race and ethnicity classifications as well as the aggregate of all minority populations (NRC, 2009). Based on NRC guidance, a minority population exists if either of the following two conditions exist:*The minority population of the block group of the impacted area (block group) exceeds 50percent of the total population of the block group.*The minority population percentage of the block group significantly (20 percentage points) exceeds the geographic area chosen for comparative analysis (NRC, 2004).For the 48 block groups within the geographic area of analysis (5-mi. [8-km] radius), the percentage of each block group's minority population in all of the minority classifications is calculated. If any block group has a minority percentage that exceeds 50 percent, then the block group is identified as containing a minority population. If any block group has a minority Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewEnvironmental JusticeSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-105Rev. 0percentage exceeding the corresponding minority percentage for Rock County and the State of Wisconsin by more than 20 percentage points, then a minority population is determined to exist in that block group.19.4.12.1.2Low-Income Populations NRC guidance defines low-income households as th ose with incomes that are less than the poverty level (NRC, 2004). A block group is considered low-income if either of the following two conditions is met:*The low-income population of the block group of the impacted area (block group) exceeds 50percent of the total number of households in the block group*The low-income population percentage of the block group significantly (20percentage points) exceeds the geographic area chosen for comparative analysisThe number of low-income households in each census block group is divided by the total households for that block group to obtain the percentage of low-income households per block group. If any block group has a low-income percentage exceeding 50 percent, then the block group is identified as containing a low-income population. If any block group has a minority percentage exceeding the corresponding percentage for Rock County and the State of Wisconsin by more than 20 percentage points, then a low-income population is determined to exist.19.4.12.2Assessment of Disproportionate Impacts19.4.12.2.1Minority Populations Table 19.4.12-1 presents the results of the analysis for minority populations. The table displays the percentage of minority populations in each block group and the totals for the complete 5-mi. | ||
(8-km) radius. The percentages of each minority category within the county and state are also presented as the basis for determining which block groups meet the criteria. | |||
None of the 48 census block groups within the 5-mi. (8-km) radius meet the NRC quantitative method for identifying a minority population. Generally, Hispanic or Latino, Black or African American, and Two or More Races (i.e. multiracial) classifications represent the predominant minority populations in the block groups within 5mi. (8-km) of the SHINE site; however, no block group contains a minority population (individual or aggregate) that either exceeds 50percent or significantly exceeds the comparative geographic areas. Overall, the percentage of minority groups in the 5-mi. (8-km) area of analysis is less than comparative figures for Rock County and Wisconsin. The aggregate minority population in the 5-mi. (8-km) study area is 11.1percent, compared to 15.5 percent in the county and 16.7 in the state. The aggregate minority population includes all minority populations, as defined by NRC (NRC, 2009) (seeSubsection19.4.12.1).Only a small percentage of the study area population is American Indian and Alaska native (0.3percent) in the study area, and there is no American Indian reservation within 5mi. (8km) of the SHINE site (Bureau of Indian Affairs, 2012). | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewEnvironmental JusticeSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-106Rev. 0There is one property in the immediate vicinity of the SHINE site that appears to be a location for regular congregation of minorities. A relatively small Hispanic church congregation uses a building located on US 51 to the south of the SHINE site. The church, called Iglesia Hispania Pentecostale, is not located within a minority block group.Within the 5-mi. (8-km) radius of the SHINE facility, there is an absence of populations indentified as minority that qualify as EJ populations. Therefore, the potential for a disproportionately high impact to these populations is SMALL.19.4.12.2.2Low-Income Populations Table 19.4.12-1 presents the results of the analysis for low-income populations. The table displays the percentage of low-income households in each block group, the total for the 5-mi. | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewEnvironmental JusticeSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-106Rev. 0There is one property in the immediate vicinity of the SHINE site that appears to be a location for regular congregation of minorities. A relatively small Hispanic church congregation uses a building located on US 51 to the south of the SHINE site. The church, called Iglesia Hispania Pentecostale, is not located within a minority block group.Within the 5-mi. (8-km) radius of the SHINE facility, there is an absence of populations indentified as minority that qualify as EJ populations. Therefore, the potential for a disproportionately high impact to these populations is SMALL.19.4.12.2.2Low-Income Populations Table 19.4.12-1 presents the results of the analysis for low-income populations. The table displays the percentage of low-income households in each block group, the total for the 5-mi. | ||
(8-km) radius, and the percentage of low-income households within the county and state. The table also highlights the block groups that meet the NRC criteria for low-income populations. | (8-km) radius, and the percentage of low-income households within the county and state. The table also highlights the block groups that meet the NRC criteria for low-income populations. | ||
| Line 539: | Line 1,016: | ||
However, it is not anticipated that construction activity will be heavy on Sundays when the most Hispanic minority persons would be expected to visit the church. Additionally, because dust control measures are used and because noise attenuates to acceptable levels near the site boundary (see Subsection 19.4.2), the potential impacts to minority populations are SMALL.19.4.12.3.2Low-Income Populations As described in Subsection19.4.12.2.2, the Janesville Terrace Mobile Home Park is located to the north of the SHINE site and may include low-income households. Plant construction may result in construction related noise, exposure to fugitive dust, exhaust emissions, vibrations, and generation of construction-related wastes. These are potential impacts that would impact the general population, but have no disproportionate impact on low-income populations. Mitigation measures include implementing best management practices for controlling fugitive dust and proper maintenance of construction equipment for controlling emissions; recycling of construction waste, to the extent possible; and, minimizing land disturbance, removing construction debris in a timely manner, and adding landscape enhancements. Additionally, noise levels attenuate to acceptable levels near the site boundary (see Subsection19.4.2). Therefore, human health and environmental impacts on low-income populations are SMALL. | However, it is not anticipated that construction activity will be heavy on Sundays when the most Hispanic minority persons would be expected to visit the church. Additionally, because dust control measures are used and because noise attenuates to acceptable levels near the site boundary (see Subsection 19.4.2), the potential impacts to minority populations are SMALL.19.4.12.3.2Low-Income Populations As described in Subsection19.4.12.2.2, the Janesville Terrace Mobile Home Park is located to the north of the SHINE site and may include low-income households. Plant construction may result in construction related noise, exposure to fugitive dust, exhaust emissions, vibrations, and generation of construction-related wastes. These are potential impacts that would impact the general population, but have no disproportionate impact on low-income populations. Mitigation measures include implementing best management practices for controlling fugitive dust and proper maintenance of construction equipment for controlling emissions; recycling of construction waste, to the extent possible; and, minimizing land disturbance, removing construction debris in a timely manner, and adding landscape enhancements. Additionally, noise levels attenuate to acceptable levels near the site boundary (see Subsection19.4.2). Therefore, human health and environmental impacts on low-income populations are SMALL. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewEnvironmental JusticeSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-108Rev. 019.4.12.4Mitigation MeasuresMitigation measures to reduce or minimize adverse impacts on EJ populations are not required; any measures as described in Subsections 19.4.12.2 and 19.4.12.3 are used to minimize potentially adverse impacts of construction affecting the general population, which are expected to be SMALL. | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewEnvironmental JusticeSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-108Rev. 019.4.12.4Mitigation MeasuresMitigation measures to reduce or minimize adverse impacts on EJ populations are not required; any measures as described in Subsections 19.4.12.2 and 19.4.12.3 are used to minimize potentially adverse impacts of construction affecting the general population, which are expected to be SMALL. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewEnvironmental JusticeSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-109Rev. 0Table 19.4.12-1 Minority and Low-Income Population Statistics for Block Groups within a 5-Mi. Radius of the SHINESite(Sheet 1 of 2)Block GroupCensus TractLow-Income Population (%)Minority Population (%)(a)Black or African American American Indian and Alaska Native Asian Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander Some Other Race Two or More RacesHispanic or LatinoAggregate1129.05.10.10.30.00.02.18.816.5124.80.60.30.50.00.01.52.15.0 223.10.90.61.50.00.00.91.55.5 3235.02.60.41.10.00.12.26.112. | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewEnvironmental JusticeSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-109Rev. 0Table 19.4.12-1 Minority and Low-Income Population Statistics for Block Groups within a 5-Mi. Radius of the SHINESite(Sheet 1 of 2)Block GroupCensus TractLow-Income Population (%)Minority Population (%) | ||
(a)Black or | |||
African American American Indian and Alaska Native Asian Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander Some Other Race Two or More RacesHispanic or LatinoAggregate1129.05.10.10.30.00.02.18.816.5124.80.60.30.50.00.01.52.15.0 223.10.90.61.50.00.00.91.55.5 | |||
3235.02.60.41.10.00.12.26.112.5 1356.67.50.31.60.00.02.711.623.8 2348.17.60.65.00.00.23.313.630.43316.14.20.47.20.00.72.05.920.3 1427.85.10.13.30.00.03.69.521.7 2417.82.30.02.00.00.14.37.015.7 3418.20.80.30.30.00.00.72.95.0 4431.01.80.42.90.00.51.914.421.9 154.51.00.41.00.40.00.63.16.4 2510.10.90.70.30.00.03.62.78.1 350.02.30.02.20.20.02.87.014.5 4521.01.30.91.00.10.02.03.89.2 558.01.30.40.70.00.10.910.113.5 167.02.40.20.30.40.22.03.69.2 2619.82.80.30.40.00.03.96.013.4 285.90.20.20.40.00.00.33.64.8 383.71.60.20.50.00.30.95.28.7 483.13.70.50.30.10.02.57.314.4 191.40.80.00.40.00.00.84.36.3 299.01.30.20.50.10.00.52.55.2 1107.42.70.71.00.00.11.76.512.7 21016.91.60.30.60.00.21.111.215.1 1117.01.70.11.10.00.11.23.07.3 2119.91.30.11.50.10.02.23.99.1 31122.66.90.10.80.00.02.79.519.9 4117.30.90.30.60.00.01.82.96.5 51126.32.80.21.20.00.01.111.516.7 112.0110.83.30.20.80.00.02.13.49.9 212.012.71.10.10.30.00.00.72.64.8 312.014.30.40.40.80.00.01.51.84.9 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewEnvironmental JusticeSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-110Rev. 0Table 19.4.12-1 Minority and Low-Income Population Statistics for Block Groups within a 5-Mi. Radius of the SHINESite(Sheet 2 of 2)Block GroupCensus TractLow-Income Population (%)Minority Population (%) | |||
(a)Black or African American American Indian and Alaska Native Asian Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander Some Other Race Two or More RacesHispanic or LatinoAggregate113.020.02.30.11.00.10.10.72.16.4213.029.51.50.10.70.00.00.62.85.6 313.026.33.40.00.90.00.00.72.77.7 413.028.60.50.00.00.00.31.01.13.0 513.023.71.20.10.50.00.01.02.04.7 1144.11.00.51.20.00.20.91.04.9 21419.03.80.20.10.00.20.910.615.8 31413.23.10.31.60.20.01.410.917.6 4145.51.50.20.60.00.01.04.17.4 2220.01.10.60.40.00.32.02.06.5 1249.03.70.11.80.00.01.33.210.0 22411.83.30.20.90.00.00.85.110.1 32420.72.60.40.30.10.02.23.39.0 126.0121.814.10.11.20.00.21.911.028.3 126.0214.73.90.11.70.00.10.84.511.2Total, 5-Mi. Radius12.72.70.31.10.00.11.65.411.1Comparative PopulationsRockCountyState ofWisconsin11.44.80.21.00.00.11.77.615.511.26.20.92.30.00.11.45.916.7a) Shaded block groups meet the NRC qualitative method for identifying low-income populations. | |||
==References:== | ==References:== | ||
USCB, 2010c; USCB, 2006-2010. | USCB, 2010c; USCB, 2006-2010. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-111Rev. 019.4.13CUMULATIVE EFFECTSThis subsection discusses the cumulative impacts to the region's environment that could result from construction and operation of the SHINE facility. A cumulative impac t is defined in Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations (40 CFR 1508.7) as an "impact on the environment which results from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency (federal or non-federal) or person undertakes such other actions." To guide its assessment of the environmental impacts of a proposed action, the NRC has established a standard of significance for impacts based on guidance developed by the CEQ (40CFR1508.27). To address cumulative impacts, the existing environment in the region surrounding the SHINE site was considered in conjunction with the environmental impacts as presented in Section19.4 for constructing and operating a new facility at the SHINE site. These combined impacts are defined by the CEQ as "cumulative" in 40CFR1508.7 and may include individually minor but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time.Cumulative effects analysis encompasses a consideration of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future (Federal, non-Federal, and private) actions that could have meaningful cumulative impacts together with the proposed action. Past construction and operational impacts of existing industrial uses and developments are part of the existing baseline conditions in the region and are therefore, intrinsically integrated as part of the cumulative effects analysis. The cumulative effects analysis therefore, focuses on the additive impacts from the existing baseline conditions, the effects of a new facility, and other identified present and reasonably foreseeable future actions. Table 19.4.13-1 provides a listing of all projects identified as potentially contributing to cumulative impacts. To identify other actions SHINE considered:*Information about current or planned local economic development programs or projects (e.g., commercial, industrial, and/or residential); and *Information about current or planned infrastructure improvements (e.g., transportation, electric and water utility).As described in NRC Memo ML100621017, actions that are not reasonably foreseeable are those that are based on mere speculation or conjecture, or those that have only been discussed on a conceptual basis. These can include projects that have not yet been approved by the proper authorities or have not yet submitted license/permit applications. Present and future projects that were considered for cumulative effects analysis but did not meet the criteria established for reasonable foreseeability were not retained. Projects and other actions retained for the cumulative effects analysis are identified in Table 19.4.13-2 and Figure 19.4.13-1.Cumulative impacts of the new facility and other identified present and reasonably foreseeable future actions are assessed for the following resources: land use and visual resources; air quality and noise; geologic environment; water resources (hydrology, water use, water quality); ecological resources (terrestrial and aquatic communities); historic and cultural resources; the socioeconomic environment; human health; and environmental justice. According to the CEQ's Considering Cumulative Effects Under the National Environmental Policy Act (CEQ, 1997), the Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-112Rev. 0establishment of an appropriate geographic area of analysis is an important step in performing the cumulative effects analysis. The geographic areas for analysis were selected based on the environmental effects that may occur to each of the affected resources under consideration and are the same as those used for each resource category in Section 19.4. The sensitivity of cumulative effects is resource-based, and an appropriate context of analysis was selected for each of the resources described below.19.4.13.1Land Use and Visual ResourcesThe description of the affected environment in Subsection 19.3.1 serves as a baseline for the land use and visual resources cu mulative impact assessment. The geographic area of analysis for evaluation of cumulative effects on land use and visual resources is the same as that used in Subsection 19.4.1 and includes the 91.27 ac. (36.94 ha) within the site boundary and the 5mi. | ||
(8km) region surrounding the site. As discussed in Subsection 19.4.1.1, construction and operation impacts from the SHINE facility on | (8km) region surrounding the site. As discussed in Subsection 19.4.1.1, construction and operation impacts from the SHINE facility on la nd use are SMALL. Impacts from construction and operation to visual resources are SMALL, as discussed in Subsection 19.4.1.2.Table 19.4.13-2 identifies recent past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the geographic extent of analysis that can be assessed to determine cumulative effects on land use and visual resources. Relevant "other actions" that are considered in this cumulative effects analysis are limited to the utility line extensions, proposed facility, TIF District No. 35 Project Plan, an agricultural storage facility immediately south of the SHINE site, the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, and an Alliant Energy power generation facility. The storage facility is a recent past disturbance; however it has on-going affects to land use and visual resources. The utility line extensions, proposed facility, and TIF No. 35 Project Plan are all future actions. The airport, Glen Erin Golf Course and power generation facilities are existing facilities ("present actions") and on-going actions.19.4.13.1.1Land Use Resources The City of Janesville plans to install a water main and sanitary sewer main along the northern boundary of the SHINE site as part of the overall TIF District No. 35 development activities. Based on the SHINE facility site layout, the expected route of the water main and sewer main connects directly to the facility (Figure 19.2.1-1). Installation of the City's water and sewer mains disturbs a 50-ft. (15-m) wide corridor (one corridor for both water and sewer) with the pipelines centered in the middle of the co rridor. Similarly, installation of the water and sewer connections from the City's mains to the SHINE facility disturbs a 50-ft. (15-m) wide corridor (one corridor for both water and sewer) with the pipelines centered in the middle of the corridor. The corridors temporarily disturb 0.62ac. (0.25ha) immediately adjacent to the northern boundary of the site. Lands disturbed by this corridor include undeveloped cultivated crop lands and prime farmland, which comprise the majority of the land cover within the site and region. In 2004, the City of Janesville purchased 224 ac. (91ha) of land located south of SH11 and west of County Truck Highway G with the intention of creating a TIF district. The parcel is vacant industrial land in agricultural use in an industrially-zoned area on the City's southeast side. The parcel is unimproved and has been used for agricultural crop production for decades. The land has since been zoned for light industrial use and is "shovel ready" certified. Land cover in this parcel consists entirely of cultivated crops and includes prime farmland. The region surrounding the SHINE site includes over 25,000 ac. (10,000 ha) of cultivated crop land and approximately 42,000 ac. (17,000 ha) of prime farmland or farmland of statewide importance Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-113Rev. 0(seeSubsection19.3.1.1). Consequently, the utilization of the 224 ac. (91ha) included in the TIF District No. 35 Project Plan would have a minimal change in the availability of these resources in the region. Immediately adjacent to the southern border of the SHINE site are two large warehouses that support local agriculture operations and provide storage for large farming equipment. The warehouse facility has resulted in the conversion of prime farmland and the land surrounding the site. This development represents a recent ground disturbance that has impacted the overall land use and potential crop production for the region. As described in Subsection 19.3.1.1.4, the potential relative value of the farmland for the 91.27ac. (36.94 ha) comprising the SHINE site is 13,771 Bu. of grain corn or 3947Bu. of soybeans, while the 10-year production estimate average for Rock County, Wisconsin, is 22,075,540Bu. of grain corn and 3,786,415Bu. of soybeans. The minor loss of on-site agricultural lands, including prime farmland and farmland of state wide importance, and the subsequent loss of potential crop production to industrial facilities is a minor impact when compared to the amount of agricultural land, land designated as prime farmland or farmland of state wide importance, and potential crop production remaining within the region (see Table19.4.1-1 and Subsection 19.3.1.1.4). Therefore, cumulative impacts to land use resources, including agricultural resources, are SMALL.19.4.13.1.2Visual ResourcesThe immediate location of the SHINE site and TIF District No. 35 is composed entirely of land used for agricultural purposes and has no existing architectural features, established structures, or natural-built barriers, screens, or buffers. Consequently, the SHINE facility and any light industrial structure built at the TIF District No. 35 location alters the on-site condition and partially obstructs views of the existing landscape. However, the visual setting of the site is generally flat and uniform in landform with low vegetation diversity and a low visual quality rating (see Subsection19.3.1.3).The viewshed to the west of the site across US51 is a light industrial development landscape that consists of the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport and its associated facilities, which includes the airport control tower and several large warehouses and hangers. The viewshed to the south of the site includes the two large warehouses immediately adjacent to the southern border of the site that support local agricultural operations and provide storage for large farming equipment. Additionally, the viewshed to the south includes several stacks associated with an Alliant Energy coal-fired power generation facility. While a portion of the plant is non-operational, the stacks are still visible as part of the viewshed. Together with the buildings and structures to the south and west, the facilities located at the SHINE and TIF District No. 35 sites do not significantly alter the visual setting. Therefore, cumulative impacts to visual resources are SMALL.19.4.13.2Air Quality and Noise 19.4.13.2.1Air QualityThe description of the affected environment in Subsection 19.3.2 serves as a baseline for the air quality cumulative impact assessment. Table 19.4.13-2 identifies recent past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the geographic extent of analysis that can be Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-114Rev. 0assessed to determine cumulative effects on air quality. Relevant "other actions" that are considered in this cumulative effects analysis include the TIF District No. 35 Project Plan (Rock County), the Alliant Energy - WP&L Turtle Generating Facility, NorthStar Medical Isotopes facility (Rock County), United Ethanol (Rock County), Generac Power Systems (Jefferson County), Kraft Foods Global (Dane County), and University of Wisconsin Madison (Dane County). With the exception of the TIF District No. 35 Project Plan and NorthStar Medical facility, which are future actions, all of the projects are present and on-going actions. The geographic area of analysis for evaluation of cumulative effects on air quality is the same as that used in Subsection 19.4.2 and includes Rock County and the four surrounding counties in Wisconsin: Green, Dane, Jefferson, and Walworth. As described in Subsection19.4.2.1.1, air emission impacts from construction are SMALL as emissions are controlled at the source where practicable; maintained within established regulatory limits designed to minimize impacts; and located a significant distance from the public. Operations of the facility have a SMALL impact on air quality, as discussed in Subsection19.4.2.1.2. Criteria PollutantsAir emission impacts as a result of concurrent construction activities are expected at both the SHINE and NorthStar Medical facilities. In addition, construction at the TIF District No. 35 site could overlap with construction activities at either of these facilities. Construction activity at NorthStar is expected to begin in 2013, with completion slated for mid-2014 (NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, 2012). Depending on the actual completion date for NorthStar, this construction schedule may overlap with the proposed construction schedule for SHINE, which is scheduled to begin in 2015. Implementation of mitigation measures described in Subsection19.4.2.1.1 minimizes impacts to local ambient air quality and the nuisance impacts to the public in proximity to the project. Impacts to air quality from construction activities are expected to be minor, localized, and short-term; therefore, overlapping construction schedules are not expected to contribute significantly to cumulative effects.The proposed NorthStar facility will produce small air emissions from operation of the building's heating system and from the use of chemicals to dissolve Mo-99 targets (DOE, 2012). Gaseous effluents at the SHINE facility are a result of isotope production and fuel combustion, as discussed in Subsection19.4.2.1.2. The SHINE facility does not result in exceedances of federal or state criteria air quality criteria. Operations emissions from both facilities are subject to permitting by the WDNR and controlled at the source using appropriate emissions control systems. In addition, the electricity demand of the SHINE and NorthStar facilities may result in an increase in regional electricity demand. However, this increase is not expected to exceed supply or the ability to deliver it and would not substantially increase air emissions for the region.Existing permitted emissions facilities are considered part of the baseline air quality. Given its proximity to the SHINE site, it is notable that the Alliant Energy - WP&L Turtle Generating Facility recently received an Air Pollution Control Operation Permit (WDNR,2011b). New construction-related emissions permits identified through the WDNR permit application website are all small-scaled and are not expected to have a significant impact on air quality in the region. | ||
United Ethanol, an ethanol production facility in Rock County, has one active Construction Permit that was issued in May, 2012 for upgrades to the existing facility. In Jefferson County, Generac Power Systems has an active operating permit renewed to 2015 and is planning modifications to one of their venting stacks, which was issued a Construction Permit exemption in April, 2012. In Chapter 19 - Environmental | United Ethanol, an ethanol production facility in Rock County, has one active Construction Permit that was issued in May, 2012 for upgrades to the existing facility. In Jefferson County, Generac Power Systems has an active operating permit renewed to 2015 and is planning modifications to one of their venting stacks, which was issued a Construction Permit exemption in April, 2012. In Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-115Rev. 0Dane County, Kraft Foods Global was issued a Construction Permit in June, 2012 to construct and operate three natural gas or distillate fuel fired boilers. The University of Wisconsin (West Campus) cogeneration facility is planning to add a four-cell cooling tower associated with the chiller plant expansion (exempted from obtaining a Construction Permit in August, 2012). The University of Wisconsin (Charter Street) was issued a Construction Permit in February, 2012 to construct boilers and emergency equipment. The University of Wisconsin is also planning to replace a coal-fired boiler with a natural gas boiler, which will reduce overall emissions (University of Wisconsin, 2009). It is expected that each of these projects will operate in such a manner as to not violate the established permit levels or federal and state criteria. Additionally, permitting reviews performed by the WDNR are conducted to ensure that new permits do not result in regional air quality degradation. Therefore, the cumulative impacts of criteria pollutants to air quality are SMALL.Greenhouse Gas EmissionsThe cumulative impacts of a single or combination of GHG emission sources must be placed in geographic context, considering the following factors:*The environmental impact should be assessed on a global rather than local or regional basis.*The effect is not sensitive to the location of the emission release point.*The magnitudes of individual GHG sources related to human activity, no matter how large compared to other sources, are small when compared to the total mass of GHGs in the | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | |||
atmosphere.*The total number and variety of GHG sources is extremely large and the sources are ubiquitous.GHG emissions associated with building, operating, and decommissioning the new facility are discussed in Subsection 19.4.2.1.2.3. As noted in Subsection 19.4.3.2.5, SHINE will develop a comprehensive program to avoid and control GHG emissions associated with the facility.Evaluation of cumulative impacts of GHG emissions requires the use of a global climate model. A synthesis of the results of numerous climate modeling studies are presented in the report from Karl, et al. (Karl, et al., 2009). The cumulative impacts of global GHG emissions as presented in the report are the appropriate basis for evaluation of cumulative impacts with regards to the SHINE facility. The report concludes that climate changes are underway in the United States as part of the global climate and that these changes are projected to grow. While noticeable, none of the changes will result in a destabilization of the global climate. In 2010 the EPA issued the CO2 Tailoring Rule (75 Federal Register [FR] 31514), which stated that GHG emissions will be factors in PSD and TitleV permitting and reporting. This revised permitting criterion indicates the need to regulate CO 2 and other GHGs from major emission sources. GHG emissions from individual stationary sources and, cumulatively, from multiple sources can contribute to national and global climate change. Given the relative ly low emissions from the SHINE facility in comparison to total global emissions, cumulative impacts of the proposed facility are SMALL. Furthermore, the cumulative impacts of GHG emissions would still be the same at the national and global scale without the GHG emissions of the proposed SHINE facility. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-116Rev. 019.4.13.2.2NoiseThe description of the affected environment in Subsection 19.3.2 serves as a baseline for the noise cumulative impact assessment. The geographic area of analysis for evaluation of cumulative effects from noise emissions includes the 91.27 ac. (36.94 ha) within the site boundary and the 1 mi. (1.6 km) area surrounding the site. This area was selected as it encompasses the nearest noise receptors to the SHINE site identified in Subsection19.4.3.6.1 and is a distance over which noise generated at the SHINE site would attenuate to negligible levels. Noise impacts resulting from construction and operation of the SHINE facility are discussed in Subsections19.4.2.2.1 and 19.4.2.2.2 and are SMALL.Table 19.4.13-2 identifies recent past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the geographic extent of analysis that can be assessed to determine cumulative effects on noise. | |||
Relevant "other actions" that are considered in this cumulative effects analysis are limited to the proposed facility, TIF District No. 35 Project Plan, and the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport. The proposed facility and TIF District No. 35 Project Plan are future actions and the airport is a current and on-going action.During the construction periods for the SHINE (including the off-site utility extension) and TIF District No. 35 facilities, additional impacts to noise are expected in the immediate area around each site. Noise levels from construction equipment are expected to attenuate rapidly with distance, and therefore, do not significantly impact nearby sensitive noise receptors. Noise levels are also impacted by increases in traffic volume during both construction and operation; however they are not expected to be significantly higher than current traffic levels. External noise emission from the SHINE facility during operation is primarily limited by the walls and other physical barriers of the facility itself. Noise generated at the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport contributes to the existing baseline noise levels of the region. The airport currently operates approximately 140 flights per day. | Relevant "other actions" that are considered in this cumulative effects analysis are limited to the proposed facility, TIF District No. 35 Project Plan, and the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport. The proposed facility and TIF District No. 35 Project Plan are future actions and the airport is a current and on-going action.During the construction periods for the SHINE (including the off-site utility extension) and TIF District No. 35 facilities, additional impacts to noise are expected in the immediate area around each site. Noise levels from construction equipment are expected to attenuate rapidly with distance, and therefore, do not significantly impact nearby sensitive noise receptors. Noise levels are also impacted by increases in traffic volume during both construction and operation; however they are not expected to be significantly higher than current traffic levels. External noise emission from the SHINE facility during operation is primarily limited by the walls and other physical barriers of the facility itself. Noise generated at the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport contributes to the existing baseline noise levels of the region. The airport currently operates approximately 140 flights per day. | ||
Additional flight operations may increase due to the demand to transport materials to and from the SHINE and NorthStar facilities; however these increases are not anticipated to cause an appreciable increase in noise above the current operations. Therefore, cumulative impacts to noise in the region are SMALL.19.4.13.3Geologic Environment The description of the affected environment in Subsection19.3.3 serves as a baseline for the geologic environment cumulative impact assessment. The geographic area of analysis for evaluation of cumulative effects on geologic resources is the same as that used in Subsection19.4.3 and includes the 91.27ac. (36.94ha) within the site boundary and the 5mi. (8km) region surrounding the site. As discussed in Subsection19.4.3, construction and operation impacts from the SHINE site on the geologic environment are SMALL.Table 19.4.13-2 identifies recent past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the geographic extent of analysis that can be assessed to determine cumulative effects on the geologic environment. Relevant "other actions" that are considered in this cumulative effects analysis are limited to the utility line extensions, the proposed facility, and the TIF District No.35 Project Plan, all of which are future actions. No present or on-going actions were identified that are relevant to this analysis. | Additional flight operations may increase due to the demand to transport materials to and from the SHINE and NorthStar facilities; however these increases are not anticipated to cause an appreciable increase in noise above the current operations. Therefore, cumulative impacts to noise in the region are SMALL.19.4.13.3Geologic Environment The description of the affected environment in Subsection19.3.3 serves as a baseline for the geologic environment cumulative impact assessment. The geographic area of analysis for evaluation of cumulative effects on geologic resources is the same as that used in Subsection19.4.3 and includes the 91.27ac. (36.94ha) within the site boundary and the 5mi. (8km) region surrounding the site. As discussed in Subsection19.4.3, construction and operation impacts from the SHINE site on the geologic environment are SMALL.Table 19.4.13-2 identifies recent past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the geographic extent of analysis that can be assessed to determine cumulative effects on the geologic environment. Relevant "other actions" that are considered in this cumulative effects analysis are limited to the utility line extensions, the proposed facility, and the TIF District No.35 Project Plan, all of which are future actions. No present or on-going actions were identified that are relevant to this analysis. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-117Rev. 0Impacts to the geologic environment from other actions are minor. The proximity of the utility line extensions and TIF District No.35 project to the SHINE site results in impacts to the same geologic resources as those affected by the SHINE facility. However, there are no sensitive geologic resources in the region surrounding the SHINE site. Impacts from these identified projects are expected to be localized and minor. Therefore, cumulative impacts are SMALL.19.4.13.4Water Resources The description of the affected environment in Subsection19.3.4 serves as a baseline for the water resources cumulative impact assessment. The geographic area of analysis for evaluation of cumulative effects on water resources is the same as that used in Subsection19.4.4 and includes the 91.27ac. (36.94ha) within the site boundary and the 5mi. (8km) region surrounding the site. As discussed in Subsection19.4.4.1, construction impacts to water resources are SMALL. Impacts from operation of the facility are discussed in Subsection19.4.4.2 and are SMALL.Table19.4.13-2 identifies recent past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the geographic extent of analysis that can be assessed to determine cumulative effects on water resources. Relevant "other actions" that are considered in this cumulative effects analysis are limited to the utility line extensions planned in support of the SHINE facilit y, proposed facility, TIF District No. 35 Project Plan, Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, and Glen Erin Golf Course. The utility lines, proposed facility, and TIF development are all future actions. Present and on-going actions include the airport and golf course.19.4.13.4.1HydrologyThere are no surface water resources located on either the SHINE or TIF District No. 35 sites; therefore there are no direct impacts as a result of alteration of streams or water bodies. The nearest water bodies are the nearby unnamed tributary to Rock River, located 1.6mi (2.6km) south of the SHINE site, and the Rock River, located 1.9 mi. (3.1 km) southwest of the SHINE site. Construction of the SHINE facility and at the TIF District No. 35 location represents potential sources of pollution associated with runoff from construction sites. It is anticipated that at both sites BMP are used in accordance with the SWPPP, as required by the WDNR, to prevent sediment runoff and subsequent siltation in receiving streams during construction.During operations, potential impacts associated with hydrology are related to stormwater management as agricultural lands at the site are converted to urban development. Currently, sheet flow runoff at the SHINE site location follows natural drainage patterns and discharges to a ditch along US51. The planned SHINE facility collects runoff from the developed parts to be directed through a vegetated on-site detention swale before being discharged through an outfall control structure to the ditch along US51 (Subsection19.4.5). Future facilities at the TIF District No. 35 may include a storm sewer collection system that includes underground piping, surface detention area, and safety fencing (City of Janesville, 2012b). Additionally, when combined with the distance to the nearest off-site water bodies, runoff and siltation to the receiving streams is minimized. Cumulative hydrologic impacts are therefore, SMALL.19.4.13.4.2Water Use All public water supplies in Rock County, including the City of Janesville are derived from groundwater. No public water supplies are provided by surface water within the region. In Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-118Rev. 0addition to the SHINE facility, the only other future demand on the groundwater supply in Janesville is the potential TIF District No. 35 development. Approval of the TIF District No. 35 Project Plan indicates that the City of Janesville has the capacity to serve the future development with both public water supply and wastewater treatment. According to the City of Janesville, the water main and sewer main infrastructure will have more than enough capacity to support the SHINE facility; therefore no upgrades to the City water supply system and sanitary sewer system are anticipated (Subsection 19.4.7). Therefore, cumulative impacts from water use are SMALL.19.4.13.4.3Water QualityExisting stormwater pollutant sources within the region around the SHINE site include urban developments, which are associated with pollutants such as phosphorous and chloride. Phosphorous has been identified as a general pollutant of concern across Wisconsin due to the impacts associated with nutrient build up in lakes. Phosphorous is also a potential pollutant associated with fertilizer application on agricultural lands. Fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides also are generally applied on golf courses. Chloride is another typical pollutant associated with development, particularly resulting from winter applications of salt on roadways and sidewalks for de-icing. Chloride is not readily adsorbed on soil particles or taken up by vegetation.The TIF District No. 35 Project Plan is the only other potential future project within the region of the SHINE site that has the potential to contribute to cumulative impacts on water quality as it is in the same subwatershed as the SHINE site. Other notable developed uses within the same subwatershed that may be the source of pollutant loading include the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport and the Glen Erin Golf Club. However, runoff from the SHINE site is detained in grassed detention areas and because of the high infiltration rates of the soil, is not conveyed to downstream areas within any organized stream channel. Similarly, no organized stream channel is evident near the SHINE site on either the airport or the golf course. Designs for development of the TIF District No. 35 site are expected to incorporate similar detention basins and best management practices as required by Wisconsin DNR and local regulations. Therefore, in consideration of the SHINE site design, future designs for detention associated with the TIF development site, high infiltration rates, and the absence of an organized stream channel near the SHINE site, cumulative impacts on surface water resources are SMALL.The SHINE facility is 91.27ac. (36.94ha) in size, and 53.75ac. (21.75ha) are expected to remain in use for the production of agricultural row crops or be returned to pre-settlement conditions. The removal of 38.52ac. (15.58ha) from row crop production results in a proportional reduction in the amount of agricultural chemicals (fertilizers, etc.) applied on the site, and less potential impact to groundwater quality from pollutant loading. If the remaining 53.75 ac (21.75 ha) were returned to pre-settlement conditions it would result in an even greater reduction in the use of agriculture chemicals. Similarly, the TIF development reduces the area of active agricultural lands and reduces the amount of agricultural chemical application. Consequently, less pollutant loading to groundwater would occur from agricultural practices. No other cumulative impacts to groundwater quality are expected. Therefore, cumulative impacts to groundwater resources are SMALL.19.4.13.5Ecological ResourcesThe description of the affected environment in Subsection19.3.5 serves as a baseline for the ecological resources cumulative impact assessment. The geographic area of analysis for evaluation of cumulative effects on ecological resources is the same as that used in Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-119Rev. 0Subsection19.4.5 and includes the 91.27 ac. (36.94 ha) within the site boundary and the 5mi. (8km) region surrounding the site. As discussed in Subsection19.4.5.1, impacts from construction on terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems, including protected species, are SMALL. Subsection 19.4.5.2 demonstrates that the potential impacts from operation of the SHINE facility on terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems, including protected species, are SMALL.Table19.4.13-2 identifies recent past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the geographic extent of analysis that can be assessed to determine cumulative effects on ecological resources. Relevant "other actions" that are considered in this cumulative effects analysis are limited to the utility line extensions, the proposed facility, and the TIF District No. 35 Project Plan, all of which are future actions. No present or on-going actions were identified that are relevant to this analysis.Terrestrial community resources could be affected by the planned utility line extensions by the City of Janesville and the TIF District No. 35 Project Plan. The proximity of the utility line extensions and TIF District No. 35 project to the SHINE site indicates that the ecological resources at these locations are likely similar. All projects include disturbance of cultivated crop lands and prime farmland. As described in Subsection19.4.5.1.3, plant communities in the region include cultivated crops (corn, soybean, winter wheat) and opportunistic weedy species. There are no federal or state-listed threatened, endangered, or special concern plant species observed or in the proximity of the site. Faunal resources in this area are limited due to the agricultural nature of the land. Field investigations identified bird and mammal species occurring in the region, however there were no state or federally listed species. Therefore, cumulative impacts to terrestrial ecological resources are SMALL.Aquatic community resources that could be affected by the proposed facility and TIF District No.35 Project Plan include the unnamed tributary to Rock River and the Rock River. The unnamed tributary, a small intermittent stream, is 1.6mi. (2.6km) south of the SHINE site and the Rock River is 1.9mi. (3.1km) southwest of the site. There are no wetlands within the SHINE site and dewatering of groundwater in excavations is not anticipated. BMPs will be used in | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | |||
accordance with the SWPPP, as required by the WDNR, to prevent sediment runoff and subsequent siltation in receiving streams during construction. Because of the distance to the off-site streams and the implementation of BMPs on-site during construction, cumulative impacts to aquatic resources are SMALL.19.4.13.6Historical and Cultural ResourcesThe description of the affected environment in Subsection19.3.6 serves as a baseline for the historical and cultural resources cumulative impact assessment. The geographic area of analysis for evaluation of cumulative effects on historical and cultural resources is the same as that used in Section 19.4.6 and includes the 91.27 ac. (36.94ha) within the site boundary and the 10mi. (16km) region surrounding the site. As discussed in Subsection19.4.6.1, impacts from construction and operation of the SHINE facility are SMALL.Table19.4.13-2 identifies recent past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the geographic extent of analysis that can be assessed to determine cumulative effects on historical and cultural resources. Relevant "other actions" that are considered in this cumulative effects analysis are limited to the utility line extensions, the proposed facility, the TIF District No.35 Project Plan, and NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, all of which are future actions. No present or on-going actions were identified that are relevant to this analysis. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-120Rev. 0The utility line extensions and TIF District No. 35 are in the same cultural context as the SHINE site. Based on the absence of archaeological sites found on the SHINE site and the immediate project area (Subsection19.3.6) it is expected that the potential for undiscovered historic properties (archaeology or historic architecture) occurring on the TIF District No. 35 project area is also low. Furthermore, there have been no Native American traditional properties identified within the region of the SHINE site. It is expected that site development practices at the TIF District No. 35 project include appropriate reviews by the WHS such that potential impacts to historic resources are either avoided or mitigated. Impacts to cultural resources were evaluated in the Environmental Assessment for NorthStar and it was determined that no cultural resources will be impacted by the project (DOE, 2012). Therefore, cumulative impacts to historic and cultural resources are SMALL.19.4.13.7Socioeconomic Environment The description of the affected environment in Subsection19.3.7 serves as a baseline for the socioeconomic cumulative impact assessment. The geographic area of analysis for evaluation of cumulative effects on socioeconomic resources is the same as that used in Subsection19.4.7 and includes the 91.27 ac. (36.94 ha) within the site boundary and the surrounding Rock County. As discussed in Subsection19.4.7.1, impacts from construction and operation of the SHINE facility have a SMALL impact on socioeconomic conditions. Impacts to transportation in Rock County associated with the development of the SHINE site are discussed in Subsection19.4.7.2 and are SMALL.Table 19.4.13-2 identifies recent past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the geographic extent of analysis that can be assessed to determine cumulative effects on the socioeconomic environment. Relevant "other actions" that are considered in this cumulative effects analysis are limited to the associated ut ility line extensions, the proposed SHINE facility, the TIF District No. 35 Project Plan, and NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, all of which are future actions. No present or on-going actions were identified that are relevant to this analysis.The TIF District No. 35 Project Plan approved in August, 2011, established TIF District No. 35 adjacent to the northern boundary of the SHINE site. In February, 2012, the Project Plan was amended to expand the district boundary to include the SHINE site. Prior to the inclusion of the SHINE site, the 226 ac. (91ha) district was created to facilitate development of a new industrial park. The district is zoned for light industrial uses and has the potential to be subdivided into 16parcels ranging from 10.99 to 18.86 ac. (4.45 to 7.6ha) in size. Wisconsin's Tax Increment District Law allows the City of Janesville to retain the property taxes levied against projected improved property value within TIF District No. 35 to pay for improvement costs that are incurred to attract new industrial development. The Project Plan proposes extension of utilities to the district and construction of an extension of Progress Drive from the north. Construction of additional utility and roadway extensions is expected to be phased to meet the needs of specific development projects.19.4.13.7.1Water Supply and Water Treatment As described in Subsection 19.4.13.2, the City of Janesville plans to install a water main and sanitary sewer main along the northern boundary of the SHINE site. The City has indicated that the water main and sewer main have more than enough capacity to support the facility and construction related population increase. Therefore, the City's water supply system and sanitary sewer system are not expected to require any upgrades. Development of the TIF District No.35 Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-121Rev. 0immediately north of the SHINE site will likely place additional demands on the City's water supply and water treatment system. The project plan for the TIF District No. 35 states that improvements to utilities will be made as needed to facilitate development and expansion (City of Janesville, 2012b). As new streets are constructed to provide access to new sites, sewer and water utilities are expected to be installed within the rights-of-way to minimize impacts. Therefore, cumulative effects to water supply and water treatment are SMALL.19.4.13.7.2Tax BaseThe development of TIF District No.35 facilitates industrial expansion, increases property values, and creates new jobs in the City of Janesville. These jobs support the diversification of the local economy and the increased manufacturing and warehousing/distribution payrolls and have a positive multiplier effect in the trade and service sectors. However, as discussed in Subsection19.4.7.1, the overall tax revenues from the SHINE and TIF District No.35 projects are positive, and relatively small in comparison to the established tax bases. Therefore, cumulative effects to the tax bases are SMALL.19.4.13.7.3Labor Force and PopulationThe NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes facility is planned to be constructed in neighboring Beloit in Rock County, WI. NorthStar plans to break ground in 2013, with production beginning in 2016, and is expected to create more than 150 jobs by 2016 (NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, 2012 and Beloit Daily News, 2011). The NorthStar facility is smaller in land area (33ac. [13ha]) and facility footprint (82,000 square ft. [7618square m]) compared to that of the SHINE facility. No workforce breakdown is available for the NorthStar facility. However, it is possible that the demand for workers may overlap between the two facilities for several labor categories. However, given the large workforce availability within the region, no significant labor category shortfalls are expected. The presence of the Blackhawk Technical College and the University of Wisconsin, Madison will help to ensure the availability of a workforce well trained for the required positions. In consideration of the availability and composition of the existing workforce, the cumulative effects on population growth are SMALL.19.4.13.7.4TransportationAs described in Subsection19.4.7.2, no modifications to the local traffic infrastructure are necessary as a result of construction-related traffic at the SHINE site. If construction activities at the TIF District No. 35 site are concurrent with those at SHINE, it is not expected to result in a significant impact on local traffic patterns or infrastructure. The other future development project in the area, NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, is located in the neighboring City of Beloit and therefore does not contribute to cumulative impacts due to the distance between facilities. | |||
Mitigation measures described in Subsection19.4.7.2.1 alleviate impacts on traffic patterns due to operation of the SHINE facility. It is anticipated that any impacts from operation of the TIF District No.35 or NorthStar facilities can be mitigated in a similar fashion. Therefore, cumulative effects to transportation infrastructure and traffic patterns are SMALL.19.4.13.7.5Summary of Socioeconomic Cumulative ImpactsIn summary, cumulative impacts from other actions identified in Table19.4.13-1 on aspects of socioeconomics, including water/wastewater systems, population growth, local tax base, the labor force, and transportation are SMALL. | Mitigation measures described in Subsection19.4.7.2.1 alleviate impacts on traffic patterns due to operation of the SHINE facility. It is anticipated that any impacts from operation of the TIF District No.35 or NorthStar facilities can be mitigated in a similar fashion. Therefore, cumulative effects to transportation infrastructure and traffic patterns are SMALL.19.4.13.7.5Summary of Socioeconomic Cumulative ImpactsIn summary, cumulative impacts from other actions identified in Table19.4.13-1 on aspects of socioeconomics, including water/wastewater systems, population growth, local tax base, the labor force, and transportation are SMALL. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-122Rev. 019.4.13.8Human HealthThe geographic area of analysis for evaluation of cumulative effects on human health is the same as that used in Subsection19.4.8 and includes the 91.27ac. (36.94 ha) within the site boundary and the 5 mi. (8 km) region surrounding the site. As discussed in Subsections19.4.8.1 and 19.4.8.2, impacts from operation of the SHINE facility has a SMALL impact on human health.Table19.4.13-2 identifies recent past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the geographic extent of analysis that can be assessed to determine cumulative effects on human health. Relevant "other actions" that are considered in this cumulative effects analysis are limited to the proposed facility, NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, and the two medical facilities located in Janesville: Mercy Clinic South and Mercy Hospital. The proposed SHINE and NorthStar facilities are future actions, whereas the hospital facilities are present and on-going.19.4.13.8.1Non-Radiological ImpactsConstruction of the SHINE and NorthStar facilities includes potential hazards to workers typical of any construction site. Normal construction safety practices will be employed to promote worker safety and reduce the likelihood of worker injury during construction. Since the Mercy Clinic South and Mercy Hospital are already operating, they have no associated construction | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | impacts.Potential non-radiological public and occupational hazards pertaining to the operation of the SHINE and NorthStar facilities are associated with emissions, discharges, and waste associated with processes within the facility as well as accidental spills/releases. The great majority of chemical processes at the SHINE facility are conducted inside of the RCA. Any wastes created by these processes are disposed of as radioactive waste and shipped off-site. Some lab-scale chemical use occurs outside the RCA. Liquid wastes produced as a result of these activities are treated to ensure they meet the requirements of the Janesville wastewater treatment facility before being discharged to the municipal sewer. Additionally, the facility sanitary wastewater is treated by the Janesville wastewater treatment facility.Control systems are in place for the SHINE facility and presumably for other permitted projects in accordance with WDNR and local requirements to minimize potential exposure to the public and include conveyance of all wastewater to appropriate approved wastewater treatment facilities, implementation of Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure Plans, and air emission controls, as appropriate. Therefore, cumulative impacts to non-radiological health are SMALL.19.4.13.8.2Radiological ImpactsThe proposed SHINE facility releases small quantities of radionuclides to the environment. Gaseous effluent activity releases and liquid effluent activity releases are discussed in Subsections 19.4.8.2.4.1 and 19.4.8.2.4.2, respectively. Direct dose to a member of the public at the site boundary is due to gamma radiation penetrating the walls of the production facility and the waste staging and shipping facility. As a result of site shielding design, the direct dose outside of the buildings is small and decreases with increasing distance. The nearest site boundary is located at an appreciable distance from the two fixed sources of radiation (production facility building and waste staging and shipping building); therefore the dose is negligible at the site boundary. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-125Rev. 0Table 19.4.13-1 Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Projects and Other Actions Considered in the Cumulative Effects Analysis(Sheet 1 of 3)Project | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-123Rev. 0There are no nuclear fuel cycle facilities located within the 5 mi. (8 km) region around the SHINE site. However, Interstate 39/90 is approximately 2 mi. (3.2 km) from the site boundary, which may result in some radiation exposure from the transportation of radioactive material along the highway. The SHINE site is surrounded by railroads on all sides except for the southeast, so additional doses of radiation may result from transportation of radioactive materials along the | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | railroads. The NorthStar facility is not projecting to have any radioactive emissions related to the operation of the facility. The facility is designed to control the amount of radioactive material released to a negligible amount. Operations emissions are not expected to violate any federal or state criteria or trigger the need for a PSD or Title V operating permit. Additionally, liquid waste generated during operations will be collected, temporarily stored on-site, and sent off-site for treatment and disposal per WDNR regulations. No public dose from air emissi ons or wastewater from the NorthStar facility is expected. Mercy Clinic South and Mercy Hospital provide imaging services to patients that include radiation oncology and nuclear medicine. Doses of radiological exposure to the public from these facilities are negligible. Therefore, cumulative impacts to radiological health are SMALL.As described in Subsection 19.4.10, the effect of transportation of radioactive material from the SHINE facility on the public is SMALL compared to the background radiological dose in the vicinity of the SHINE facility. Transportation workers will receive a larger dose due to the number of shipments originating at the SHINE facility. The shipment of radioactive material for the SHINE and NorthStar facilities contributes to the cumulative impact of radioactive material production, storage, utilization and disposal for all facilities in the United States that utilize radioactive material. The cumulative impacts of the transportation of radioactive materials for the existing facilities in the region, including the Mercy medical facilities, are SMALL and the impacts from the addition of the SHINE facility do not change that conclusion. Therefore, cumulative effects on transportation of nuclear material from the addition of the SHINE facility are SMALL.19.4.13.9Environmental JusticeThe geographic area of analysis for evaluation of cumulative effects on environmental justice is the same as that used in Subsection19.4.12 and includes the 91.27ac. (36.94ha) within the site boundary and the 5 mi. (8km) region surrounding the site. As discussed in Subsection19.4.12, construction and operation impacts to environmental justice in the region are SMALL.Table 19.4.13-2 identifies recent past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the geographic extent of analysis that can be assessed to determine cumulative effects on environmental justice. Relevant "other actions" that are considered in this cumulative effects analysis are limited to the utility line extensions, the proposed facility, and the TIF District No. 35 Project Plan, all of which are future actions. No present or on-going actions were identified that are relevant to this analysis.Disproportionate impacts on low-income or minority populations from other actions are not expected. The proximity of the utility line extensions and TIF District No. 35 project to the SHINE site indicates that the populations of concern at these locations will be the same and that the cumulative impacts on environmental justice are SMALL. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-124Rev. 019.4.13.10ConclusionTable19.4.13-3 summarizes the cumulative impacts in all resource areas. In conclusion, there are no significant cumulative adverse environmental impacts from the construction and operation of the SHINE site when considered together with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects in the area. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-125Rev. 0Table 19.4.13-1 Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Projects and Other Actions Considered in the Cumulative Effects Analysis(Sheet 1 of 3) | |||
Project Name Summary of ProjectLocationPotentially Affected Resource(s)Retained for Cumulative Effects AnalysisBasisUtility ProjectsUtility line extensionInstallation of water and sewer lines Adjacent to SHINE siteLand Use; Geology; Noise, Water; Ecology; Historical and Cultural; Socioeconomics; Environmental JusticeYPart of overall development of TIF District No. 35; SHINE to tie into line extension.Water and Sewer System ImprovementsImprovements throughout the City of JanesvilleRock County, WILand Use; Water; SocioeconomicsNConstruction activities limited to previously disturbed/ developed landsEnergy ProjectsAlliant Energy Generation FacilityExisting power | |||
generation facilityRock County, WIAir Quality, Visual ResourcesYExisting operating facility. Stacks visible in site | |||
viewshedUniversity of Wisconsin Charter StreetReplacement of coal boilers with natural gas | |||
boilersDane County, WIAir QualityYPlanned rebuild of current facilities with new construction permittedWest Campus CogenerationConstruction of new cooling towers for chiller plant expansionDane County, WIAir Quality YExisting facility with new construction permittedNew ConstructionFuture UrbanizationConstruction of housing, commercial buildings, roads, bridges, rail, and other utility facilities, as described in local land use planning documents.Throughout the regionLand Use; Visual; Geology; Air Quality; Noise; Water; Ecology; Historical and Cultural; Socioeconomics; Environmental JusticeNAll future actions with timeline uncertain. Not in immediate proximity to SHINE site Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-126Rev. 0Table 19.4.13-1 Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Projects and Other Actions Considered in the Cumulative Effects Analysis (Sheet 2 of 3)Project NameSummary of ProjectLocationPotentially Affected Resource(s) | |||
Retained for Cumulative Effects AnalysisBasisJanesville Innovation CenterProvides support and assistance for small businesses and start-upsRock County, WISocioeconomicsNConstruction activities limited to previously disturbed/ developed landsNorthStar Medical Radioisotopes Medical radioisotope production facility Rock County, WIAir Quality; Historical and Cultural; Socioeconomics; Human HealthYConstruction planned to start in 2013TIF District No. 35 Project PlanParcel zoned for industrial use as a TIF districtAdjacent to SHINE site, Rock County, WILand Use; Geology; Noise, Ecology; Historical and Cultural; Socioeconomics; Environmental JusticeYApproved by City of JanesvilleManufacturing FacilitiesGenerac Power SystemsModifications to venting stack at generator manufacturing location Jefferson County, WIAir QualityYExisting operation with new construction permittedKraft Foods GlobalNew boiler construction at a processing location for prepared foodsDane County, WIAir QualityYExisting operation with new construction permittedUnited EthanolFacility upgrades at an ethanol production plantRock County, WIAir QualityYExisting operation with new construction permittedTraffic ProjectsInterstate 39/90 CorridorExpansion and improvementsDane and Rock Counties, WILand Use; Water Resources; Air Quality; Noise; SocioeconomicsNTimeframe uncertain Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-127Rev. 0Table 19.4.13-1 Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Projects and Other Actions Considered in the Cumulative Effects Analysis (Sheet 3 of 3)Project NameSummary of ProjectLocationPotentially Affected Resource(s) | |||
Retained for Cumulative Effects AnalysisBasisPalmer Drive Bridge Railing replacementRock County, WILand Use; Water Resources; Air Quality; Noise; Socioeconomics NConstruction activities limited to previously disturbed/ developed landsRoad Improvement ProjectsCurb, gutter and sidewalk replacement; manhole rehabilitation and replacement; street resurfacingRock County, WILand Use; Water Resources; Air Quality; Noise; SocioeconomicsNConstruction activities limited to previously disturbed/ developed landsSouthern Wisconsin Regional AirportPublic airport Rock County, WIVisual Resources; Noise; WaterYExisting facility. OperationalWIS 26 CorridorRoad expansionRock County, WILand Use; Water Resources; Air Quality; Noise; SocioeconomicsNTimeframe uncertainUS 14 Corridor StudyRoad expansion studyDane and Rock Counties, WILand Use; Water Resources; Air Quality; Noise; SocioeconomicsNTimeframe uncertainUS 14/WIS 11 Corridor | |||
StudyRoad expansion studyRock and Walworth Counties, WILand Use; Water Resources; Air Quality; Noise; SocioeconomicsNTimeframe uncertainRadiological SourcesMercy Clinic SouthMedical services facilityRock County, WIHuman HealthYOperationalMercy HospitalMedical services facilityRock County, WIHuman HealthYOperationalOther Projects/ ActionsGlen Erin Golf Course7000-yd. public golf courseRock County, WIWater QualityYExisting facility. Operational Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-128Rev. 0Table 19.4.13-2 Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Projects and Other Actions Retained for the Cumulative Effects Analysis(Sheet 1 of 2)Project NameSummary of ProjectLocationStatusUtility ProjectsUtility line extensionInstallation of water and sewer lines0.1 mi. north of siteTimeframe dependent on SHINE facility construction Energy ProjectsAlliant Energy Generation FacilityExisting power generation facility3.2 mi south of siteExisting operating facility, stacks visible in site viewshed(WDNR, 2011b)University of Wisconsin Charter StReplacement of coal boilers with natural gas boilers36.4 mi. northwest of | |||
siteUnder construction (WDNR, 2011c; WDNR, 2012c) | |||
West Campus CogenerationConstruction of new cooling towers for chiller plant expansion37.1 mi. northwest of | |||
siteExisting operation with new construction permitted(WDNR, 2010a)New ConstructionTIF District No. 35 Project PlanParcel zoned for industrial use as a TIF district0.9 mi. north of siteApproved by City of Janesville (City of Janesville, 2012b) | |||
NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes Medical radioisotope facility 7.7 mi. south of siteConstruction planned to start in 2013 (NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, 2012)Transportation ProjectsSouthern Wisconsin Regional AirportPublic airport 1.0 mi southwest of siteOperational (AirNav, 2013)Manufacturing FacilitiesGenerac Power SystemsModifications to venting stack at generator manufacturing location21.8 mi. northeast of siteExisting operation with new construction permitted(WDNR, 2010b)Kraft Foods GlobalNew boiler construction at a processing location for prepared foods37.5 mi. northwest of siteExisting operation with new construction permitted(WDNR, 2012e)United EthanolFacility upgrades at an ethanol production plant11.2 mi. northeast of siteExisting operation with new construction permitted(WDNR, 2012d) | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-129Rev. 0Table 19.4.13-2 Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Projects and Other Actions Retained for the Cumulative Effects Analysis(Sheet 2 of 2)Project NameSummary of ProjectLocationStatusRadiological SourcesMercy Clinic SouthMedical services facility1.8 mi. north of siteOperational (Mercy Health System, 2012a)Mercy HospitalMedical services facility4.4 mi. north of siteOperational (Mercy Health System, 2012b)Other Projects/ ActionsGlen Erin Golf Course7000-yd. public golf course1.6 mi southwest of siteOperational (Wisconsin Golf Courses, 2013) | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-130Rev. 0Table 19.4.13-3 Cumulative Impacts on Environmental Resources, Including the Impacts of the Proposed ProjectResource CategoryCumulative Impact LevelLand Use and Visual Resources Land UseSMALL Visual ResourcesSMALL Air Quality and Noise Air QualitySMALL NoiseSMALL Geologic EnvironmentSMALLWater Resources HydrologySMALL Water UseSMALL Water QualitySMALL Ecological Resources Terrestrial EcosystemsSMALL Aquatic EcosystemsSMALL SocioeconomicsSMALLHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSMALLHuman Health Nonradiological HealthSMALL Radiological HealthSMALL Environmental JusticeSMALLTransportationSMALL Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTable of ContentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-iRev. 0SECTION 19.5ALTERNATIVESTable of Contents SectionTitlePage19.5ALTERNATIVES..........................................................................................19.5-119.5.1NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE.....................................................................19.5-119.5.2REASONABLE ALTERNATIVES..............................................................19.5-219.5.3COST-BENEFIT OF THE ALTERNATIVES..............................................19.5-7219.5.4COMPARISON OF THE POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS......19.5-93 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-iiRev. 0List of Tables NumberTitle19.5.2-1Sensitive Features in the Chippewa Falls Site Area19.5.2-2Potential Land Use and Natural Habitat Impacts at the Chippewa Falls Site (USGS, 2006)19.5.2-3Plant Species Oberved at the Chippewa Falls Site19.5.2-4Endangered Resources Known or Likely to Occur in the Chippewa Falls Site Area19.5.2-5Annual Average Hourly Traffic Counts in the Chippewa Falls Site Area19.5.2-6Minority and Poverty Populations within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Chippewa Falls Site19.5.2-8Sensitive Features in the Stevens Point Site Area 19.5.2-9Potential Land Use and Natural Habitat Impacts at the Stevens Point Site (USGS, 2006)19.5.2-10Plant Species Observed at the Stevens Point Site 19.5.2-11Endangered Resources Known or Likely to Occur in the Stevens Point Site Area19.5.2-12Annual Average Hourly Traffic Counts in the Stevens Point Site Area19.5.2-13Minority and Poverty Populations within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Stevens Point Site19.5.2-14Potentially Significant Projects Identified within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Stevens Point Site Vicinity19.5.4-1Comparison of Construction Impacts for the SHINE Site and Alternative Sites 19.5.4-2Comparison of Operation Impacts for the SHINE Site and Alternative Sites19.5.4-3Comparison of Construction Impacts for the SHINE Technology and Alternative Technologies19.5.4-4Comparison of Operation Impacts for the SHINE Technology and Alternative Technologies Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of FiguresSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-iiiRev. 0List of Figures NumberTitle19.5.2-1Locations of States Considered for Potential Sites (Black Dots) Relative to Potential Customers (Yellow Stars)19.5.2-2Locations of Communities in Wisconsin Considered for Potential Sites (Black Dots) Relative to Potential Future Customers (Yellow Stars)19.5.2-3Locations of Potential Sites19.5.2-4Conceptual Layout of the Chippewa Falls Site19.5.2-5Sensitive Features Near the Chippewa Falls Site19.5.2-6Census Block Groups with Above Average Low Income Population within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Chippewa Falls Site 19.5.2-7Conceptual Layout of the Stevens Point Site19.5.2-8Sensitive Features Near the Stevens Point Site19.5.2-9Census Block Groups with Above Average Low Income Population within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Stevens Point Site Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-ivRev. 0Acronyms and AbbreviationsAcronym/Abbreviation Definition10 CFR 20Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 20oCdegrees Celsius oFdegrees Fahrenheitac.acreADAMSAgencywide Documents Access and Management SystemAHRaqueous homogeneous reactor B&W TSGBabcock & Wilcox Technical Services Group, Inc.CFRCode of Federal Regulations Cicurie CLSCanadian Light Sourcecmcentimetercm/scentimeters per second CPConstruction PermitDOEU.S. Department of EnergyERPEnvironmental Repair Program ft.feetGEHGE Hitachi Nuclear EnergyGISGeographic Information System gpmgallons per minutehahectareHEUhighly enriched uranium HIhealth imaging Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-vRev. 0I-131iodine-131 in.inchISGInterim Staff Guidance kmkilometer kWkilowattLliterL/minliters per minute LEUlow enriched uranium LUSTleaking underground storage tank mmeterMHAMaximum Hypothetical Accident mi.mileMo-98molybdenum-98 Mo-99molybdenum-99 Mo-100molybdenum-100MURRUniversity of Miss ouri Research Reactor MWmegawattNAAQSNational Ambient Air quality Standards NMNuclear MonitorNorthStarNorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, LLC NOxnitrogen oxides NRCU.S. Nuclear Regulator Commission NRCSNatural Resource Conservation Service NRHPNational Register of Historic PlacesAcronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-viRev. 0OLOperating License PMparticulate matter SHINESHINE Medical Technologies SO2sulfur dioxideSPCCSpill Prevention, Control, and CountermeasureSPTStandard Penetration Test sq.squareSWRASouthern Wisconsin Regional AirportTc-99mtechnetium-99m TIFTax Increment Financing UMUniversity of Missouri | |||
-ColumbiaUSCBU.S. Census BureauUSEPAU.S. Environmental Protection Agency USFWSU.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceUSGSU.S. Geological Survey UWUniversity of Wisconsin | |||
-MadisonWBNWisconsin BrokerNETWDNRWisconsin Department of Natural ResourcesWDORWisconsin Department of Revenue WDOTWisconsin Department of TransportationWDPIWisconsin Department of Public InstructionWGNHSWisconsin Geological and Natural History SurveyWNNWorld Nuclear NewsAcronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-viiRev. 0Xe-133xenon-133Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewNo-Action AlternativeSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-1Rev. 0CHAPTER 1919.5ALTERNATIVES19.5.1NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVEThis section defines the No-Action Alternative and describes the consequences of adopting the No-Action Alternative.The proposed federal action is the issuance of a Construction Permit (CP) and Operating License (OL) that would allow SHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. (SHINE) to construct and operate a medical SHINE facility to produce molybdenum | |||
-99 (Mo-99), iodine-131 (I-131), and xenon-133 (Xe-133). Under the No-Action Alternative, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) would not issue the CP and OL, and the construction and operation of the SHINE facility would not occur. In accordance with the Final Interim Staff Guidance (ISG) Augmenting NUREG-1537, Chapter 19, the environmental consequences of the No-Action Alternative are assumed to be the status quo. If the SHINE facility were not constructed and operated, the environmental consequences discussed in Section 19.4 would be avoided. The consequences that would be avoided include adverse impacts such as changes in land use; however, as discussed in Section 19.4, the severity of all of the adverse impacts is considered to be SMALL. Because the adverse impacts are not significant, the benefit of avoiding those impacts would also not be significant. In addition, as discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, construction and operation of the SHINE facility produces socioeconomic benefits, such as increases in tax revenues to local jurisdictions. If the SHINE facility were not constructed and operated, these beneficial socioeconomic impacts would not be realized.In addition to the beneficial socioeconomic impacts discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, the SHINE facility benefits the health of people who need diagnostic tests that require technetium-99m (Tc-99m) and other isotopes. The facility is expected to satisfy approximately half of the annual demand for Tc-99m in the United States, and to provide a more reliable supply of this isotope than currently exists. This represents a significant health benefit. The facility will also produce I-131 and Xe-133, which will have additional health benefits. If the SHINE facility were not constructed and operated, these health benefits would not be realized.The SHINE facility also produces significant programmatic benefits that would not be realized under the No-Action Alternative. These programmatic benefits are summarized in the following paragraphs.As discussed in Subsection 19.1.1, there is currently no commercial production of Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133 in the United States. Reactors outside the United States supply these isotopes. Two of these reactors are more than 50 years old (NRCL, 2009), and both have experienced supply disruptions related to maintenance problems. In addition to age-related maintenance problems, the reliability of the medical isotope supply is further jeopardized by increasing demand, both domestically and globally; by the increasing difficulty of transporting medical isotopes across international borders; and by the short half-life of these medical isotopes. Because of these supply reliability concerns, the U.S. government has a policy to encourage the domestic production of medical isotopes. The SHINE facility makes a significant contribution toward advancing this policy. Under the No-Action Alternative, this benefit would not be realized, in direct Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-2Rev. 0contradiction of the stated policy of the U.S. government to encourage the domestic production of medical isotopes.The SHINE facility also helps achieve U.S. government nonproliferation objectives. Currently, most medical isotopes are produced by irradiating highly enriched uranium (HEU) targets in non-power reactors fueled with low enriched uranium (LEU).The United States currently exports HEU for medical SHINE. Congress passed the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (U.S. Government, 1992), which includes a nonproliferation objective to phase out exports of HEU for medical SHINE. Based on this, the U.S. government is encouraging medical SHINE without the use of HEU. The SHINE facility uses LEU to produce medical isotopes, thereby avoiding the use of HEU, reducing the need to ship HEU abroad, and helping to accomplish the nonproliferation objective. Under the No-Action Alternative, this benefit would not be realized.19.5.2REASONABLE ALTERNATIVES This section discusses alternatives to the proposed project as required by the NRC Final ISG Augmenting NUREG-1537. The fo llowing types of alter natives are discussed:*Alternative sites *Alternative technologiesBoth beneficial and adverse impacts are described for the associated environmental resource areas for alternative sites and alternative technologies. The analyses include direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts. Impacts are analyzed in proportion to their significance.It should be noted that alternative siting within each site is not discussed, because the alternative sites are relatively small and no reasonable arrangement of the SHINE facility components within the site boundaries would avoid or significantly reduce the expected environmental impacts. Modification of existing facilities (versus construction of an entirely new facility) is not discussed, because the SHINE facility is intended to be a new stand-alone facility employing a technology that has not previously been used anywhere in the world. Finally, alternative transportation methods are not discussed, because there are no reasonable alternatives considering the nature of the products that need to be transported from the SHINE facility. Due to the short half-life of Mo-99 (2.75 days), this isotope is normally shipped from the facility to the processing facility by air. Among the other possible products, I-131 has a half-life of 8.0 days, and Xe-133 has a half-life of 5.2 days. Due to their longer half-lives, these isotopes could be shipped by either truck or air. However, since the I-131 and Xe-133 would likely be shipped with the Mo-99 shipments, air shipment is the most reasonable method. (Knolls, 2002)19.5.2.1ALTERNATIVE SITES19.5.2.1.1Identification of Reasonable Alternatives This subsection discusses the identification of reasonable siting alternatives for the SHINE facility. The following information is provided:*Process used to determine reasonable alternatives to the proposed site.*All alternative sites considered. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-3Rev. 0*Alternative sites that were eliminated from further study.*Description of reasonable alternative sites.*Discussion of any alternative sites considered that would reduce or avoid adverse effects.The region considered for potential sites was based on SHINE's mission to serve the need for medical isotopes in the United States. In a market where the primary product decays at a rate of 1 percent per hour, being in close proximity to customers is of utmost importance, since minimizing product travel time is key.When determining potential customers, SHINE considered two scenarios: the near-term scenario, in which SHINE sells Mo-99 and other medical isotopes as an active pharmaceutical ingredient to packagers; and a possible long-term scenario, in which SHINE expands to also package and distribute the isotopes itself. The second, long-term scenario is outside the scope of this license application, but was considered in identifying and evaluating potential sites.In the near-term scenario, SHINE identified three likely customers: Nordion (Ottawa, Canada), Covidien (St. Louis, Missouri), and Lantheus Medical Imaging (Billerica, Massachusetts). A production site central to these locations minimizes product losses due to decay during shipment.In addition to these three customers, in the long-term scenario SHINE would be selling directly to consumers. As the hospitals and radiopharmacies that use medical isotopes are located throughout the country, the center of the United States was particularly appealing. Locating on either coast would result in fewer patients being served and therefore reduced social and economic benefits. In general, the Midwest provides a good balance between proximity to currently anticipated customers and customers anticipated in an expansion scenario.Given the Midwest as a starting point, SHINE proceeded to contact state economic development offices. States to be contacted were chosen based on their location and perceived potential ability to provide financial incentives to the project. SHINE contacted economic development offices in Wisconsin, Minnesota, Ohio, Michigan, and Louisiana. Although Louisiana is not considered part of the Midwest, the potential for high financial incentives prompted SHINE to request information.No response was received from Ohio or Michigan; therefore, they were eliminated from consideration. A preliminary check of the seismic conditions in Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Louisiana indicated no major fault lines in any of these states, thereby not eliminating any of them from consideration due to seismic activity. After careful analysis of the proposals from Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Louisiana, Wisconsin was chosen for its superior financial incentive package. Of the three states, Wisconsin also has the benefit of being most centrally located with respect to SHINE's three prospective customers (as seen in Figure 19.5.2-1), and being the home state of several project partners, including the University of Wisconsin-Madison (UW), the Morgridge Institute for Research, and Phoenix Nuclear Labs. Thereby, the states of Minnesota and Louisiana were eliminated from further consideration.After narrowing the search to the state of Wisconsin, SHINE identified four communities that met certain basic requirements for the SHINE plant. In the initial consideration process, the communities were required to have build-to-suit land available for development with good access to an interstate highway, and an airport capable of handling aircraft necessary for isotope Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-4Rev. 0distribution within approximately 10 minutes of the potential site. The four communities identified in Wisconsin that met these requirements were:*Madison*Chippewa Falls *Janesville *Stevens Point Madison was eliminated from consideration early in the study due to lack of community and local government support. The location of the remaining communities is shown in Figure 19.5.2-2. An approximate parcel size appropriate for the facility was determined and the search for parcels within each of the three remaining communities was limited to sites of comparable size. Each of these communities identified a potential site and prepared an incentive proposal detailing the advantages of their site. The location of the potential sites is shown in Figure 19.5.2-3. SHINE then proceeded to compare these sites on the basis of the following criteria:*Local government and community support. | |||
*Financial incentives. | *Financial incentives. | ||
*Size and shape of the proposed parcel.*Access to a skilled workforce.*Proximity to potential future customers. | *Size and shape of the proposed parcel.*Access to a skilled workforce.*Proximity to potential future customers. | ||
*Proximity to airport.*Proximity to an interstate highway.*Anticipated depth to groundwater table. | *Proximity to airport.*Proximity to an interstate highway.*Anticipated depth to groundwater table. | ||
*Seismic characteristics.*Presence of endangered resources and wetlands.*Presence of historic and archaeological resources.The assessments of these criteria with respect to the potential sites are discussed as follows:Local government and community supportLocal government and community support will be essential to SHINE successfully completing its mission and, therefore, were very important factors in the site selection process. All three communities showed very high interest in the project and were extremely cooperative.Financial incentivesFinancial incentives will also be key to SHINE's success and were thus key to the site selection process. All three communities were competitive with respect to economic incentives, though Janesville and Stevens Point had a slight economic advantage over Chippewa Falls. | *Seismic characteristics.*Presence of endangered resources and wetlands.*Presence of historic and archaeological resources.The assessments of these criteria with respect to the potential sites are discussed as follows:Local government and community supportLocal government and community support will be essential to SHINE successfully completing its mission and, therefore, were very important factors in the site selection process. All three communities showed very high interest in the project and were extremely cooperative. | ||
Size and shape of the proposed parcelA greater distance from the facility to the site boundary was considered beneficial, as a greater distance decreases likelihood of adverse impact to the public. The Janesville site, being 90 acres (ac.) (36.4 hectares [ha]) in size and roughly square, had the largest minimum distance to the site boundary at approximately 1000 feet (ft.) (304.8 meters [m]) in all directions. Stevens Point Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Financial incentivesFinancial incentives will also be key to SHINE's success and were thus key to the site selection process. All three communities were competitive with respect to economic incentives, though Janesville and Stevens Point had a slight economic advantage over Chippewa Falls. | ||
Size and shape of the proposed parcelA greater distance from the facility to the site boundary was considered beneficial, as a greater distance decreases likelihood of adverse impact to the public. The Janesville site, being 90 acres (ac.) (36.4 hectares [ha]) in size and roughly square, had the largest minimum distance to the site boundary at approximately 1000 feet (ft.) (304.8 meters [m]) in all directions. Stevens Point Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-5Rev. 0proposed an 80 ac. (32.4 ha), square site, roughly on par with the Janesville site minimum distance at just a little under 1000 ft. (304.8 m) in all directions. The Chippewa Falls site, being slightly less than 80 ac. (32.4 ha) and oblong in shape, had a considerably smaller minimum distance to the site boundary in some directions.Access to a skilled workforceTwo factors were considered when determining access to a skilled workforce: proximity to large cities and the potential cooperation with local universities or technical colleges willing to help train the production facility workforce. With respect to larger cities, Janesville has the advantage of being near Madison, Milwaukee, and Chicago. Chippewa Falls is fairly close to Minneapolis/St. Paul, while Stevens Point is a bit more remote. Janesville and Stevens Point both have access to universities or technical colleges willing to help train SHINE's workforce: Blackhawk Technical College and UW-Stevens Point, respectively. Workforce training was not offered by local officials at Chippewa Falls.Proximity to potential customersOf the three potential locations in Wisconsin, medical isotopes shipped from Janesville had the shortest overall distance to travel to each of SHINE's customers by air. | |||
Proximity to airportAs discussed earlier, efficient product transportation is extremely important in the medical isotope business. The closer the site was to the local airport, the better from this perspective. The Janesville site is directly across from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (SWAR), requiring SHINE's product to travel less than 0.5 mile (mi.) (0.8 kilometer [km]). The Stevens Point site was approximately 4 mi. (6.4 km) from the Stevens Point Municipal Airport. The Chippewa Falls site was approximately 10 mi. (16.1 km) from the Chippewa Valley Regional Airport. The perceived disadvantage of a higher risk of an airplane crash with increased proximity to the airport (no formal analysis was done on the risk of a crash at the alternative sites) is mitigated through design of the facility.In the case of local airport closure, it is likely that SHINE's product would be transported by truck to the nearest secondary airport. The Janesville site is approximately 1 hour from Dane County Regional Airport in Madison, and within 2 hours of both O'Hare International Airport in Chicago and Mitchell International Airport in Milwaukee. The Chippewa Falls site is within 2hours of Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport. The Stevens Point site is more than 2hours from all of these airports.Proximity to an interstate highwayIn the case of a local airport closure, SHINE would intend to ship its product by truck either to thenext closest airport or, depending on the circumstances, directly to the customer. To facilitate ease of transport by truck, close proximity to an interstate highway is desired.The Janesville site is approximately 3 mi. (4.8 km) by road from I-39/90. The Stevens Point site is less than 2 mi. (3.2 km) by road from I-39, and the Chippewa Falls site is approximately 18 mi. | Proximity to airportAs discussed earlier, efficient product transportation is extremely important in the medical isotope business. The closer the site was to the local airport, the better from this perspective. The Janesville site is directly across from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (SWAR), requiring SHINE's product to travel less than 0.5 mile (mi.) (0.8 kilometer [km]). The Stevens Point site was approximately 4 mi. (6.4 km) from the Stevens Point Municipal Airport. The Chippewa Falls site was approximately 10 mi. (16.1 km) from the Chippewa Valley Regional Airport. The perceived disadvantage of a higher risk of an airplane crash with increased proximity to the airport (no formal analysis was done on the risk of a crash at the alternative sites) is mitigated through design of the facility.In the case of local airport closure, it is likely that SHINE's product would be transported by truck to the nearest secondary airport. The Janesville site is approximately 1 hour from Dane County Regional Airport in Madison, and within 2 hours of both O'Hare International Airport in Chicago and Mitchell International Airport in Milwaukee. The Chippewa Falls site is within 2hours of Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport. The Stevens Point site is more than 2hours from all of these airports.Proximity to an interstate highwayIn the case of a local airport closure, SHINE would intend to ship its product by truck either to thenext closest airport or, depending on the circumstances, directly to the customer. To facilitate ease of transport by truck, close proximity to an interstate highway is desired.The Janesville site is approximately 3 mi. (4.8 km) by road from I-39/90. The Stevens Point site is less than 2 mi. (3.2 km) by road from I-39, and the Chippewa Falls site is approximately 18 mi. | ||
(29.0 km) from I-94. | (29.0 km) from I-94. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-6Rev. 0Anticipated depth to groundwaterRough approximations of groundwater depth from U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) historical data were taken into consideration. In general, deeper groundwater was considered to be beneficial as deeper groundwater is less likely to impact the facility and vice versa.The Janesville site is located in Rock County, Wisconsin. Historical wells in counties adjacent to Rock County are between 70 and 100 ft. (21.3 and 30.5 m) deep. Recent measurements down to 30 ft. (9.1 m) found no water and the nearby river elevation is approximately 70 ft. (21.3 m) lower than site elevation. Using this information, groundwater depth at the Janesville site was estimated at greater than 30 ft. (9.1 m). Since then, boreholes and wells drilled on-site have found groundwater at between 55 and 65 ft. (16.8 and 19.8 m) below grade.Using similar estimation methods, groundwater depth at the Chippewa Falls site was estimated to be at 20 to 30 ft. (6.1 to 9.1 m). Records of an on-site borehole subsequently showed groundwater at approximately 50 ft. (15.2 m) below grade. Groundwater depth at the Stevens Point site was estimated to be at 10 ft. (3.0 m) or less. Since then, boreholes and wells drilled on-site at Stevens Point have found groundwater at about 8 to 11 ft. (2.4 to 3.4 m) below grade. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Seismic characteristicsA preliminary check of the seismic characteristics of each site was made to determine if there were any major advantages or disadvantages between the three. The Janesville site was deemed slightly more likely to have a very weak shaking event than the other two sites; however, both Chippewa Falls and Stevens Point were predicted to be located on glacial sands that might have higher amplification factors than the ground at Janesville. Overall, Janesville was rated slightly preferable from a seismic perspective. Since that time, a geotechnical investigation of the Janesville site has shown glacial deposits at the Janesville site as well.Presence of endangered resources and wetlandsAn Endangered Resources Review by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) was requested for all three sites. Because of the Janesville site's current condition as an active agricultural field far from any wetlands, water or buffer areas, it was determined to be an unsuitable habitat for endangered resources likely to be in the area. No conservation or compliance actions were recommended for the site.Although the Chippewa Falls site was not found to provide suitable habitat for the four Threatened or Special Concern species identified in its vicinity, strict erosion and siltation controls during the entire construction period were recommended to avoid indirect impact to sensitive aquatic species that could be present in the nearby Lake Wissota or Chippewa River. It was also recommended that the small wetland community on the eastern edge of the project site be protected as much as possible to avoid impacting any rare or declining species it may contain.Like Chippewa Falls, the Stevens Point site was determined to be unlikely to provide suitable habitat for the four Threatened or Special Concern species recorded within the vicinity of the project site. No impacts were expected and no conservation or compliance actions were recommended. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-7Rev. 0Input from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) was also requested for all three sites. No federally-listed, proposed, or candidate species are expected within the project area at either the Janesville or Chippewa Falls sites and neither site contains critical habitat.A portion of the Stevens Point site was found to be within the high potential range of the Karner blue butterfly (Lycaeides melissa samuelis), a federally-listed endangered species in Wisconsin. A survey for wild lupine (Lupinus perennis), the host plant of the Karner blue butterfly, was recommended. It was also recommended that any disturbance of migratory bird nesting places occur before May 1 or after August 30 to minimize impacts to migratory birds. As the Stevens Point site is mostly wooded and the trees would need to be cleared for the SHINE project, it is likely that some migratory bird nesting places would be disturbed. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Presence of historic and archaeological resourcesThere was no indication that significant archaeological sites or other cultural resources had been reported on or near any of the sites; however, at the time of the potential site evaluations, none of the sites had been surveyed. Since that time a Phase I archaeaological survey of the Janesville site has been completed. The survey did not identify any pre-contact or historic Euro-American archaeological sites. No additional field work is recommended. No surveys are planned for Stevens Point or Chippewa Falls. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-8Rev. 0SummaryEach potential site was given a score based on the factors discussed above. These scores are summarized below:In consideration of these factors, the Janesville site was selected as the proposed site for the SHINE facility. The Chippewa Falls site and the Stevens Point site were both considered to be viable and were identified as reasonable alternatives. As shown in the summary above, the Janesville site had scores equal to or better than the Chippewa Falls and Stevens Point sites on factors related to environmental impacts. The impact evaluations discussed in Subsection 19.5.2.1.2 subsequently confirmed that neither of the alternative sites would reduce nor avoid adverse effects as compared with the Janesville site.19.5.2.1.2Evaluation of Reasonable AlternativesAs discussed in the previous subsection, the Chippewa Falls site and the Stevens Point site are both considered to be viable sites and reasonable alternatives. This subsection describes the alternative sites in more detail, evaluates the major direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental impacts associated with the sites, and describes potential impact mitigation measures that would reduce or minimize adverse impacts.Information on the Chippewa Falls and Stevens Point sites was obtained through field reconnaissance in the site areas, contacts with appropriate government agencies (federal, state, and local), examination of published maps and aerial photographs, and analysis of digitized Geographic Information System (GIS) mapping data. In order to evaluate the environmental impacts of constructing and operating the SHINE facility, the facility design described in Section19.2 and the construction and operation practices described in Section 19.4 were (Max Score)Janesville StevensPointChippewaFallsLocal government and community support(10)101010Financial Incentives(10)998Minimum distance to site boundary(5)554Access to a skilled workforce(5)433 Proximity to potential future customers(5)543Proximity to airport(5)533Proximity to interstate highway(5)453 Anticipated depth to groundwater table(5)524Seismic characteristics(5) 4(a)33Presence of endangered resources and wetlands(5)522Presence of historic and archaeological resources (5)555Total:65615148a) Based on the geotechnical investigation conducted after site selection was completed, this score would be reduced by one point. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-9Rev. 0applied to each site. This allowed for a comprehensive and qualitatively-consistent assessment of environmental impacts. The potential impact of facility construction and operation on each resource category specified in the Final ISG Augmenting NUREG-1537 was assigned a significance level according to the criteria established in 10 CFR 51, Appendix B, Table B-1, Footnote 3, as follows:SMALL - Environmental effects are not detectable or are so minor that they will neither destabilize nor noticeably alter any important attribute of the resource. | |||
MODERATE - Environmental effects are sufficient to alter noticeably, but not to destabilize, any important attribute of the resource.LARGE - Environmental effects are clearly noticeable and are sufficient to destabilize any important attributes of the resource.For some analyses, it was determined that the additional impact criteria established by the NRC in NUREG-1437 were appropriate, and those criteria were used to assign a significance level to certain impacts, as noted in the subsections below.In addition to the direct and indirect impacts of the SHINE facility itself, related cumulative impacts from other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future federal and non-federal projects and activities in the area around each site were considered. The specific environmental resources that could be impacted by the incremental effects of the SHINE facility together with other projects in the vicinity were identified, and the cumulative impacts were assessed.The following subsections summarize the evaluation of each alternative site. | MODERATE - Environmental effects are sufficient to alter noticeably, but not to destabilize, any important attribute of the resource.LARGE - Environmental effects are clearly noticeable and are sufficient to destabilize any important attributes of the resource.For some analyses, it was determined that the additional impact criteria established by the NRC in NUREG-1437 were appropriate, and those criteria were used to assign a significance level to certain impacts, as noted in the subsections below.In addition to the direct and indirect impacts of the SHINE facility itself, related cumulative impacts from other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future federal and non-federal projects and activities in the area around each site were considered. The specific environmental resources that could be impacted by the incremental effects of the SHINE facility together with other projects in the vicinity were identified, and the cumulative impacts were assessed.The following subsections summarize the evaluation of each alternative site. | ||
19.5.2.1.2.1Chippewa Falls Site19.5.2.1.2.1.1DescriptionThe Chippewa Falls site is located in the Wissota Lake Business Park, near the northern edge of the corporate boundaries of the City of Chippewa Falls in Chippewa County, Wisconsin. The site is bordered to the west by Commerce Parkway, to the north by County Highway S, and to the east by State Highway 178. The southern boundary of the site is not defined by any observable landmarks; it is located in a fallow agricultural field at the edge of property that has been platted but not yet developed for the Lake Wissota Business Park. The site boundaries were determined by the City of Chippewa Falls when they recommended the site to SHINE.The terrain across the site is flat with little noticeable relief other than a gentle slope to the southwest. No residences or other structures are located within the site boundaries. Most of the site is cultivated cropland used for growing corn and soybeans. An abandoned railroad right of way (with the tracks removed) cuts diagonally through the southern portion of the site. South of this right-of-way is a fallow agricultural field, some of which has been graded for use by the Business Park.Figure 19.5.2-4 shows a conceptual layout of the SHINE facility on the Chippewa Falls site, including the area that would be developed with permanent facility structures, the area that would be temporarily disturbed for construction laydown and parking, and the remaining area within the site boundaries. The area developed with permanent structures occupies part of the abandoned Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | 19.5.2.1.2.1Chippewa Falls Site19.5.2.1.2.1.1DescriptionThe Chippewa Falls site is located in the Wissota Lake Business Park, near the northern edge of the corporate boundaries of the City of Chippewa Falls in Chippewa County, Wisconsin. The site is bordered to the west by Commerce Parkway, to the north by County Highway S, and to the east by State Highway 178. The southern boundary of the site is not defined by any observable landmarks; it is located in a fallow agricultural field at the edge of property that has been platted but not yet developed for the Lake Wissota Business Park. The site boundaries were determined by the City of Chippewa Falls when they recommended the site to SHINE.The terrain across the site is flat with little noticeable relief other than a gentle slope to the southwest. No residences or other structures are located within the site boundaries. Most of the site is cultivated cropland used for growing corn and soybeans. An abandoned railroad right of way (with the tracks removed) cuts diagonally through the southern portion of the site. South of this right-of-way is a fallow agricultural field, some of which has been graded for use by the Business Park.Figure 19.5.2-4 shows a conceptual layout of the SHINE facility on the Chippewa Falls site, including the area that would be developed with permanent facility structures, the area that would be temporarily disturbed for construction laydown and parking, and the remaining area within the site boundaries. The area developed with permanent structures occupies part of the abandoned Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-10Rev. 0railroad right-of-way, part of the cropland to the north, and part of the fallow field to the south, while the area temporarily disturbed for construction laydown and parking is located entirely in the cropland. The production facility building, which is the only part of the facility that contains safety-related equipment, is located near the center of the site, positioned so as to maximize the distance to the site boundaries in all directions.The area within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the site is a mixture of agricultural land and suburban-type residential and commercial development. The nearest occupied residence is a house located on County Highway S less than 0.1 mi. (0.16 km) northwest of the northern site boundary. Another house is located on County Highway S slightly more than 0.1 mi. (0.16 km) northeast of the site boundary. Several commercial buildings are located along Commerce Parkway less than 0.1 mi. (0.16 km) west of the western site boundary. The nearest residential concentration is a subdivision located on the north side of County Highway I approximately 0.7 mi. (1.0 km) southwest of the southern site boundary. Other residential concentrations are located within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the site boundaries to the west, north, and east.In addition to residences, several other sensitive features are located within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the site boundaries. These include a hospital, a nursing home, a child day care facility, an adult day care facility, several medical clinics, and two colleges. Table 19.5.2-1 lists the distance to each of these sensitive features from the nearest site boundary and the center point of the safety-related area in the production facility building. Table 19.5.2-1 also lists the distance to the nearest public park, public school, and listed historical property, all of which are more than 1 mi. (1.6 km) from the site boundaries. Figure 19.5.2-5 shows the location of the sensitive features identified within 1 mi. (1.6 km).U.S. Highway 53, which is located about 5 mi. (8.0 km) west of the site at its nearest point, provides long-distance road access to the site area. The exit nearest to the site is Exit 99 (County Highway S), which is approximately 5 mi. (8.0 km) west of the site. State Highway 178, which borders the site to the east, also provides access to the site area. U.S. Highway 53 and State Highway 178 are well-maintained multi-lane divided highways. The other roads in the immediate site area are well-maintained two- or four-lane roads with paved shoulders. Chippewa Valley Regional Airport is located approximately 8 mi. (12.8 km) southwest of the site. Aircraft using this airport would be the primary means of transporting isotopes produced by the SHINE facility.An overhead electrical line and underground natural gas pipeline are located along Commerce Parkway at the western edge of the site. An underground municipal water supply pipeline and sanitary sewer pipeline are located approximately 0.2 mi. (3.2 km) south of the site. It is assumed that if this site were developed, the City of Chippewa Falls would extend the sewer and water utilities to the site boundary.19.5.2.1.2.1.2Land Use and Visual Resources ImpactsExisting land use on the Chippewa Falls site is predominantly agricultural, with approximately the northern two-thirds of the site planted in cultivated crops. The abandoned railroad right of way that cuts through the site and the land south of the right-of-way are primarily fallow. Virtually the Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-11Rev. 0entire site is composed of soils classified as prime farmland. No recreational use of the site or the immediate vicinity was identified.No residences or other structures are located within the site boundaries. The site is zoned for Light Industrial use, as are the adjacent parts of the Wissota Lake Business Park (City of Chippewa Falls, 2011). The City of Chippewa Falls has indicated that a Special Use Permit would probably need to be obtained in order to construct the SHINE facility. A public hearing before the City Council could be required as part of the Special Use Permit application process.The acreage of each major land use category found within the areas affected by the conceptual facility layout was estimated based on USGS land use/land cover GIS mapping data (USGS, 2006). Table 19.5.2-2 summarizes the acreages in the major land use categories and compares those quantities with the total acreages found within a 5 mi. (8.0 km) radius of the site. It can be seen that the acreage of each land use category potentially affected by the facility layout is less than 1 percent of the total acreage of that category found within 5 mi. (8.0 km). There is no reason to believe that construction of the SHINE facility would destabilize any important land use resources. Construction would change much of the site from predominantly agricultural use to industrial use, which would noticeably alter the existing land use resources of the site. However, this alteration is consistent with the existing zoning of the site and the intended land use in the Wissota Lake Business Park. Therefore, the land use impact due to project construction would be SMALL. | ||
During operation of the SHINE facility, land use impacts would be reduced. No new land use impacts would occur beyond those described above for project construction, and some areas that were temporarily disturbed for construction laydown and parking might be returned to agricultural use. Therefore, the land use impact due to operation of the SHINE facility would be SMALL.Visual resources in the vicinity of the site could be affected by the visual intrusion of industrial structures and equipment. During project construction, dust could create additional visual intrusions. Given that the site area currently includes some rural and residential scenery, in addition to institutional, commercial, and industrial scenery, project construction and operation would alter the existing visual conditions somewhat. However, the severity of visual impacts on the human population would depend primarily on the visibility of the | During operation of the SHINE facility, land use impacts would be reduced. No new land use impacts would occur beyond those described above for project construction, and some areas that were temporarily disturbed for construction laydown and parking might be returned to agricultural use. Therefore, the land use impact due to operation of the SHINE facility would be SMALL.Visual resources in the vicinity of the site could be affected by the visual intrusion of industrial structures and equipment. During project construction, dust could create additional visual intrusions. Given that the site area currently includes some rural and residential scenery, in addition to institutional, commercial, and industrial scenery, project construction and operation would alter the existing visual conditions somewhat. However, the severity of visual impacts on the human population would depend primarily on the visibility of the proj ect facilities from sensitive viewing areas.Field reconnaissance and examination of aerial photographs indicate that more than 100 residences are located within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the site boundaries. As discussed in Subsection 19.5.2.1.2.1.1, the area within 1 mi. (1.6 km) also includes several other sensitive viewing areas, including a hospital, a nursing home, a child day care facility, an adult day care facility, several medical clinics, and two colleges. Although trees and existing buildings would block the view from some of these locations, many would be expected to have at least a partial view of the SHINE facility during construction and operation. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-12Rev. 0NUREG-1437 establishes the following criteria for judging the severity of aesthetic impacts:SMALL - No complaints from affected public about a changed sense of place or a diminution in enjoyment of the physical environment, and no measurable impact on socioeconomic institutions and processes.MODERATE - Some complaints from affected public about a changed sense of place or a diminution in enjoyment of the physical environment, and measurable impacts that do not alter the continued functioning of socioeconomic institutions and processes.LARGE - Continuing and widely shared opposition to the project based on a perceived degradation of the area's sense of place or diminution in enjoyment of the physical environment, and measurable social impacts that perturb the continued functioning of community institutions and processes.Considering that the SHINE facility would noticeably alter the appearance of the project site and be at least partially visible from numerous sensitive viewing areas, it is possible that project construction would generate some public complaints related to a changed sense of place and diminished enjoyment of the physical environment. However, it is not likely that there would be "continuing and widely shared opposition" to the project or that there would be "measurable social impacts that perturb the continued functioning of community institutions and processes." Therefore, the visual resources impact associated with project construction would be MODERATE.Project operation would not result in significant further alteration of aesthetic conditions, and it does not seem likely that there would be continued public complaints related to diminished enjoyment of the physical environment. Therefore, the visual resources impact associated with project operation would be SMALL.As shown in Figure 19.5.2-4, the conceptual layout of the Chippewa Falls si te includes provisions to plant trees along the boundaries of the site that border public roads. These provisions would partially mitigate the visual impact of the project, especially during project operation, and this mitigation is considered in the impact assessment discussed above. No other feasible mitigation measures for land use or visual impacts have been identified.19.5.2.1.2.1.3Air Quality and Noise ImpactsThe Chippewa Falls site is located in Chippewa County, Wisconsin, which is part of the Southeast Wisconsin - La Crosse (West Central Wisconsin) Interstate Air Quality Control Region (WDNR, 2012a). The ambient air quality in Chippewa County currently is in attainment with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for all criteria pollutants (ozone, particulate matter, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, and lead) (USEPA, 2012a). The nearest county out of attainment with the NAAQS is Dakota County, Minnesota, which is non-attainment for lead (USEPA, 2012b). Dakota County is located in the Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan area, approximately 75 mi. (120 km) west of the Chippewa Falls site. The nearest Wisconsin county out of attainment is Sheboygan County, Wisconsin, which is non-attainment for ozone (USEPA, 2012a). Sheboygan County is located along the western shore of Lake Michigan, approximately 190 mi. (306 km) southeast of the Chippewa Falls site. At these distances and beyond, air pollution emissions from the Chippewa Falls site would not be expected to have any noticeable effect on non-attainment areas. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-13Rev. 0The air quality impacts of constructing and operating the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be very similar to the impacts discussed for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.2. Potential air pollution emissions during construction would include dust from earthmoving and material handling activities, and exhaust emissions from construction equipment and vehicles. In general, these emissions would be the same as the emissions associated with any large construction project. Emission-specific control measures, such as watering areas of disturbed soil, would be implemented to limit air quality impacts and ensure compliance with applicable federal and state regulations. Therefore, air quality impacts associated with facility construction would be SMALL.During facility operation, the SHINE process would emit small quantities of nitrogen oxides. Natural gas firing to heat buildings and occasional testing of the standby diesel generator would emit nitrogen oxides and very small quantities of particulate matter and sulfur dioxide. Standard emission control measures, such as proper mixing of fuels and combustion air, would be implemented to limit air quality impacts. Emissions during facility operation would be governed by applicable air permits, which would ensure compliance with the NAAQS and other applicable regulatory requirements. Therefore, air quality impacts associated with facility operation would be SMALL.As discussed above, standard emission control measures would be implemented to limit air quality impacts during construction and operation. These measures would ensure that impacts on air quality would be SMALL, and there would be no need for any other air quality impact mitigation measures.Noise emissions during construction at the Chippewa Falls site would be very similar to the emissions discussed for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.2. Based on the depth to bedrock at the Chippewa Falls site (see Subsection 19.5.2.1.2.1.4), blasting and pile driving would not be required for excavation or installation of foundations. The primary source of noise during construction would be the operation of heavy equipment. This noise would be noticeable in the immediate construction area, but it generally would be expected to attenuate to acceptable levels before reaching sensitive receptors. However, vehicular traffic due to construction workers commuting to and from the site and deliveries of equipment and supplies to the site would increase noise levels in the immediate vicinity of several sensitive receptors. It is expected that most project-related traffic would move on Commerce Parkway, County Highway S, and/or County Highway I, and all of these roads have sensitive receptors (residences, medical clinics, day care facilities, a hospital, etc. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | ) in close proximity. It is likely that increased traffic noise would be noticeable at some of these receptors; therefore, noise impacts associated with project construction would be MODERATE.During operation, project-related traffic would be greatly reduced, and there would be no use of heavy construction equipment on the site. As discussed in Subsection 19.4.2, no significant sources of noise have been identified for project operation. Therefore, noise impacts associated with operation would be SMALL.As shown in Figure 19.5.2-4, the conceptual layout of the Chippewa Falls si te includes provisions to plant trees along the facility access road and the boundaries of the site that border public roads. The layout also would accommodate a low earthen berm around the permanent project facilities. These provisions would be expected to achieve some attenuation of operational noise, and this mitigation is considered in the impact assessment discussed above. No other feasible mitigation measures for noise impacts have been identified. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-14Rev. 019.5.2.1.2.1.4Geology, Soils, and Seismology ImpactsThe majority of the surface soils at the Chippewa Falls site consist of Sattre loam derived from glacial outwash materials. The upper 30 inches (in.) (76.2 centimeters [cm]) of the soil horizon is a mixture of sand, silt, and clay with roughly equal proportions of each. Below 30 in. (76.2 cm), sand becomes the predominant constituent (approximately 90 percent) with a substantial increase in the hydraulic conductivity (approximately 0.015 centimeters per second [cm/s]). Soils at the site are generally well-drained and not susceptible to ponding or flooding. Erosion potential of the surficial soils is expected to be slight to moderate. (UW, 1964; NRCS, 2012)Subsoil information obtained from one boring drilled at the site (American Engineering Testing, 2011) and records of two water wells drilled within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the site (WGNHS, 2004) corroborate the soils information provided above. The on-site boring log (American Engineering Testing, 2011) also shows an apparently man-made layer of fill material, approximately 3 ft. (0.9m) thick, at the surface. The fill material was identified as a mixture of sand, gravel, and clay. | |||
It is not known how much of the site is covered by this fill material. Bedrock lies directly beneath the glacial outwash materials and primarily consists of granite (Mudrey, et al., 1982). Karst conditions are not expected in the bedrock (WGNHS, 2012). The single soil boring drilled at the site (American Engineering Testing, 2011) did not encounter bedrock at 82 ft. (25.0 m) below grade, the maximum depth of the boring. Driller's records (WGNHS, 2004) for the two water wells within 1 mi. (1.6 km) show sand and gravel to depths of 50 ft. and 61 ft (15.2 and 18.6 m). The wells were completed within the sand and gravel aquifer, and therefore do not indicate the depth of bedrock. However, a report by the UW (1983) indicates the thickness of unconsolidated materials (soils) as between 100 ft. and 200 ft. (30.5 and 61.0m), which indicates that the depth to bedrock is 100 ft. to 200 ft. (30.5 and 61.0 m) below grade elevation. As described in Subsection 19.4.3, the maximum depth of excavation required for the SHINE facility is 39 ft. (11.9 m) below grade. Therefore, blasting would not be required for installation of foundations or other construction activities.The USGS National Seismic Hazard Maps database (USGS, 2012a) indicates the following peak ground accelerations for the Chippewa Falls site area:*10-percent probability of exceedance in a 50-year period:0.78 percent of gravity.*2-percent probability of exceedance in a 50-year period:2.13 percent of gravity.Based on these values, seismicity in the site area is considered to be minimal. In addition, no significant historical earthquakes have been recorded in the site area or anywhere in Wisconsin (USGS, 2012b), and no Quaternary faults (age less than 1.6 x 106 years) are known to be present in the site area or anywhere in Wisconsin (USGS, 2012c).The Chippewa Falls site is flat and does not contain landslide hazards. Because the site soils are primarily granular (sand with very little silt and clay) below the upper 30 in. (76.2 cm) of the soil profile, and no underground mining activity has been identified in the site area, land subsidence is not anticipated due to either consolidation of the site soils or local loss of support resulting from underground mining. In addition, no potential for shrink/swell action in response to changes in the moisture content of the soil as related to the stability of shallow foundations is anticipated. Potential for frost heave beneath shallow foundations should also be minimal. | It is not known how much of the site is covered by this fill material. Bedrock lies directly beneath the glacial outwash materials and primarily consists of granite (Mudrey, et al., 1982). Karst conditions are not expected in the bedrock (WGNHS, 2012). The single soil boring drilled at the site (American Engineering Testing, 2011) did not encounter bedrock at 82 ft. (25.0 m) below grade, the maximum depth of the boring. Driller's records (WGNHS, 2004) for the two water wells within 1 mi. (1.6 km) show sand and gravel to depths of 50 ft. and 61 ft (15.2 and 18.6 m). The wells were completed within the sand and gravel aquifer, and therefore do not indicate the depth of bedrock. However, a report by the UW (1983) indicates the thickness of unconsolidated materials (soils) as between 100 ft. and 200 ft. (30.5 and 61.0m), which indicates that the depth to bedrock is 100 ft. to 200 ft. (30.5 and 61.0 m) below grade elevation. As described in Subsection 19.4.3, the maximum depth of excavation required for the SHINE facility is 39 ft. (11.9 m) below grade. Therefore, blasting would not be required for installation of foundations or other construction activities.The USGS National Seismic Hazard Maps database (USGS, 2012a) indicates the following peak ground accelerations for the Chippewa Falls site area:*10-percent probability of exceedance in a 50-year period:0.78 percent of gravity.*2-percent probability of exceedance in a 50-year period:2.13 percent of gravity.Based on these values, seismicity in the site area is considered to be minimal. In addition, no significant historical earthquakes have been recorded in the site area or anywhere in Wisconsin (USGS, 2012b), and no Quaternary faults (age less than 1.6 x 106 years) are known to be present in the site area or anywhere in Wisconsin (USGS, 2012c).The Chippewa Falls site is flat and does not contain landslide hazards. Because the site soils are primarily granular (sand with very little silt and clay) below the upper 30 in. (76.2 cm) of the soil profile, and no underground mining activity has been identified in the site area, land subsidence is not anticipated due to either consolidation of the site soils or local loss of support resulting from underground mining. In addition, no potential for shrink/swell action in response to changes in the moisture content of the soil as related to the stability of shallow foundations is anticipated. Potential for frost heave beneath shallow foundations should also be minimal. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-15Rev. 0Standard Penetration Test (SPT) blow counts obtained during drilling of the one soil boring on the site indicate that the sand deposits are generally medium dense and not subject to substantial settlement under typical loads applied by shallow foundations. As described in Subsection 19.4.3, the main building for the SHINE facility has a concrete foundation at 39 ft. (11.9 m) below grade, and it should be possible to design this foundation without the need for piles or drilled piers. Due to the low seismicity of the site area and relatively high SPT blow counts, the potential for earthquake induced liquefaction of subsoil below the groundwater table does not need to be considered. Based on the information summarized above, the geology, soils, and seismology of the Chippewa Falls site would not be expected to have any significant impacts on the SHINE facility. Similarly, construction and operation of the SHINE facility would not be expected to have any significant impacts on the geology, soils, and seismology of the Chippewa Falls site. There is no indication that any rare or unique rock, mineral, or energy assets are present that could be impacted by development at the site. Mining of sand is being conducted in several locations around Chippewa County (where the Chippewa Falls site is located) for use in hydraulic fracturing associated with natural gas production (USGS, 2012c). It is not known whether the type and gradation of the sand at the site is suitable for use in hydraulic fracturing. However, suitable sand deposits appear to be common in Chippewa County and therefore cannot be considered rare or unique. There is no indication that any contaminated soils are present that could be exposed by development at the site. A USGS map of contaminated sites in Chippewa County shows a few closed leaking underground storage tank (LUST) and Environmental Repair Program (ERP) locations in the site area, but investigation and cleanup activities at these locations have been completed and approved by the state (USGS, 2012d). There is no reason to believe that any LUST or ERP concerns extend to the site.Considering the information presented above, geology, soils, and seismology impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL. There would be no need for impact mitigation measures.19.5.2.1.2.1.5Water Resources ImpactsNo streams or other surface water bodies have been identified within the boundaries of the Chippewa Falls site. Therefore, construction of the SHINE facility would have no direct impacts on surface water. The only surface water features identified in close proximity to the site are drainage ditches along the roads that border the site. These drainage ditches would receive rainfall runoff from the construction site, and they potentially could experience indirect impacts, such as increased runoff volumes or degradation of water quality due to sedimentation. | ||
However, potential impacts would be minimized by implementing best management practices, such as soil erosion and sediment control measures; runoff detention ponds; provisions to allow infiltration of rainfall; stormwater pollution prevention plans; and Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) plans. Therefore, surface water impacts associated with facility construction would be SMALL.The City of Chippewa Falls municipal water supply system would provide all water required for operation of the SHINE facility. A 16-inch water main currently serves the Wissota Lake Business Park, and this main would be expected to have more than enough capacity to satisfy the needs Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | However, potential impacts would be minimized by implementing best management practices, such as soil erosion and sediment control measures; runoff detention ponds; provisions to allow infiltration of rainfall; stormwater pollution prevention plans; and Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) plans. Therefore, surface water impacts associated with facility construction would be SMALL.The City of Chippewa Falls municipal water supply system would provide all water required for operation of the SHINE facility. A 16-inch water main currently serves the Wissota Lake Business Park, and this main would be expected to have more than enough capacity to satisfy the needs Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-16Rev. 0of the SHINE facility. The facility would have no need to withdraw surface water or ground water. Best management practices would continue to be used during facility operation to minimize potential impacts on the drainage ditches that receive rainfall runoff from the site. Wastewater other than uncontaminated runoff would be discharged to the City of Chippewa Falls sanitary sewer system after being treated as described in Subsection 19.4.4. Wastewater discharges would comply with state and local pretreatment requirements. Therefore, surface water impacts associated with facility operation would be SMALL.A soil boring drilled at the Chippewa Falls site in 2011 found ground water at a depth of 50 ft. (15.2 m) below the grade elevation (American Engineering Testing, 2011). As described in Subsection 19.4.3, the maximum depth of excavation required for the SHINE facility is 39 ft. (11.9 m) below grade. Although there could be some seasonal variation in the depth to ground water, it is not likely that significant dewatering of excavations would be required. Because the SHINE facility would not withdraw ground water during construction or operation, the only potential impact on ground water would be possible contamination due to a leak or spill of oil or chemicals. The soils found at the Chippewa Falls site have relatively high hydraulic conductivity, which increases the potential for ground water contamination (UW, 1989). However, oil and chemical storage and handling during both construction and operation would be governed by SPCC plans and standard best practices to prevent and contain leaks and spills. Therefore, ground water impacts associated with facility construction and operation would be SMALL.As described above, best management practices and other standard provisions would be used during construction and operation to avoid and minimize impacts on surface water and ground water. These measures would ensure that impacts on water resources would be SMALL, and there would be no need for any other water resources impact mitigation measures.19.5.2.1.2.1.6Ecological Resources ImpactsNo significant ecological resources were identified on or in the immediate vicinity of the Chippewa Falls site. The majority of land on the site is cultivated cropland used for growing corn and soybeans. An abandoned railroad right-of-way (with the tracks removed) cuts diagonally through the southern portion of the site. South of this right-of-way is a fallow agricultural field, some of which has been graded for use by the Wissota Lake Business Park. Observations during a field reconnaissance visit to the site indicate that the edges of the agricultural fields support weedy herbaceous plant species typical of early successional stages. The plant community associated with the abandoned railroad right-of way is a mid-successional disturbance community with a few deciduous tree species and few prairie remnant species observed during field reconnaissance. The fallow agricultural field south of the right-of-way appears to support a typical old field plant community. Representative plant species observed within these areas are listed in Table 19.5.2-3.An apparent wetland community was observed in a narrow drainage way along the eastern edge of the site, immediately west of State Highway 178. Representative plant species observed within this area are listed in Table 19.5.2-3.Wildlife observed at the site included red-tailed hawk, common crow, black-capped chickadee, and various sparrows. None of the plant or animal species observed during field reconnaissance are listed by the USFWS or the WDNR as Endangered, Threatened, or of Special Concern. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-17Rev. 0Figure 19.5.2-4 shows a conceptual facility layout, including the area that would be developed with permanent facility structures and the area that would be temporarily disturbed for construction laydown and parking. It can be seen that the permanently developed area occupies part of the abandoned railroad right-of-way, part of the cropland to the north, and part of the fallow field to the south, while the temporarily disturbed area is located entirely in the cropland.The acreage of natural habitats found within the areas affected by the conceptual facility layout was estimated based on USGS land use/land cover GIS mapping data. Table 19.5.2-2 summarizes the acreages in the natural habitat categories and compares those quantities with the total acreages found within a 5 mi. (8.0 km) radius of the site. It can be seen that the permanently developed area would occupy approximately 0.5 ac. (0.2 ha) of deciduous forest, which represents the trees scattered along the abandoned railroad right-of-way. This is a tiny percentage of the deciduous forest found within 5 mi. (8.0 km) of the site, and the loss of this habitat would not be expected to have any noticeable ecological impact. Table 19.5.2-2 does not show any other natural habitats within the site boundaries.The apparent wetland community observed along the eastern edge of the site is not identified as wetland habitat in the GIS data used to compile Table 19.5.2-2, probably because the community developed somewhat recently as a result of drainage alterations caused by State Highway 178. This wetland community may have some ecological value, but it would not be disturbed during construction or operation of the SHINE facility. The drainage ditch that supports the wetland community would receive rainfall runoff from the site and could potentially experience indirect impacts such as increased runoff volumes or degradation of water quality. However, as discussed in Subsection 19.5.2.1.2.1.5, potential impacts would be minimized by implementing best management practices and pollution prevention plans during construction and operation. Therefore, the wetland community would not be significantly affected.The nearest wetland habitat represented in GIS mapping data is a small area located along a railroad line west of the Chippewa Falls site. This wetland area is approximately 0.25 mi. (0.4km) from the site boundary at its nearest point, and it is separated from the site by two roads and a row of commercial buildings. It would not be directly or indirectly affected by construction or operation of the SHINE facility.As discussed in Subsection 19.5.2.1.2.1.5, no streams or other surface water bodies have been identified within the boundaries of the Chippewa Falls site, and the only surface water features identified in close proximity to the site are drainage ditches along the roads that border the site. These drainage ditches do not represent significant aquatic ecological habitats. The nearest significant surface water bodies are Lake Wissota, which at its nearest point is approximately 0.75 mi. (1.2 km) north-northwest of the site, and the Chippewa River, which at its nearest point is approximately 0.9 mi. (1.4 km) south of the site. Both of these are significant ecological habitats, but neither would be directly or indirectly affected by construction or operation of the SHINE facility.A consultation letter received from the USFWS (2012a) states that "no federally-listed, proposed, or candidate species, or designated critical habitat occurs within the project area." This letter does not express any concerns about or recommendations applicable to the development of the Chippewa Falls site. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-18Rev. 0A letter documenting an Endangered Resources Re view conducted by t he WDNR (2011a) lists four Endangered, Threatened, or Special Concern species known or likely to occur in the project area. These species and their regulatory status are shown in Table 19.5.2-4. The letter indicates that none of these species are likely to occur on the project site, because they all are associated with aquatic habitats, primarily Lake Wissota and the Chippewa River. The letter does not list any actions that need to be taken to comply with state or federal endangered species laws. It recommends avoiding impacts on the wetland community observed along the eastern edge of the site and implementing strict erosion and siltation controls during the entire construction period.Considering the information presented above, aquatic and terrestrial ecology impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL. The methods used to clear vegetation, control erosion and siltation, and restore temporarily disturbed areas would be selected so as to minimize impacts as described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.5. No other impact mitigation measures would be required.19.5.2.1.2.1.7Historic and Cultural Resources ImpactsNo properties listed on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) are located on or in the immediate vicinity of the Chippewa Falls site. The nearest listed property is the Notre Dame Church and Goldsmith Memorial Chapel, which is approximately 2 mi. (3.2 km) southwest of the southwestern corner of the site. This property is located in a densely populated part of the City of Chippewa Falls, and it is separated from the site by numerous buildings, roads, trees, and other obstructions. Therefore, this property would not be directly or indirectly affected by construction or operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site.The Wisconsin State Archeologist conducted a search of the Wisconsin Historic Preservation Database in order to identify any historic and archeological resources that have been reported in the site vicinity, regardless of whether those resources are listed on the NRHP or not. The database search did not identify any historic or archeological resources that have been reported on the site or within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the site boundaries. The Wisconsin State Archeologist did not express any concerns about potential construction at the site except that Wisconsin law must be followed if human remains are unearthed or if Native American burial mounds or any marked or unmarked burial is suspected to be present. (Broihahn, 2011)Field reconnaissance in the site vicinity did not identify any buildings or other features that appeared likely to have historic or cultural significance. | ||
Based on the information presented above, construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would not be expected to directly or indirectly affect historic or cultural resources. If human remains or archeological artifacts were discovered during construction or operation, the procedures outlined for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.6 would be followed. Therefore, cultural resources impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL. There would be no need for impact mitigation measures. | Based on the information presented above, construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would not be expected to directly or indirectly affect historic or cultural resources. If human remains or archeological artifacts were discovered during construction or operation, the procedures outlined for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.6 would be followed. Therefore, cultural resources impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL. There would be no need for impact mitigation measures. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-19Rev. 019.5.2.1.2.1.8Socioeconomic ImpactsThis subsection evaluates the social and economic impacts that could result from constructing and operating the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site. The evaluation includes the impacts of construction and operation activities themselves and the demands placed by the construction and operation workforces on the site and the surrounding region. As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, the socioeconomic impacts of constructing and operating the SHINE facility at the Janesville site are expected to be largely restricted to Rock County, the county in which the site is located. Socioeconomic impacts in other counties are expected to be minimal and do not require evaluation. It is expected that the socioeconomic impacts of construction and operation at the Chippewa Falls site would similarly occur primarily in Chippewa County, the county in which the site is located. Therefore, the following impact evaluation focuses on Chippewa County. In accordance with the Revised ISG Augmenting NUREG-1537, the ev aluation considers potential impacts on housing, public services, public education, tax revenues, and transportation. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | HousingImpacts on housing could be caused by construction and operation workers moving, either permanently or temporarily, into the region surrounding the project site (Chippewa County). This influx of workers could decrease the availability of unoccupied housing units and increase the cost to buy or rent housing. The severity of such impacts would depend primarily on the existing availability of unoccupied housing units compared with the number of workers who would move into the area.NUREG-1437 establishes the following criteria for judging the severity of impacts on housing:SMALL - Small and not easily discernible change in housing availability. Increases in rental rates or housing values equal or slightly exceed the statewide inflation rate.MODERATE - Discernible but short-lived reduction in available housing units. Rental rates and housing values rise slightly faster than the inflation rate, but prices realign quickly once new housing units became available or project-related demand diminishes.LARGE - Project-related demand for housing units results in very limited housing availability and increases in rental rates and housing values well above normal inflationary increases in the state.Based on U.S. Census Bureau (USCB) data for 2010, the total number of housing units in Chippewa County was 27,185, and the number of vacant units was 2,775 (USCB, 2012a). As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for construction of the SHINE facility is 420. It is expected that many of these workers would be current residents of Chippewa County or the nearby region, but even if all of the workers moved into the county and required housing, the resulting demand for 420 housing units would represent only about 15 percent of the vacant housing units in the county. It is unlikely that this would result in any discernible change in ho using availability or increase in housing costs. Therefore, the housing impact associated with construction of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-20Rev. 0As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for operation of the SHINE facility is 150. This number is significantly smaller than the estimated number of construction workers. Therefore, the housing impact associated with operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Public ServicesPublic services include water supply and waste water treatment facilities; police, fire, and medical services; and social services. Impacts on public services could be caused by construction and operation workers moving into the region surrounding the project site (Chippewa County). This influx of workers and their families could increase the demand for public services, potentially requiring local governments to add facilities, programs, and/or staff.Per NUREG-1437, impacts on public services generally are considered to be SMALL if there is little or no need to add facilities, programs, and/or staff because of the influx of workers, and MODERATE or LARGE if additional facilities, programs, and/or staff are required. USCB estimates that the population of Chippewa County in 2011 was 62,778, and the average number of people per household was 2.5 (USCB, 2012b). As discussed above, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for construction of the SHINE facility is 420. It is expected that many of these workers would be current residents of Chippewa County or the nearby region, but even if all of the workers moved into the county with the average household size of 2.5 people, the resulting influx of 1,150 people would increase the population of the county by less than 2 percent. It is unlikely that this small population increase would result in a noticeable increase in the demand for public services or a need to add facilities, programs, and/or staff. Therefore, the public services impact associated with construction of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL.As discussed above, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for operation of the SHINE facility is 150. This number is significantly smaller than the estimated number of construction workers. Therefore, the public services impact associated with operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL.Public EducationImpacts on public education could be caused by construction and operation workers moving into and bringing school-aged children into the region surrounding the project site (Chippewa County). This increase in the number of school-aged children could cause crowding of local schools and potentially require school systems to add facilities and/or staff. | ||
Per NUREG-1437, impacts on education are considered to be SMALL if the project-related increase in school enrollment represents less than 3 percent of the total school enrollment in affected school systems, MODERATE if 4 to 8 percent, and LARGE if more than 8 percent.Based on Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (WDPI) data for 2010, the total public school enrollment in Chippewa County was 9,218 students (WDPI 2012). As discussed above, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for construction of the SHINE facility is 420. It is expected that many of these workers would be current residents of Chippewa County, but if all of the workers moved into the county and brought a school-aged child who attended a public school, the resulting influx of 420 students would increase school Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-21Rev. 0enrollment by approximately 4.6 percent. Using the NUREG-1437 guideline, this would indicate a MODERATE impact on education. However, given the conservativeness of the assumption that all construction workers would move into the county and the fact that the peak construction employment period would last less than 1 year, it is unlikely that the increase in school-aged children would result in noticeable crowding or a need to add facilities or staff. Therefore, the public education impact associated with construction of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALLAs discussed above, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for operation of the SHINE facility is 150. This number is significantly smaller than the estimated number of construction workers. Therefore, the public education impact associated with operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL.TaxesProperty taxes and other taxes paid during construction and operation of the SHINE facility would benefit the state and local jurisdictions that co llect the taxes. Per NUREG-1437, tax impacts are considered SMALL if project-related tax revenues represent less than 10 percent of the total tax revenues of the local taxing jurisdictions, MODERATE if 10 to 20 percent, and LARGE if more than 20 percent.As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, SHINE intends to enter into a Tax Increment Financing (TIF) agreement with the City of Janesville. This agreement is expected to cover the first 10 years of the NRC license period, which includes the construction period for the SHINE facility. Under this agreement, SHINE expects to pay a total of $635,000 per year in property taxes and payments in lieu of taxes. If the SHINE facility were constructed at the Chippewa Falls site, it is expected that SHINE would enter into a similar TIF agreement and make similar payments during the construction period. Based on Wisconsin Department of Revenue (WDOR) data for Chippewa County, the property taxes collected in 2011 were $14,887,300 (WDOR, 2012a). Therefore, even if the entire payments of $635,000 per year were counted toward property taxes, the payments would represent approximately 4.3 percent of the annual property tax revenues of Chippewa County, and the tax impact associated with construction of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL.After expiration of the 10-year TIF agreement with the City of Janesville, SHINE expects to pay property taxes of approximately $660,000 per year during the remaining period of operation for the SHINE facility. It is expected that tax payments at the Chippewa Falls site would be approximately the same, and such payments would represent approximately 4.4 percent of the annual property tax revenues of Chippewa County. Therefore, the tax impact associated with operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL.TransportationTransportation in the vicinity of the SHINE facility could be affected by the increase in vehicle traffic associated with construction and operation workers commuting to and from the site and the delivery of materials and equipment to the site. The increase in vehicle traffic could cause congestion and delays on local roads. The severity of such impacts would depend primarily on the existing road conditions and traffic volumes on the local roads compared with the expected volume of project-related traffic. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-22Rev. 0As shown in Figure 19.5.2-4, the entrance road for the SHINE facility would connect with Commerce Parkway, a City of Chippewa Falls street that forms the western boundary of the site. No other construction, modification of roads, or other transportation infrastructure would be required for construction, operation, or decommissioning of the SHINE facility. However, Commerce Parkway is a two-lane road that probably would experience a significant increase in traffic volume due to project-related traffic. Therefore, construction of turning lanes or other improvements might be necessary to avoid traffic delays on Commerce Parkway, as discussed below.U.S. Highway 53 provides long-distance road access to the site area. The exit nearest to the site is Exit 99, which is approximately 5 mi. (8.0 km) west of the site and connects with County Highway S. Thus, it is expected that most vehicles traveling to the site from outside of the Chippewa Falls metropolitan area would travel on County Highway S and then turn onto Commerce Parkway. Many vehicles traveling to the site from inside of the metropolitan area probably also would travel on County Highway S, although some might travel on County Highway I. Commerce Parkway and County Highway S are two-lane roads with paved shoulders, while County Highway I is a four-lane road with curbed shoulders and a two-way turning lane as the median. Table 19.5.2-5 provides Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WDOT) peak hourly traffic data for Commerce Parkway, County Highway S, County Highway I, and other roads in the site area (WDOT, 2011). It can be seen that the traffic volume on most of these roads is around 400 vehicles per hour during both the morning and evening peak periods. As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, the maximum number of vehicles expected to travel to and from the site during construction of the SHINE facility is 465 per day. The great majority of these vehicles (approximately 420) would represent commuting construction workers. These vehicles generally would arrive at the site on Commerce Parkway at about the same time each morning and leave on Commerce Parkway at about the same time each evening. Thus, commuting construction workers could roughly double the volume of traffic on Commerce Parkway during the peak morning and evening periods. The increase in traffic volumes on other roads in the site vicinity probably would not be as great but could be significant.Considering the nature of the roads in the site vicinity and the increase in traffic volume these roads would experience, it is likely that the peak construction-related traffic would noticeably alter existing transportation conditions (cause noticeable traffic delays) but not be sufficient to destabilize transportation resources. Therefore, the transportation impact associated with project construction would be MODERATE.As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, the maximum number of vehicles expected to travel to and from the site during operation of the SHINE facility is 118 per day. The great majority of these vehicles would represent commuting operation workers, but it is expected that these workers would be divided into three shifts. Thus, the maximum number of vehicles arriving at or departing from the site at any one time would be much less than during the construction period. Therefore, the transportation impact associated with facility operation would be SMALL.In order to alleviate traffic congestion during project construction, mitiga tion measures, such as adding turning lanes might be necessary, especially on Commerce Parkway. Specific mitigation measures would be selected after a detailed evaluation of traffic patterns and potential problem areas. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-23Rev. 019.5.2.1.2.1.9Human Health Impacts19.5.2.1.2.1.9.1Nonradiological ImpactsNo unusual existing sources of nonradioactive chemical exposure or effluents have been identified in the vicinity of the Chippewa Falls site. No operating industrial facilities with environmental monitoring programs have been identified in the site vicinity. A SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be essentially the same as the SHINE facility described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.8.1 with regard to the following factors:*Nonradioactive chemical sources (location, type, strength).*Nonradioactive liquid, gaseous, and solid waste management and effluent control systems.*Nonradioactive effluents released into the on-site and off-site environment. | |||
*Chemical exposure to the public and on-site workforce. | *Chemical exposure to the public and on-site workforce. | ||
*Physical occupational hazards.*Mitigation measures for nonradiological human health impacts.Nonradiological chemical sources, wastes, effluents, and occupational hazards associated with the SHINE facility would be strictly controlled to ensure compliance with applicable environmental and occupational regulations and standards as discussed in Subsection 19.4.8.1. Therefore, the nonradiological human health impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL.19.5.2.1.2.1.9.2Radiological Impacts No unusual existing sources of radiation have been identified in the vicinity of the Chippewa Falls site. The major sources and levels of background radiation exposure at the Chippewa Falls site are very similar to the sources and levels described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.3.8.2. The physical layout of the Chippewa Falls site is shown in Figure 19.5.2-4. Radioactive materials would be located in the central part of the production facility building. A SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be essentially the same as the SHINE facility described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.8.2 with regard to the following factors:*Characteristics of radiation sources and expected radioactive effluents.*Compliance with 10 CFR 20.1301, including calculated radiation dose rates at the site boundary.*Annual radiation dose to the maximally exposed worker. | *Physical occupational hazards.*Mitigation measures for nonradiological human health impacts.Nonradiological chemical sources, wastes, effluents, and occupational hazards associated with the SHINE facility would be strictly controlled to ensure compliance with applicable environmental and occupational regulations and standards as discussed in Subsection 19.4.8.1. Therefore, the nonradiological human health impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL.19.5.2.1.2.1.9.2Radiological Impacts No unusual existing sources of radiation have been identified in the vicinity of the Chippewa Falls site. The major sources and levels of background radiation exposure at the Chippewa Falls site are very similar to the sources and levels described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.3.8.2. The physical layout of the Chippewa Falls site is shown in Figure 19.5.2-4. Radioactive materials would be located in the central part of the production facility building. A SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be essentially the same as the SHINE facility described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.8.2 with regard to the following factors:*Characteristics of radiation sources and expected radioactive effluents.*Compliance with 10 CFR 20.1301, including calculated radiation dose rates at the site boundary.*Annual radiation dose to the maximally exposed worker. | ||
*Mitigation measures to minimize public and occupational exposures to radioactive material.Radiation sources and radioactive effluents would be strictly controlled to ensure compliance with applicable regulations and standards as discussed in Subsection 19.4.8.2. Therefore, the radiological human health impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL. | *Mitigation measures to minimize public and occupational exposures to radioactive material.Radiation sources and radioactive effluents would be strictly controlled to ensure compliance with applicable regulations and standards as discussed in Subsection 19.4.8.2. Therefore, the radiological human health impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-24Rev. 019.5.2.1.2.1.10Waste Management ImpactsNo conditions have been identified for the Chippewa Falls site that would significantly affect waste management impacts. A SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be essentially the same as the SHINE facility described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.9 with regard to the following factors:*Sources, types, and approximate quantities of solid, hazardous, radioactive, and mixed wastes.*Proposed waste management systems designed to collect, store, and process the waste. | ||
*Anticipated waste disposal or waste management plans.*Anticipated waste-minimization plans to minimize the generation of waste.Wastes would be handled, processed, stored, and disposed as discussed in Subsection 19.4.9. Therefore, the waste management impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL.19.5.2.1.2.1.11Transportation ImpactsPer the Final ISG Augmenting NUREG-1537, the traffic impacts of vehicles associated with the SHINE facility are discussed in Subsection 19.5.2.1.2.1.8. This subsection discusses the radiological and other human health impacts of transporting nuclear and non-nuclear materials associated with the project. No conditions have been identified | *Anticipated waste disposal or waste management plans.*Anticipated waste-minimization plans to minimize the generation of waste.Wastes would be handled, processed, stored, and disposed as discussed in Subsection 19.4.9. Therefore, the waste management impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL.19.5.2.1.2.1.11Transportation ImpactsPer the Final ISG Augmenting NUREG-1537, the traffic impacts of vehicles associated with the SHINE facility are discussed in Subsection 19.5.2.1.2.1.8. This subsection discusses the radiological and other human health impacts of transporting nuclear and non-nuclear materials associated with the project. No conditions have been identified fo r the Chippewa Falls site that would significantly affect the impacts of transporting nuclear and non-nuclear materials, including radioactive waste, nonradioactive waste, and medical isotopes. Because the Chippewa Falls site and the Janesville site are relatively close to each other in comparison with the projected origins and destinations of nuclear and non-nuclear materials, distance-related impacts of transportation would be essentially the same. A SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be essentially the same as the SHINE facility described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.10 with regard to the | ||
following factors:*Transportation modes. | |||
*Approximate transportation distances. | *Approximate transportation distances. | ||
*Treatment and packaging for radioactive and nonradioactive wastes.*Calculated radiological | |||
SMALL - Small and not easily discernible change in housing availability. Increases in rental rates or housing values equal or slightly exceed the statewide inflation rate. | SMALL - Small and not easily discernible change in housing availability. Increases in rental rates or housing values equal or slightly exceed the statewide inflation rate. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-37Rev. 0MODERATE - Discernible but short-lived reduction in available housing units. Rental rates and housing values rise slightly faster than the inflation rate, but prices realign quickly once new housing units became available or project-related demand diminishes.LARGE - Project-related demand for housing units results in very limited housing availability and increases in rental rates and housing values well above normal inflationary increases in the state.Based on USCB data for 2010, the total number of housing units in Portage County was 30,054, and the number of vacant units was 2240 (USCB, 2012a). As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for construction of the SHINE facility is 420. It is expected that many of these workers would be current residents of Portage Countyand the nearby region, but even if all of the workers moved into the county and required housing, the resulting demand for 420 housing units would represent less than 19 percent of the vacant housing units in the county. It is unlikely that this would result in any discernible change in housing availability or an increase in housing costs. Therefore, the housing impact associated with construction of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL.As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for operation of the SHINE facility is 150. This number is significantly smaller than the estimated number of construction workers. Therefore, the housing impact associated with operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Public ServicesPublic services include water supply and waste water treatment facilities; police, fire, and medical services; and social services. Impacts on public services could be caused by construction and operation workers moving into the region surrounding the project site (PortageCounty). This influx of workers and their families could increase the demand for public services, potentially requiring local governments to add facilities, programs, and/or staff.Per NUREG-1437, impacts on public services generally are considered to be SMALL if there is little or no need to add facilities, programs, and/or staff because of the influx of workers, and MODERATE or LARGE if additional facilities, programs, and/or staff are required. USCB estimates that the population of Portage County in 2011 was 70,084, and the average number of people per household was 2.4 (USCB, 2012e). As discussed above, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for construction of the SHINE facility is 420. It is expected that many of these workers would be current residents of Portage County and the nearby region, but even if all of the workers moved into the county with the average household size of 2.4 people, the resulting influx of 1,008 people would increase the population of the county by less than 2 percent. It is unlikely that this small population increase would result in a noticeable increase in the demand for public services or a need to add facilities, programs, and/or staff. Therefore, the public services impact associated with construction of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALLAs discussed above, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for operation of the SHINE facility is 150. This number is significantly smaller than the estimated number of construction workers. Therefore, the public services impact associated with operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-38Rev. 0Public EducationImpacts on public education could be caused by construction and operation workers moving into and bringing school-aged children into the region surrounding the project site (Portage County). This increase in the number of school-aged children could cause crowding of local schools and potentially require school systems to add facilities and/or staff. | ||
Per NUREG-1437, impacts on education are considered to be SMALL if the project-related increase in school enrollment represents less than 3 percent of the total school enrollment in affected school systems, MODERATE if 4 to 8 percent, and LARGE if more than 8 percent.Based on WDPI data for 2010, the total public school enrollment in Portage County was 9,528 students (WDPI, 2012). As discussed above, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for construction of the SHINE facility is 420. It is expected that many of these workers would be current residents of Portage County and the nearby region, but if all of the workers moved into the county and brought a school-aged child who attended a public school, the resulting influx of 420 students would increase school enrollment by approximately 4.4 percent. Using the NUREG-1437 guideline, this would indicate a MODERATE impact on education. However, given the conservativeness of the assumption that all construction workers would move into the county, and the fact that the peak construction employment period would last less than 1 year, it is unlikely that the increase in school-aged children would result in noticeable crowding or a need to add facilities or staff. Therefore, the public education impact associated with construction of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALLAs discussed above, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for operation of the SHINE facility is 150. This number is significantly smaller than the estimated number of construction workers. Therefore, the public education impact associated with operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL.TaxesProperty taxes and other taxes paid during construction and operation of the SHINE facility would benefit the state and local jurisdictions that co llect the taxes. Per NUREG-1437, tax impacts are considered SMALL if project-related tax revenues represent less than 10 percent of the total tax revenues of the local taxing jurisdictions, MODERATE if 10 to 20 percent, and LARGE if more than 20 percent.As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, SHINE intends to enter into a TIF agreement with the City of Janesville. This agreement is expected to cover the first 10 years of the NRC license period, which includes the construction period for the SHINE facility. Under this agreement, SHINE expects to pay a total of $635,000 per year in property taxes and payments in lieu of taxes. If the SHINE facility were constructed at the Stevens Point site, it is expected that SHINE would enter into a similar TIF agreement and make similar payments during the construction period. Based on WDOR data for Portage County, the property taxes collected in 2011 were $24,819,000 (WDOR, 2012a). Therefore, even if the entire payment of $635,000 per year were counted toward property taxes, the payments would represent approximately 2.6percent of the annual property tax revenues of Portage County, and the tax impact associated with construction of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would beSMALL. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-39Rev. 0After expiration of the 10-year TIF agreement with the City of Janesville, SHINE expects to pay property taxes of approximately $660,000 per year during the remaining period of operation for the SHINE facility. It is expected that tax payments at the Stevens Point site would be approximately the same, and such payments would represent approximately 2.7 percent of the annual property tax revenues of Portage County. Therefore, the tax impact associated with operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL.TransportationTransportation in the vicinity of the SHINE facility could be affected by the increase in vehicle traffic associated with construction and operation workers commuting to and from the site and the delivery of materials and equipment to the site. The increase in vehicle traffic could cause congestion and delays on local roads. The severity of such impacts would depend primarily on the existing road conditions and traffic volumes on the local roads compared with the expected volume of project-related traffic.As shown in Figure 19.5.2-7, the entrance road for the SHINE facility would connect with a new street that the City of Stevens Point has indicated they would construct along the northern boundary of the site. It is expected that this new street would connect with County Highway R (Eisenhower Road), an existing public road located approximately 1.0 mi. (1.6 km) west of the site, and Burbank Road, an existing public road located approximately 1.5 mi. (2.4 km) east of the site. The City also has indicated that they would construct a new street along the western boundary of the site, between the new street to the north and County Highway HH (McDill Avenue), an existing public road to the south. No other construction or modification of roads or other transportation infrastructure would be required for construction, operation, or decommissioning of the SHINE facility. Interstate-39 provides long-distance access to the site area. The exit nearest to the site is Exit156, which is approximately 1.5 mi. (2.4 km) southwest of the site and connects with County Highway HH. Exit 158, which is approximately 2 mi. (3.2 km) northwest of the site, connects with U.S. Highway 10. Thus, it is expected that most vehicles traveling to the site from outside of the Stevens Point metropolitan area would travel on County Highway HH or U.S. Highway 10, then turn onto County Highway R, and then turn onto the new street to be constructed along the northern boundary of the site. Many vehicles traveling to the site from inside of the metropolitan area probably also would travel on County Highways R and HH, although some might travel on Old Highway 18 or Burbank Road, which are the nearest existing public roads to the north and east of the site, respectively.U.S. Highway 10 is a multi-lane divided highway. County Highway R is an undivided four-lane road with a curbed shoulder. County Highway HH, Old Highway 18, and Burbank Road are two lane roads with minimal paved shoulders. Old Highway 18 and Burbank Road are narrow and do not have painted center stripes.Table 19.5.2-12 provides peak hourly traffic data for the roads in the site area (WDOT, 2011). It can be seen that the traffic volume on these roads varies greatly. Most relevantly, however, the traffic volume on County Highway R in the site area (south of U.S. Highway 10) is around 400 vehicles per hour during the morning peak period and around 700 vehicles per hour during the evening peak period. The traffic volume on County Highway HH is around 350 vehicles per hour during the morning peak period and around 500 vehicles per hour during the evening peak Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-40Rev. 0period. The traffic volume on both Old Highway 18 and Burbank Road is less than 50 vehicles per hour during both the morning and evening peak periods.As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, the maximum number of vehicles expected to travel to and from the site during construction of the SHINE facility is 465 per day. The great majority of these vehicles (approximately 420) would represent commuting construction workers. These vehicles generally would arrive at the site on County Highway R at about the same time each morning and leave on County Highway R at about the same time each evening. Thus, commuting construction workers could roughly double the volume of traffic on County Highway R during the peak morning period. The increase in traffic volumes on other roads in the site vicinity would not be as great but could be significant. Given the low existing traffic volumes and relatively poor road conditions on Old Highway 18 and Burbank Road, any appreciable increase in traffic could be significant for these roads.Considering the nature of the roads in the site vicinity and the increase in traffic volume these roads would experience, it is likely that the peak construction-related traffic would noticeably alter existing transportation conditions (cause noticeable traffic delays) but not be sufficient to destabilize transportation resources. Therefore, the transportation impact associated with project construction would be MODERATE.As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, the maximum number of vehicles expected to travel to and from the site during operation of the SHINE facility is 118 per day. The great majority of these vehicles would represent commuting operation workers, but it is expected that these workers would be divided into three shifts. Thus, the maximum number of vehicles arriving at or departing from the site at any one time would be much less than during the construction period. Therefore, the transportation impact associated with facility operation would be SMALL.In order to alleviate traffic congestion during project construction, mitiga tion measures such as widening or adding turning lanes might be necessary, especially on Old Highway 18 and Burbank Road. Specific mitigation measures would be selected after a detailed evaluation of traffic patterns and potential problem areas.19.5.2.1.2.2.9Human Health Impacts19.5.2.1.2.2.9.1Nonradiological Impacts No unusual existing sources of nonradioactive chemical exposure or effluents have been identified in the vicinity of the Stevens Point site. No operating industrial facilities with environmental monitoring programs have been identified in the site vicinity. A SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be essentially the same as the SHINE facility described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.8.1 with regard to the following factors:*Nonradioactive chemical sources (location, type, strength). | |||
*Nonradioactive liquid, gaseous, and solid waste management and effluent control systems.*Nonradioactive effluents released into the on-site and off-site environment. | *Nonradioactive liquid, gaseous, and solid waste management and effluent control systems.*Nonradioactive effluents released into the on-site and off-site environment. | ||
*Chemical exposure to the public and on-site workforce.*Physical occupational hazards.*Mitigation measures for nonradiological human health impacts. | *Chemical exposure to the public and on-site workforce.*Physical occupational hazards.*Mitigation measures for nonradiological human health impacts. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-41Rev. 0Nonradiological chemical sources, wastes, effluents, and occupational hazards associated with the SHINE facility would be strictly controlled to ensure compliance with applicable environmental and occupational regulations and standards as discussed in Subsection 19.4.8.1. Therefore, the nonradiological human health impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL.19.5.2.1.2.2.9.2Radiological Impacts No unusual existing sources of radiation have been identified in the vicinity of the Stevens Point site. The major sources and levels of background radiation exposure at the Stevens Point site are very similar to the sources and levels described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.3.8.2. The physical layout of the Stevens Point site is shown in Figure 19.5.2-7. Radioactive materials would be located in the central part of the production facility building. A SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be essentially the same as the SHINE facility described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.8.2 with regard to the following factors:*Characteristics of radiation sources and expected radioactive effluents. | ||
*Compliance with 10 CFR 20.1301, including calculated radiation dose rates at the site boundary.*Annual radiation dose to the maximally exposed worker.*Mitigation measures to minimize public and occupational exposures to radioactive material.Radiation sources and radioactive effluents would be strictly controlled to ensure compliance with applicable regulations and standards as discussed in Subsection 19.4.8.2. Therefore, the radiological human health impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL.19.5.2.1.2.2.10Waste Management ImpactsNo conditions have been identified for the Stevens Point site that would significantly affect waste management impacts. A SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be essentially the same as the SHINE facility described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.9 with regard to the following factors:*Sources, types, and approximate quantities of solid, hazardous, radioactive, and mixed wastes.*Proposed waste management systems designed to collect, store, and process the waste.*Anticipated waste disposal or waste management plans.*Anticipated waste-minimization plans to minimize the generation of waste.Wastes would be handled, processed, stored, and disposed as discussed in Subsection 19.4.9. Therefore, the waste management impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL. | *Compliance with 10 CFR 20.1301, including calculated radiation dose rates at the site boundary.*Annual radiation dose to the maximally exposed worker.*Mitigation measures to minimize public and occupational exposures to radioactive material.Radiation sources and radioactive effluents would be strictly controlled to ensure compliance with applicable regulations and standards as discussed in Subsection 19.4.8.2. Therefore, the radiological human health impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL.19.5.2.1.2.2.10Waste Management ImpactsNo conditions have been identified for the Stevens Point site that would significantly affect waste management impacts. A SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be essentially the same as the SHINE facility described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.9 with regard to the following factors:*Sources, types, and approximate quantities of solid, hazardous, radioactive, and mixed wastes.*Proposed waste management systems designed to collect, store, and process the waste.*Anticipated waste disposal or waste management plans.*Anticipated waste-minimization plans to minimize the generation of waste.Wastes would be handled, processed, stored, and disposed as discussed in Subsection 19.4.9. Therefore, the waste management impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-42Rev. 019.5.2.1.2.2.11Waste Management ImpactsPer the Final ISG Augmenting NUREG-1537, the traffic impacts of vehicles associated with the SHINE project are discussed in Subsection 19.5.2.1.2.2.8. This subsection discusses the radiological and other human health impacts of transporting nuclear and non-nuclear materials associated with the project.No conditions have been identified for the Stevens Point site that would significantly affect the impacts of transporting nuclear and non-nuclear materials, including radioactive waste, nonradioactive waste, and medical isotopes. Because the Stevens Point site and the Janesville site are relatively close to each other in comparison with the projected origins and destinations of nuclear and non-nuclear materials, distance-related impacts of transportation would be essentially the same. A SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be essentially the same as the SHINE facility described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.10 with regard to the following factors:*Transportation modes.*Approximate transportation distances.*Treatment and packaging for radioactive and nonradioactive wastes. | ||
*Calculated radiological dose to members of the public and workers from incident-free transportation scenarios.The impact of the transportation of nuclear and non-nuclear materials is discussed in Subsections 19.4.10.1.3 and 19.4.10.2 . Therefore, the transportation impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL.19.5.2.1.2.2.12Postulated Accident ImpactsNo conditions have been identified for the Stevens Point site that would significantly affect the radiological and nonradiological impacts from postulated accidents. A SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be essentially the same as the SHINE facility described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.11 with regard to the following factors:*Credible accidents having a potential for releases into the environment.*Radiological and nonradiological consequences from the postulated accidents.The SHINE facility would be designed, constructed, and operated to ensure that the consequences of postulated accidents would comply with applicable regulations and standards, as discussed in Subsection 19.4.11. Therefore, the postulated accident impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL.19.5.2.1.2.2.13Environmental Justice ImpactsEnvironmental justice issues involve aspects of the project that could disproportionately impact minority or low-income populations. The potential for disproportionate impacts depends primarily on the location of the project facilities in relation to existing minority and low-income populations.Minority and low-income populations within 5 mi. (8 km) of the Stevens Point site were identified based on USCB Census block group data (USCB, 2012c and 2012d). Census block groups with above-average minority and low-income populations were determined by comparing the minority Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | *Calculated radiological dose to members of the public and workers from incident-free transportation scenarios.The impact of the transportation of nuclear and non-nuclear materials is discussed in Subsections 19.4.10.1.3 and 19.4.10.2 . Therefore, the transportation impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL.19.5.2.1.2.2.12Postulated Accident ImpactsNo conditions have been identified for the Stevens Point site that would significantly affect the radiological and nonradiological impacts from postulated accidents. A SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be essentially the same as the SHINE facility described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.11 with regard to the following factors:*Credible accidents having a potential for releases into the environment.*Radiological and nonradiological consequences from the postulated accidents.The SHINE facility would be designed, constructed, and operated to ensure that the consequences of postulated accidents would comply with applicable regulations and standards, as discussed in Subsection 19.4.11. Therefore, the postulated accident impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL.19.5.2.1.2.2.13Environmental Justice ImpactsEnvironmental justice issues involve aspects of the project that could disproportionately impact minority or low-income populations. The potential for disproportionate impacts depends primarily on the location of the project facilities in relation to existing minority and low-income populations.Minority and low-income populations within 5 mi. (8 km) of the Stevens Point site were identified based on USCB Census block group data (USCB, 2012c and 2012d). Census block groups with above-average minority and low-income populations were determined by comparing the minority Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-43Rev. 0and poverty populations in each block group to the total population in that block group and to the average minority and poverty populations in the county and state. Where the minority or poverty population in a block group exceeded 50 percent of the total population in that block group, or where the minority or poverty population was found to be at least 20 percentage points greater than the comparable county and/or state averages, the minority or poverty population was defined as "above average." This methodology is consistent with NRC guidance for identification of Environmental Justic e populations (NRC, 2004).Table 19.5.2-13 shows the block groups and census tracts within 5 mi. (8 km) of the Stevens Point site, the percentage of households below the poverty level in each, and the percentage of each minority group, including American Indian and Hispanic populations, in each. The percentage of households below the poverty level, the percentage of each minority group, and aggregate percentage of all minority groups are compared with the average percentage in Portage County and the state of Wisconsin.As shown in Table 19.5.2-13, none of the block groups/census tracts within 5 mi. (8 km) of the Stevens Point site has an above average percentage of any minority groups individually or in the aggregate, but four block groups/census tracts have an above average percentage of households below the poverty level. These block groups/census tracts have 36.4 to 59.5 percent of households below the poverty level, compared with 12.4 percent in Portage County and 11.2percent in the state of Wisconsin. The location of these block groups/census tracts is shown in Figure 19.5.2-9. It can be seen that all of the block groups/census tracts are located west-northwest of the Stevens Point site, with the nearest one being approximately 3.5 mi. (5.6km) from the site. All of the block groups/census tracts are located on the far side of the City of Stevens Point, and all are separated from the site by numerous buildings, roads, trees, and other obstructions. None of the primary transportation routes that would be used to transport workers, materials, or equipment to the Stevens Point site pass through these block groups/ | ||
census tracks. Therefore, these populations would not be directly or indirectly affected by construction or operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site.No American Indian reservations or other special communities have been identified within 5 mi. (8 km) of the Stevens Point site. The nearest American Indian reservation is the Winnebago Reservation, which belongs to the Ho-Chunk Nation and is located approximately 20 mi. (32 km) southwest of the site (National Atlas of the United States, 2012; WDNR, 2012b).Based on the information presented above, there is no indication that any minority or low income population would be disproportionately affected during project construction or operation as compared to the effect on the general population. Based on the potential for disproportionate exposure to environmental hazards from the SHINE facility as well as multiple-hazard and cumulative hazard conditions, the human health and environmental effects on minority and low-income populations would not be significantly high or adverse. Therefore, the environmental justice impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | census tracks. Therefore, these populations would not be directly or indirectly affected by construction or operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site.No American Indian reservations or other special communities have been identified within 5 mi. (8 km) of the Stevens Point site. The nearest American Indian reservation is the Winnebago Reservation, which belongs to the Ho-Chunk Nation and is located approximately 20 mi. (32 km) southwest of the site (National Atlas of the United States, 2012; WDNR, 2012b).Based on the information presented above, there is no indication that any minority or low income population would be disproportionately affected during project construction or operation as compared to the effect on the general population. Based on the potential for disproportionate exposure to environmental hazards from the SHINE facility as well as multiple-hazard and cumulative hazard conditions, the human health and environmental effects on minority and low-income populations would not be significantly high or adverse. Therefore, the environmental justice impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-44Rev. 019.5.2.1.2.2.14Cumulative ImpactsPast, present, and reasonably foreseeable future development projects and other actions that could result in cumulative impacts at the Stevens Point site were identified by searching for economic development plans, permit lists, news releases, and similar sources of information. An effort was made to identify all relevant activities conducted, regulated, or approved by a federal agency or non-federal entity within 5 mi. (8 km) of the site. Available information about the projects and other activities identified is provided in Table 19.5.2-14.As shown in Table 19.5.2-14, the projects and other activities located within 5 mi. (8 km) of the Stevens Point site generally are of a relatively small scale and would not be expected to have significant impacts in the same areas affected by the SHINE facility. Construction of a new ethanol plant, as planned by Central Wisconsin Alcohol, Inc. approximately 1 mi. (1.6 km) from the Stevens Point site might have contributed to the land use impacts of the SHINE facility; however, the air construction permit application for this project recently was rejected and it is not clear that the project will proceed. The projects that are proceeding or appear likely to proceed would not be expected to have significant land use impacts. However, some of these projects could produce increases in vehicle traffic and ambient noise that might affect some of the same areas as the SHINE facility. Therefore, the cumulative effects of these pr ojects might contribute to the traffic and noise impacts of the SHINE facility, which are expected to be MODERATE as discussed above.19.5.2.2ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGIES 19.5.2.2.1Identification of Reasonable AlternativesThe SHINE facility uses a new, proprietary technology developed by SHINE in order to domestically produce medical isotopes such as Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has provided support to SHINE and three additional technologies for the domestic production of medical isotopes (NRC, 2011). The DOE conducted a rigorous technical review of proposed technologies for producing Mo-99 domestically before selecting its four cooperative agreement partners. The DOE intentionally chose four distinct technologies to support. Rather than repeat this selection process for the purpose of this section, the three other DOE cooperative agreement partner technologies were selected as the alternative technologies to be considered in this section.The three technologies considered were:*Linear accelerator-based technology (for production of Mo-99 only).*Neutron capture using existing power reactors (for production of Mo-99 only).*Low enriched uranium (LEU) aqueous homogenous reactors.Each of these technologies were evaluated to determine if they could reasonably be implemented at the Janesville site. While both an aqueous homogeneous reactor and linear accelerator facility could concievably be built at the SHINE site, there is no power reactor at the site. As a result, neutron capture in an existing power reactor was considered unreasonable for the purpose of this section and eliminated from the list.The two remaining technologies are considered reasonable alternatives to the SHINE technology for the Janesville site and are evaluated in the following subsections. However, as noted below, Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-45Rev. 0the linear accelerator-based approach is not able to produce medical isotopes other than Mo-99, and therefore, does not address the need for domestic SHINE as effectively as the SHINE technology.19.5.2.2.2Evaluation of Reasonable AlternativesThe two alternative technologies evaluated are as follows:*Linear accelerator-based approach (for production of Mo-99 only).*Low enriched uranium (LEU) aqueous homogeneous reactor approach.The following subsections describe these alternative technologies in more detail and evaluate the major environmental impacts associated with construction and operation of the technologies at the SHINE site. Cumulative impacts and potential impact mitigation measures would be largely determined by the project site conditions, and therefore, would be the same as described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.13.19.5.2.2.2.1Linear Accelerator Approach (Production of Mo-99 Only)19.5.2.2.2.1.1DescriptionThis technology uses multiple linear accelerators to produce Mo-99. The linear accelerator accelerates electrons that collide with a metal target, producing extremely intense high-energy photons. The high energy photons irradiate a target made of molybdenum-100 (Mo-100), producing Mo-99 (CLS, 2012). The Mo-99 is shipped to pharmacies for TechneGenŽ processing and Tc-99m generation. The design allows for increasing production when required by demand.19.5.2.2.2.1.2Land Use and Visual Resources ImpactsThe linear accelerator SHINE facility for this technology is 77,000 square (sq.) ft. (7200 sq. m) in size and requires an approximately 33 ac. site (13.4 ha) (DOE, 2012). The size of the facility is similar to the size of the SHINE facility, and it would be expected to have similar impacts on land use and visual resources (see Subsection 19.4.1). Therefore, the land use and visual impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.1.3Air Quality and Noise ImpactsConstruction activities associated with the proposed facility would generate air pollutant emissions from site-disturbing activities, such as grading, filling, compacting, trenching, and operation of construction equipment. The maximum annual greenhouse gas emissions would be about 0.037 percent of Wisconsin's 2009 carbon dioxide emissions (DOE, 2012). | ||
The proposed facility would produce air emissions from operation of the building's heating system. Process emissions would not be expected, but the use of chemicals used to dissolve Mo-99 targets and the resulting evaporation could result in small emissions. Operations emissions under the proposed project would not be expected to (1) cause or contribute to a violation of any Federal or State ambient air quality standard; (2) expose sensitive receptors to substantially increased pollutant concentrations; or (3) exceed any evaluation criteria established by a State implementation plan. Operation of the facility would also result in an increase in vehicular emissions and noise due to shipping radioisotopes and operating and maintaining the Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | The proposed facility would produce air emissions from operation of the building's heating system. Process emissions would not be expected, but the use of chemicals used to dissolve Mo-99 targets and the resulting evaporation could result in small emissions. Operations emissions under the proposed project would not be expected to (1) cause or contribute to a violation of any Federal or State ambient air quality standard; (2) expose sensitive receptors to substantially increased pollutant concentrations; or (3) exceed any evaluation criteria established by a State implementation plan. Operation of the facility would also result in an increase in vehicular emissions and noise due to shipping radioisotopes and operating and maintaining the Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-46Rev. 0facility. Noise would stem from the operation of linear accelerator and chemical processing equipment. While operations are likely to produce considerable noise, the noise would be contained within the production facility and would have no impact on the surrounding ambient noise levels. Employees working in this environment would follow best management practices, such as the use of hearing protection equipment, as necessary to limit exposure above the permissible levels defined by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (DOE, 2012). Therefore, the air quality and noise impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.1.4Geology, Soils, and Seismology ImpactsThe linear accelerator SHINE facility would be designed to withstand the same seismic and geologic hazards as the SHINE facility. Construction of the linear accelerator SHINE facility would require some excavation and the use of some geologic resources for fill material. No information on the design of the linear accelerator SHINE facility is available except the size, but the need for excavation and geologic resources should be similar to those described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.3. Therefore, the geology, soils, and seismology impacts during construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.1.5Water Resources ImpactsConstruction of the proposed facility and associated parking areas and roadways would likely involve conversion of less than 2 hectares (5 acres) of the property to impervious surface. This would result in a slight increase in potential runoff from the project site compared with the site's undeveloped state. Facility operations would not be expected to require di rect withdrawals of groundwater, as all required water would be obtained from municipal supplies (DOE, 2012). The water resource impacts would be similar to those described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.4. Therefore, the water resource impacts during construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.1.6Ecological Resources ImpactSince the linear accelerator SHINE facility is similar in size to the SHINE facility, the ecological resource impacts would be similar to those described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.5. Therefore, the ecological impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.1.7Historic and Cultural Resources Impacts Since the linear accelerator SHINE facility is similar in size to the SHINE facility, the historical and cultural resource impacts would be similar to those described for the SHINE facility discussed in Subsection 19.4.6. Therefore, the historical and cultural resource impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.1.8Socioeconomic ImpactsConstruction of the linear accelerator SHINE facility would have a positive socioeconomic impact related to employment and tax revenues. Operation of the facility would create 150 jobs (HI, 2011) as well as provide additional tax revenues and alleviate shortages of medical isotopes. These beneficial impacts, as well as potential adverse impacts on public services and transportation, would be similar to those described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.7. | ||
Therefore, the socioeconomic impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL. | Therefore, the socioeconomic impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-47Rev. 019.5.2.2.2.1.9Human Health ImpactsConstruction would entail potential hazards to workers typical of any construction site. Normal construction safety practices would be employed to promote worker safety and reduce the likelihood of worker injury during construction. Nonetheless, construction accidents could occur. Air emissions from the facility have the potential to contain radioactive material as a result of the accelerator operations and the dissolution and packaging of radioactive materials in the hot cells. However, the facility design and operation would be intended to control the amount of radioactive material released to a negligible amount. Liquid waste generated during operations would be collected, temporarily stored on-site, and sent off-site for treatment and disposal. The proposed facility would not release any radioactive material through wastewater. No public dose from air emissions or wastewater is expected. Although radiological emissions would not be expected, if any emissions were to occur, impacts on the public would be negligible (DOE, 2012).The potential sources of exposure for the workers include the activities associated with the linear accelerator irradiation of the Mo-100 targets, transfer of irradiated material into the hot cells, packaging and shipment of the Mo-99 product, and preparation of any radioactive waste for disposal. The Mo-99 production facility design and operation would include several features to limit worker dose. Only a fraction of the workers at the Mo-99 production facility would be expected to receive any radiation dose; individual worker doses would not exceed the 5-rem-per-year regulatory limit (DOE, 2012). The human health impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.1.10Waste Management ImpactsExcavation of the subgrade portion of the facility would generate up to 23,000 cubic meters (30,000 cubic yards) of soil/rock that would be disposed of off-site if not used for on-site grading. The soil/rock material would be recycled/reused as construction fill for other construction or grading purposes, if the material properties are acceptable. Construction activities would generate about 160 metric tons (175 tons) of solid waste in the form of wood, metal, concrete, or other miscellaneous construction debris. Construction waste would be recycled to the extent practicable or disposed of at an appropriate licensed landfill or waste management facility (DOE,2012). Operation of this type of facility would be expected to result in waste generation during the process of bombarding targets and preparing the Mo-99 product for shipment. About 10.4 cubic meters (14cubic yards) of low-level radioactive waste, 2.4 cubic meters (3.1 cubic yards) of hazardous waste, and 45 cubic meters (59 cubic yards) of solid waste would be generated annually. No mixed low-level radioactive waste generation would be expected. Existing commercial or municipal treatment and disposal facilities would be able to accommodate all projected quantities of waste generated by the proposed facility (DOE, 2012).No process-water discharges would be expected. Sanitary waste from the facility would be discharged to the sanitary sewer system; the quantity of waste, primarily from personnel water use, would be a small addition to the load on the local sewer system (DOE, 2012). The waste management impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-48Rev. 019.5.2.2.2.1.11Transportation ImpactsLow-level radioactive waste would be shipped by truck and/or rail to waste disposal facilities, and Mo-99 would be shipped by air for processing. The transportation impacts would be similar or less (since there would be no fission product wastes) than those for the SHINE facility discussed in Subsection 19.4.10. Therefore, the transportation impacts would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.1.12Postulated Accidents ImpactsA range of accidents involving radioactive Mo-99 or chemicals to be used in the process was postulated. Risks to the public from most postulated accidents would be small. Impacts of extremely unlikely severe accidents, such as building collapse from an earthquake or explosion, could extend to members of the public. A severe accident causing release of the entire helium inventory (from the linear accelerator target-cooling system) could result in dispersion of hazardous concentrations to a distance of about 85 meters (280 feet) from the building; the distance from the building to the site boundary is about 20 meters (66 feet). A severe accident involving direct exposure to a freshly irradiated molybdenum target would result in a risk of a latent cancer fatality of 7 x 10 | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | -4 (1 chance in 1,400) to someone exposed at the site boundary for an hour. Although considered extremely unlikely, an intentional destructive act involving release of a significant portion of a freshly-irradiated target would result in a risk of a latent cancer fatality of 8 x 10 | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | -5 to 3x 10-4 (1 chance in 3,000 to 13,000) to a person at the site boundary (DOE, 2012). The environmental impact of postulated accidents would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.1.13Environmental Justice ImpactsEnvironmental justice impacts are largely dependent on the site location, and since the alternative technologies are assumed to be constructed at the SHINE site, the impacts would be similar to those described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.12. Given that the impacts in all environmental resource areas discussed above would be SMALL, the environmental justice impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.2Low Enriched Uranium Aqueous Homogeneous Reactor Approach (Production of Mo-99, I-131 and Xe-133)19.5.2.2.2.2.1DescriptionThis process consists of an array of aqueous homogeneous reactors (AHR) to produce Mo-99, I-131 and Xe-133. The AHR uses an LEU uranyl nitrate solution for fuel and target material. Once produced, these isotopes are extracted and sent for processing, distribution to pharmacies, and Tc-99m generation. This technology has the potential to supply more than 50 percent of the US demand for Mo-99 (B&W TSG, 2009a).The facility consists of a small number of AHR modules, each with a generating capacity of 200 to 240 kilowatt (kW), less than 1 MW total (B&W TSG, 2009b). The use of LEU uranyl nitrate solution for both reactor fuel and target material allows Mo-99 to be produced in the entire reactor solution. The design reduces waste production and proliferation issues, and allows for a large negative coefficient of reactivity, passive safety factor, operating temperature of 80 degrees Celsius (°C) (176°F [degrees Fahrenheit]), and atmospheric operating pressure (B&W TSG, 2009c). The low power and small footprint of the AHR modules allows for additional facilities Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-49Rev. 0and/or increased production at the first facility. To produce Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133, LEU is dissolved in nitric acid and brought to criticality. To extract these isotopes, the solution is transferred from the reactor to a vent tank. After degassing, the solution is transferred to an extraction column where it undergoes nitric acid wash, water wash, and sodium hydroxide elution processes. The processed solution is cleaned up and returned to the reactor (B&W TSG, 2009b; B&W TSG, 2009c). 19.5.2.2.2.2.2Land Use and Visual Resources ImpactsThere is no information on the size of this type of facility. It is anticipated the size would be similar to the SHINE facility (see Subsection 19.4.1) (B&W TSG, 2009c). Therefore, the land use and visual resource impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.2.3Air Quality and Noise Impacts Construction of the facility results in an increase in dust and vehicular emissions and noise. Operation of the facility results in an increase in vehicular emissions and noise due to shipping radioisotopes and operating and maintaining the facility. The air quality and noise impacts would be similar to those described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.2. Therefore, the air quality and noise impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.2.4Geology, Soils, and Seismology ImpactsThe facility would be designed to withstand the same seismic and geologic hazards as the SHINE facility. Construction of the facility would require some excavation and the use of some geologic resources for fill material. No information on the design of the facility is available, but the need for excavation and geologic resources should be similar to those described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.3. Therefore, the geology, soils, and seismology impacts during construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.2.5Water Resources ImpactsThere is no information on the water requirements for this type of facility. However, the water requirements are anticipated to be greater than that of the SHINE facility (see Subsection 19.4.4) (B&W TSG, 2009c). However, the water resource impacts of construction and operation would likely be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.2.6Ecological Resources Impact There is no information on the size of this type of facility. However, the size is likely to be similar to the SHINE facility (B&W TSG, 2009c). Therefore, the ecological resource impacts of construction and operation would be similar to those described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.5 and the impacts would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.2.7Historic and Cultural Resources ImpactsThere is no information on the size of this type of facility. However, the size is likely to be similar to the SHINE facility (B&W TSG, 2009c). Therefore, the historic and cultural resource impacts of construction and operation would be similar to those described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.6 and the impacts would be SMALL. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-52Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-2 Potential Land Use and Natural Habitat Impacts at the Chippewa Falls Site (USGS, 2006)Land Use CategoryPermanently Developed AreaTemporarilyDisturbed AreaRemaining | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-50Rev. 019.5.2.2.2.2.8Socioeconomic ImpactsConstruction of the facility would have a positive socioeconomic impact related to employment and tax revenues. While there is no information on the number of jobs that would be created by operating this type of facility, it is likely to be similar to the operation of the SHINE facility. Operation also would provide additional tax revenues and alleviate shortages of medical isotopes. These beneficial impacts, as well as potential adverse impacts on public services and transportation, would be similar to those described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.7. Therefore, the socioeconomic impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.2.9Human Health ImpactsThere is no information available on this type of facility to directly assess the human health impacts of its construction and operation. However, the radiological and nonradiological human health impacts of this type of facility (B&W TSG, 2009b) is likely to be greater than those of the SHINE facility (see Subsection 19.4.8). However, the human health impacts of construction and operation are likely to be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.2.10Waste Management ImpactsThere is no information available on this type of facility to directly assess the radiological and nonradiological waste management impacts of its construction and operation. However, given the similar Mo-99 production levels, the waste production is anticipated to be similar to the SHINE facility (see Subsection 19.4.9). Therefore, the waste management impacts of construction and operation are likely to be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.2.11Transportation ImpactsThere is no information available on this type of facility to directly assess transportation impacts. However, given the similar Mo-99 production levels, the impacts of transporting spent fuel and radioactive waste from this type of facility is anticipated to be similar to those of the SHINE facility (see Subsection 19.4.10). Transportation impacts due to the shipment of Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133 to processing facilities would be similar to the impact of shipping isotopes from the SHINE facility as described in Subsection 19.4.10. Therefore, environmental impacts due to transportation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.2.12Postulated Accidents ImpactsThere is no information available on this type of facility to directly assess the impacts of postulated accidents. However, the postulated accident impacts of this type of facility are anticipated to be greater than those of the SHINE facility (see Subsection 19.4.11). Regardless, the environmental impact of postulated accidents would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.2.13Environmental Justice Impacts Environmental justice impacts are largely dependent on the site location, and since the alternative technologies are assumed to be constructed at the SHINE site, the impacts would be similar to those described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.12. Given that the impacts in all environmental resource areas discussed above would be SMALL, the environmental justice impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-51Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-1 Sensitive Features in the Chippewa Falls Site Area Measured fromSite NearestBoundaryMeasured fromCenter PointNearest Residence 10.07 mi. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-58Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-6 Minority and Poverty Populations within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Chippewa Falls Site (a)(Sheet 2 of 2)a)Shaded cells indicate "Above Average Populations" (USCB, 2012c).Minority Population (%)Block Group and TractHouseholdsLiving BelowPoverty LevelBlack orAfricanAmericanAmericanIndian andAlaska NativeAsianNative Hawaiianand Other PacificIslander | (0.12 km)0.40 mi.(0.65 km)Nearest Residence 20.12 mi. | ||
(0.19 km)0.39 mi.(0.63 km)Monkey Business Child Care Center0.21 mi. | |||
(0.34 km)0.40 mi.(0.65 km)Grace Adult Day Services0.49 mi. | |||
(0.79 km)0.64 mi.(1.04 km)Oral & Maxillofacial Associates0.58 mi. | |||
(0.93 km)0.74 mi.(1.19 km)Lakeland College and Chippewa Valley Technical College 0.56 mi.(0.90 km)0.70 mi.(1.13 km)Family Health Associates0.55 mi. | |||
(0.89 km)0.70 mi.(1.13 km)Chippewa Valley Eye Clinic0.54 mi (0.86 km)0.69 mi.(1.12 km)Wissota Health and Regional Vent Center0.69 (1.12 km)0.88 mi.(1.41 km)Marshfield Clinic Chippewa Falls Center0.64 mi. | |||
(1.03 km)0.84 mi.(1.35 km)St. Joseph's Hospital0.65 mi. | |||
(1.05 km)0.82 mi.(1.32 km)Wissota Sprints Assisted Living Center0.63 mi. | |||
(1.01 km)0.81 mi.(1.31 km)Marshfield Clinic Chippewa Falls Dental | |||
Center0.69 mi.(1.11 km)0.93 mi.(1.50 km)Kids USA Learning Center0.81 mi. | |||
(1.30 km)1.00 mi.(1.60 km)Sunrise Family Care Clinic0.77 mi. | |||
(1.24 km)0.95 mi.(1.53 km)Irvine Park (nearest public park)1.45 mi. | |||
(2.34 km)1.79 mi.(2.89 km)Notre Dame Church and Goldsmith Chapel (nearest listed historical site) 1.85 mi.(2.98 km)2.11 mi.(3.40 km)Parkview Elementary School (nearest public school) 1.50 mi.(2.41 km)1.79 mi.(2.88 km) | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-52Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-2 Potential Land Use and Natural Habitat Impacts at the Chippewa Falls Site (USGS, 2006) | |||
Land Use CategoryPermanently Developed AreaTemporarilyDisturbed AreaRemaining Area within Site BoundariesTotal Within Site BoundariesTotal Witin 5-Mile RadiusPercentage of 5-MileRadius within Site BoundariesDeveloped land2.6 ac.(1.0 ha)0.01 ac.(0.004 ha)6.5 ac.(2.6 ha)9.1 ac.(3.7 ha)8,966.4 ac.(3,628.6 ha)0.10%Cultivated Crops14.9 ac.(6.0 ha)13.7 ac.(5.5 ha)37.9 ac.(15.4 ha)66.5 ac.(26.9 ha)19,133.0 ac.(7,742.9 ha)0.35%Pasture/Hay0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)3,237.0 ac.(1,310.0 ha)0.0%Grassland/Herbaceous0 ac. | |||
(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)895.6 ac.(362.4 ha)0.0%Shrub/Scrub0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)568.9 ac.(230.2 ha)0.0%Deciduous Forest0.5 ac.(0.2 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0.3 ac.(0.1 ha)0.8 ac.(0.3 ha)7,301.3 ac.(2,954.7 ha)0.01%Evergreen Forest0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)1,116.1 ac.(451.7 ha)0.0%Mixed Forest0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)495.9 ac.(200.7 ha)0.0%Woody Wetlands0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)1,268.9 ac.(513.5 ha)0.0%Emergent, HerbaceousWetlands0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)732.8 ac.(296.5 ha)0.0%Open Water0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)6,549.0 ac.(2,650.3 ha)0.0%Barren Land (Rock/Sand/Clay)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0.0%Totals17.9 ac.(7.3 ha)13.7 ac.(5.5 ha)44.8 ac.(18.1 ha)76.4 ac.(30.9 ha)50,264.9 ac.(20,341.5 ha)0.15% | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-53Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-3 Plant Species Oberved at the Chippewa Falls Site(Sheet 1 of 2)Site LocaleScientific Name Common NameCultivated FieldEdgesBromus inermissmooth brome Cirsium vulgare thistleFestuca elatior fescuePicea sp. (treeline to north)sprucePinus resinosa (treeline to north)red pinePoa pratensisKentucky bluegrassPopulus deltoides (treeline to north)cottonwoodRubus sp. (treeline to north) blackberrySetaria glaucafoxtail grassSolidago sp. (treeline to north)goldenrod Symphyotrichum sp. | |||
asterTaraxicum officinalecommon dandelionTrifolium repenswhite cloverWetland Community Eleocharis sp.spikerushPhalaris arundinaceareed canary grass Rumex sp. | |||
dockScirpus cyperinus woolgrassTypha latifoliacommon cattail Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-54Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-3 Plant Species Oberved at the Chippewa Falls Site(Sheet 2 of 2)Site LocaleScientific Name Common NameOldfield/Railroad ROWAmbrosia artemisiifoliacommon ragweedAmorpha canescensleadplantAndropogon gerardiibig bluestemAristida sp.three-awned grassAsclepias syriacacommon milkweedAster nove-angliaeNew England aster Bromus inermissmooth bromeCornus speciesdogwood speciesFestuca elatior fescueLespedeza captitataprairie bush cloverMonarda fistulosawild bergamotPoa pratensisKentucky bluegrassPopulus deltoidescottonwoodPopulus tremuloides trembling aspenRubus flagellarusdewberryRubus sp. | |||
blackberryRudbeckia hirtablack-eyed susanSchizachyrium scoparium little bluestemSetaria glaucafoxtail grassSolidago sp. | |||
goldenrod Symphyotrichum sp. | |||
aster Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-55Rev. 0a)Species designated by the WDNR in Endangered Resources Review (WDNR, 2011a). b)Global ranking system ranging from G1: critically imperiled globally to G5: common, widespread, and abundant as described in the Wisconsin Natural Heritage Working List. c)State ranking system ranging from S1: critically imperiled in Wisconsin to S5: demonstrably secure in Wisconsin as described in the Wisconsin Natural Heritage Working List. d)Bald eagles are not expected to be present on project site due to lack of suitable habitat; however, as a result of Federal protection under the Bald & Golden Eagle Protection Act and Migratory Bird Act, Wisconsin DNR must be contacted if individuals begin to nest in or near sit e.e)Classification signifying an issue with abundance or distribution to increase awareness before species becomes threatened or endangered. Species not legally protected by state or federal endangered species laws, but may be protected by other laws, policies, or permitting processes requiring or strongly encouraging protection of these resources. f)The term "threatened" is defined in the Endangered Species Act as "any species which is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range". Table 19.5.2-4 Endangered Resources Known or Likely to Occur in the Chippewa Falls Site Area (a)Scientific NameCommon NameState StatusGlobal Rank (b)State Rank (c)BirdsHaliaeetus IeucocephalusBald eagle (d)Special Concern (Fully Protected) | |||
(e)G5S4 (breeding);S4 (non-breeding)FishAcipenser fulvescens lake sturgeonSpecial Concern (Regulated by harvest seasons) (e)G3; G4S3Moxostoma valenciennesigreater redhorseThreatened (f)G4S3InsectsOphiogomphus smithisand snaketailSpecial Concern (No regulations) (e)G2; G3S3 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-56Rev. 0a)Traffic count for the hour between 00:00 and 09:59 hours with the greatest traffic volume.b)Traffic count for the hour between 10:00 and 14:59 hours with the greatest traffic volume.c)Traffic count for the hour between 15:00 and 23:59 hours with the greatest traffic volume.Table 19.5.2-5 Annual Average Hourly Traffic Counts in the Chippewa Falls Site AreaAnnual Average Hourly Traffic (WDOT, 2011) | |||
AM Peak (a)Middday Peak (b)PM Peak (c)Daily TotalCounty Highway S between WI-124 and 149th Street4302984054,573County Highway S west of WI-1783382223623,831WI-178 between Lake View and Chippewa Drive2242052512,7771st Avenue east of State Street258N/A3843,253 Commerce Parkway between Bergman and Warren Street3844124505,211County Highway I between Scheidler Road an d WI-1784844555715,643WI-178 between County Highway I and Chippewa River7046047838,283 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-57Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-6 Minority and Poverty Populations within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Chippewa Falls Site (a)(Sheet 1 of 2)Minority Population (%)Block Group and TractHouseholdsLiving BelowPoverty LevelBlack orAfricanAmericanAmericanIndian andAlaska NativeAsianNative Hawaiianand Other PacificIslander alone SomeOtherRace aloneTwo or More RacesHispanicor LatinoAggregateBlock Group 1, Census Tract 10212.4%0.5%0.6%1.3%0.0%0.1%0.5%1.3%4.3%Block Group 2, Census Tract 1022.1%0.6%0.3%2.6%0.0%0.1%1.0%2.4%7.0%Block Group 3, Census Tract 1028.8%0.4%0.6%0.8%0.0%0.1%1.2%1.7%4.7%Block Group 1, Census Tract 10336.5%1.6%0.5%0.1%0.0%0.0%1.4%2.2%5.9%Block Group 2, Census Tract 10314.5%0.0%0.6%0.1%0.1%0.3%1.1%1.8%4.0%Block Group 3, Census Tract 10310.4%0.7%0.5%0.5%0.0%0.0%1.1%0.5%3.3%Block Group 4, Census Tract 10325.0%0.6%0.7%0.1%0.0%0.0%1.0%1.4%3.8%Block Group 5, Census Tract 1033.1%0.3%0.3%1.1%0.0%0.0%0.9%1.1%3.7%Block Group 6, Census Tract 1036.0%0.1%0.2%2.0%0.0%0.0%0.7%2.6%5.6%Block Group 1, Census Tract 1047.0%0.1%0.3%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.9%2.2%Block Group 3, Census Tract 1041.0%0.4%0.4%4.2%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.7%5.9%Block Group 1, Census Tract 1058.4%0.9%0.0%0.5%0.0%0.0%0.6%1.8%3.9%Block Group 2, Census Tract 10518.3%1.2%0.1%1.3%0.1%0.0%2.0%1.0%5.7%Block Group 3, Census Tract 1057.0%0.6%1.2%0.6%0.0%0.0%2.4%0.7%5.4%Block Group 4, Census Tract 10516.5%6.4%1.5%1.1%0.0%0.0%1.2%2.2%12.4%Block Group 1, Census Tract 1075.9%0.4%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%1.0%0.7%2.6%Block Group 2, Census Tract 1076.5%0.3%0.1%0.7%0.0%0.0%0.8%0.8%2.8%Block Group 3, Census Tract 10713.7%0.5%0.4%1.0%0.0%0.0%1.2%1.1%4.2%Block Group 3, Census Tract 1081.0%0.1%1.1%0.9%0.0%0.0%1.0%0.4%3.5%Block Group 4, Census Tract 1102.3%0.1%0.1%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.9%0.5%2.0%Block Group 5, Census Tract 1105.4%0.6%0.1%0.3%0.0%0.1%1.1%0.4%2.6%Block Group 4, Census Tract 1121.9%0.1%0.0%0.2%0.0%0.0%0.2%0.5%1.0% | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-58Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-6 Minority and Poverty Populations within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Chippewa Falls Site (a)(Sheet 2 of 2)a)Shaded cells indicate "Above Average Populations" (USCB, 2012c).Minority Population (%)Block Group and TractHouseholdsLiving BelowPoverty LevelBlack orAfricanAmericanAmericanIndian andAlaska NativeAsianNative Hawaiianand Other PacificIslander alone SomeOther RacealoneTwo orMore RacesHispanicor LatinoAggregateTotal Area, 5 Mi. Radius9.5%0.9%0.5%1.0%0.0%0.0%1.0%1.2%4.6%Chippewa County10.9%1.5%0.4%1.2%0.0%0.0%0.9%1.3%5.4%State of Wisconsin11.2%6.2%0.9%2.3%0.0%0.1%1.4%5.9%16.7% | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-59Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-7 Potentially Significant Projects Identified within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Cippewa Falls Site Vicinity(Sheet 1 of 2)Project/Company NameSummary of ProjectLocationDistancefrom SiteStatusReferenceEOG Resources Inc.Silica sand processing plant.Chippewa Falls 1 mi. (1.6 km)Operating, achieved full operation in May 2012.The Chippewa Herald, 2012EOG Resources, 2012Wissota Green Housing DevelopmentBuilding of a traditional neighborhood, complete with neighborhood parks and a home owners association park with access to Lake Wissota. (100 lots, with varying lot sizes).Chippewa Falls1 mi. (1.6 km)Conditional Use Permit approved in 2005; developer went bankrupt in 2009; land scheduled to be sold to continue development individually.The Chippewa Herald, 2009CN Railway Intermodal Train-Truck ProjectRail to truck transfer facility; future expansion that will allow an estimated 400 trucks per week. Chippewa Falls2 mi. (3.2 km)Operating, with plans for expansion.Rubenzer, 2011Chippewa Falls Irvine Park and ZooUpdates to current exhibits. | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-59Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-7 Potentially Significant Projects Identified within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Cippewa Falls Site Vicinity(Sheet 1 of 2)Project/Company NameSummary of ProjectLocationDistancefrom SiteStatusReferenceEOG Resources Inc.Silica sand processing plant.Chippewa Falls 1 mi. (1.6 km)Operating, achieved full operation in May 2012.The Chippewa Herald, 2012EOG Resources, 2012Wissota Green Housing DevelopmentBuilding of a traditional neighborhood, complete with neighborhood parks and a home owners association park with access to Lake Wissota. (100 lots, with varying lot sizes).Chippewa Falls1 mi. (1.6 km)Conditional Use Permit approved in 2005; developer went bankrupt in 2009; land scheduled to be sold to continue development individually.The Chippewa Herald, 2009CN Railway Intermodal Train-Truck ProjectRail to truck transfer facility; future expansion that will allow an estimated 400 trucks per week. Chippewa Falls2 mi. (3.2 km)Operating, with plans for expansion.Rubenzer, 2011Chippewa Falls Irvine Park and ZooUpdates to current exhibits. | ||
Next step is to design the primate/small animal building and visitor/artifact center.Chippewa Falls2 mi. (3.2 km)Approved by Chippewa Falls Park Board in December 2011; progress will not occur until fundraising completed.Vetter, 2012Indianhead Plating, Inc.Construction of a hard chrome plating tank.Chippewa Falls2 mi. (3.2 km)Applied for air construction permit in December 2011, waiting for approval.WDNR, 2012cSpectrum Industries Construction of burn off oven for paint hangers.Chippewa Falls2 mi. (3.2 km)Air construction permit issued in February 2011.WDNR, 2012dGreat Northern Corporation Construction of printers.Chippewa Falls2 mi. (3.2 km)Air construction permit issued in March 2011.WDNR, 2012eDairyland Power Cooperative -Seven Mile Creek Landfill Gas to Renewable Energy StationModifications to an existing internal combustion engine and existing landfill gas to energy generating facility.Eau Claire 2 mi. (3.2 km)Air construction permit issued in March 2011.WDNR, 2012f Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-60Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-7 Potentially Significant Projects Identified within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Cippewa Falls Site Vicinity(Sheet 2 of 2)Project/Company NameSummary of ProjectLocationDistancefrom SiteStatusReferenceWRR Environmental Services Company, Inc.Construction of tanks Q and R and modifications to the F-V (Full - Vacuum) Fractionation Distillation Column.Eau Claire 4 mi. (6.4 km)Air construction permit issued in February 2011.WDNR, 2012gWheaton Generating Station(430 MW maximum, fuel oil)Operating power plant with potential air pollution control projects for compliance with future regulatory requirements.Chippewa County5 mi. (8.0 km)Operating, with possible addition of air pollution control equipment in the future.ThinkResources, Inc. 2008Elk Mound Generating Station (71 MW, Combustion Turbines )Operating power plant with potential air pollution control projects for compliance with future regulatory requirements.Chippewa County5 mi. (8.0 km)Operating, with possible addition of air pollution control equipment in the future.McCarthy, 2011USEPA, 2012cEDI Aftermarket Services FacilityAdditional facility with new machining/ grinding capabilities for flat die rework.Chippewa Falls5 mi. (8.0 km)Scheduled to finish by October 2012.EDI, 2011 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Next step is to design the primate/small animal building and visitor/artifact center.Chippewa Falls2 mi. (3.2 km)Approved by Chippewa Falls Park Board in December 2011; progress will not occur until fundraising completed.Vetter, 2012Indianhead Plating, Inc.Construction of a hard chrome plating tank.Chippewa Falls2 mi. (3.2 km)Applied for air construction permit in December 2011, waiting for approval.WDNR, 2012cSpectrum Industries Construction of burn off oven for paint hangers.Chippewa Falls2 mi. (3.2 km)Air construction permit issued in February 2011.WDNR, 2012dGreat Northern Corporation Construction of printers.Chippewa Falls2 mi. (3.2 km)Air construction permit issued in March 2011.WDNR, 2012eDairyland Power Cooperative -Seven Mile Creek Landfill Gas to Renewable Energy StationModifications to an existing internal combustion engine and existing landfill gas to energy generating facility.Eau Claire 2 mi. (3.2 km)Air construction permit issued in March 2011.WDNR, 2012f Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-60Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-7 Potentially Significant Projects Identified within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Cippewa Falls Site Vicinity(Sheet 2 of 2)Project/Company NameSummary of ProjectLocationDistancefrom SiteStatusReferenceWRR Environmental Services Company, Inc.Construction of tanks Q and R and modifications to the F-V (Full - Vacuum) Fractionation Distillation Column.Eau Claire 4 mi. (6.4 km)Air construction permit issued in February 2011.WDNR, 2012gWheaton Generating Station(430 MW maximum, fuel oil)Operating power plant with potential air pollution control projects for compliance with future regulatory requirements.Chippewa County5 mi. (8.0 km)Operating, with possible addition of air pollution control equipment in the | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-62Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-9 Potential Land Use and Natural Habitat Impacts at the Stevens Point Site (USGS, 2006)Land Use CategoryPermanentlyDeveloped AreaTemporarilyDisturbed | |||
Sand/Clay) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)108.5 ac.(43.9 ha)0.0%Totals 17.4 ac.(7.1 ha) 13.6 ac.(5.5 ha) 49.3 ac.(20.0 ha) 80.4 ac.(32.5 ha)50,264.9 ac.(20,341.5 ha)0.16% | future.ThinkResources, Inc. 2008Elk Mound Generating | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | |||
d)Annual average hourly traffic counts from 2009. e)Annual average hourly traffic counts from 2010.Annual Average Hourly Traffic (WDOT, 2011)AM Peak (a)Midday Peak (b)PM Peak (c)Daily TotalI-39 southbound off-ramp to County Highway HH1712483203,383I-39 southbound on-ramp from County Highway HH1071862252,302I-39 northbound off-ramp to County Highway HH1692172312,888I-39 northbound on-ramp from County Highway HH2262182553,272County Highway HH between I-39 and County Highway R3514265226,125County Highway R north of Porter Road (e)413N/A7236,565 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-68Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-13 Minority and Poverty Populations within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Stevens Point Site (a)(Sheet 1 of 2)Minority Population (%)Block Group and TractHouseholdsLiving BelowPoverty LevelBlack orAfricanAmericanAmericanIndian andAlaska NativeAsianNative Hawaiianand Other PacificIslander aloneSomeOther RacealoneTwo orMore RacesHispanicor LatinoAggregateBlock Group 3, Census Tract 96015.6%0.0%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.6%2.0%3.0%Block Group 4, Census Tract 96025.3%0.1%0.2%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.4%1.1%Block Group 1, Census Tract 960339.2%0.9%0.1%5.0%0.0%0.1%0.9%1.6%8.8%Block Group 2, Census Tract 960318.1%0.9%0.1%16.8%0.1%0.1%1.3%2.8%22.1%Block Group 3, Census Tract 960336.4%1.4%0.8%4.7%0.1%0.2%2.0%3.3%12.7%Block Group 4, Census Tract 960348.7%0.3%0.8%6.9%0.0%0.2%0.9%2.4%11.6%Block Group 1, Census Tract 960459.5%0.7%0.5%2.2%0.2%0.0%1.6%2.3%7.4%Block Group 2, Census Tract 960418.0%0.7%0.0%3.7%0.0%0.0%0.6%4.0%9.1%Block Group 3, Census Tract 960428.9%1.6%0.3%5.8%0.0%0.0%0.7%2.9%11.3%Block Group 4, Census Tract 960414.8%0.0%0.7%3.0%0.0%0.0%0.8%1.6%6.1%Block Group 5, Census Tract 960416.1%1.4%0.5%3.6%0.2%0.1%1.5%2.3%9.5%Block Group 1, Census Tract 96050.0%0.0%0.1%2.4%0.0%0.0%1.0%1.4%5.0%Block Group 2, Census Tract 96055.8%0.3%0.3%1.3%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.8%3.1%Block Group 3, Census Tract 960511.0%0.3%0.6%0.9%0.0%0.0%0.9%5.7%8.5%Block Group 4, Census Tract 96051.4%0.5%0.5%2.8%0.0%0.1%0.6%1.5%6.0%Block Group 1, Census Tract 96062.3%0.1%0.2%0.7%0.0%0.0%0.4%1.3%2.7%Block Group 4, Census Tract 96062.5%0.3%0.1%0.4%0.0%0.4%1.0%0.9%3.1%Block Group 1, Census Tract 9607.0111.7%0.5%0.3%4.2%0.0%0.1%1.5%6.0%12.5%Block Group 2, Census Tract 9607.012.6%0.3%0.2%2.8%0.0%0.0%0.8%1.4%5.5%Block Group 3, Census Tract 9607.017.5%0.3%0.2%2.7%0.0%0.1%1.1%2.3%6.7%Block Group 1, Census Tract 9607.025.3%0.8%0.2%4.4%0.1%0.0%1.1%1.8%8.4%Block Group 2, Census Tract 9607.021.7%0.4%0.0%3.4%0.0%0.1%0.5%1.6%6.0% | Station (71 MW, Combustion Turbines )Operating power plant with potential air pollution control projects for compliance with future regulatory requirements.Chippewa County5 mi. (8.0 km)Operating, with possible addition of air pollution control equipment in the future.McCarthy, 2011USEPA, 2012cEDI Aftermarket Services FacilityAdditional facility with new machining/ grinding capabilities for flat die rework.Chippewa Falls5 mi. (8.0 km)Scheduled to finish by October 2012.EDI, 2011 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-61Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-8 Sensitive Features in the Stevens Point Site Area Measured fromSite Nearest BoundaryMeasured from Center PointNearest Residence 10.20 mi.(0.33 km) 0.39 mi.(0.63 km)Nearest Residence 20.21 mi.(0.34 km) 0.41 mi.(0.65 km)Little Scholars Child Center and Preschool0.60 mi.(0.97 km) 0.83 mi.(1.34 km)Children's Discovery Center (day care)0.66 mi. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-69Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-13 Minority and Poverty Populations within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Stevens Point Site (a)(Sheet 2 of 2)a)Shaded cells indicate "Above Average Populations" (USCB, 2012c) Minority Population (%)Block Group and TractHouseholdsLiving BelowPoverty LevelBlack orAfricanAmericanAmericanIndian andAlaska NativeAsianNative Hawaiianand Other PacificIslander | (1.06 km) 0.85 mi.(1.37 km)Stockton School (potential historical site)0.69 mi.(1.12 km) 0.92 mi.(1.48 km)Conifer Park (city park)0.78 mi.(1.26 km) 1.03 mi.(1.67 km)Little Scholars Beginnings (day care)0.74 mi. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-70Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-14 | (1.19 km) 0.93 mi.(1.50 km)Medical Office Building0.89 mi.(1.43 km)1.11 mi.(1.79 km)Unnamed Cemetery (potential historical site)0.85 mi.(1.37 km) 1.10 mi.(1.78 km)Oakview Dental Center0.83 mi.(1.34 km) 1.04 mi.(1.68 km)Aspirus Stevens Point Medical Clinic0.98 mi.(1.58 km) 1.21 mi.(1.95 km)Bannach Elementary School (nearest public school)1.53 mi.(2.46 km) 1.86 mi.(2.99 km)Saint Michael's Hospital (nearest hospital)3.54 mi.(5.69 km) 3.77 mi.(6.07 km)Nelson Hall (nearest listed historical site)3.54 mi.(5.69 km) 3.74 mi.(6.01 km) | ||
Natural Gas-Fueled Electric Generator New generator to be installed at existing Wastewater Treatment Facility; will burn digester gas (methane) produced there. Stevens Point3 mi. (4.8 km)Received funding in July 2012.City of Stevens Point, 2012bColumbia Energy Center (455 MW baseload, coal fired)Operating power plant with potential air pollution control projects for compliance with future regulatory requirements.Portage3 mi. (4.8 km)Operating, with possible addition of air pollution control equipment in the future.Jerde, 2011Copps Food CenterConstruction of a 70,000 sq. ft. store with 385 stall parking lot.Stevens Point3 mi. (4.8 km)Plans approved in January 2012.City of Stevens Point, 2012a Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-71Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-14 Potentially Significant Projects Identified within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Stevens Point Site Vicinity(Sheet 2 of 2)Project/Company NameSummary of ProjectLocationDistancefrom SiteStatusReferenceSchmeeckle Trails Housing DevelopmentExpansion of existing residential development.Stevens Point3.5 mi. (5.6 km)Beginning second phase of building "essential houses" in the development. iMakeSense, LLC, 2010WIMME Sand & GravelSand and gravel plant.Plover(Portage County)5 mi. (8.0 km)Operating.WDNR, 2012jU.S. Highway 10 Expansion ProjectNew four lane highway that will bypass downtown Stevens Point.Stevens Point5 mi. (8.0 km)Construction started in 2006, scheduled for completion in 2012.WDOT, 2012Water and Sewer Reconstruction Project Michigan Avenue and Fourth Avenue mains to be reconstructed.Stevens Point4 mi. (6.4 km)5 mi. (8.0 km)Scheduled to be completed in 2012.City of Stevens Point, 2012c Lake Dredging (several locations)Several areas are to be dredged and fill material hauled off-site.McDill Lake District(Portage County)5 mi. (8.0 km)Scheduled to start in 2012.City of Stevens Point, 2011bNeenah Paper Inc. | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-62Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-9 Potential Land Use and Natural Habitat Impacts at the Stevens Point Site (USGS, 2006)Land Use CategoryPermanentlyDeveloped AreaTemporarilyDisturbed Area Remaining Areawithin Site BoundariesTotal WithinSite BoundariesTotal Within 5-Mile RadiusPercentage of 5-MileRadius within Site BoundariesDeveloped land 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)13,555.3 ac. | ||
Whiting Mill Biomass Plant (wood and waste fibers to steam)Operating power plant with potential air pollution control projects for compliance with future regulatory requirements.Stevens Point5 mi. (8.0 km)Operating, with possible addition of air pollution control equipment in the future.Environmental Leader, LLC, 2008 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical | (5,485.6 ha) 0.0%Cultivated Crops3.6 ac.(1.4 ha)13.6 ac.(5.5 ha)13.4 ac.(5.4 ha)30.6 ac.(12.4 ha)18,062.4 ac. | ||
(7,309.6 ha)0.17%Pasture/Hay 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)3,616.6 ac. | |||
(1,463.6 ha) 0.0%Grassland/Herbaceous 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)262.9 ac.(106.4 ha) 0.0%Shrub/Scrub 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)50.8 ac.(20.6 ha) 0.0%Deciduous Forest13.9 ac.(5.6 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)34.3 ac.(13.9 ha) 48.2 ac.(19.5 ha)7,537.7 ac. | |||
(3,050.4 ha)0.64%Evergreen Forest 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)1,566.5 ac.(633.9 ha) 0.0%Mixed Forest 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)1.6 ac.(0.6 ha)1.6 ac.(0.6 ha)935.2 ac.(378.4 ha)0.17%Woody Wetlands 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)2,627.1 ac. | |||
(1,063.2 ha) 0.0%Emergent, Herbaceous Wetlands 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)814.9 ac.(329.8 ha) 0.0%Open Water 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)1,126.8 ac.(456.0 ha) 0.0%Barren Land (Rock/ | |||
Sand/Clay) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)108.5 ac.(43.9 ha) 0.0%Totals 17.4 ac.(7.1 ha) 13.6 ac.(5.5 ha) 49.3 ac.(20.0 ha) 80.4 ac.(32.5 ha)50,264.9 ac.(20,341.5 ha)0.16% | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-63Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-10 Plant Species Observed at the Stevens Point Site(Sheet 1 of 2)Site LocaleScientific NameCommon Name Forested AreaAbies balsameabalsam firAcer saccharum sugar maple Carex sp. | |||
sedgeOstrya virginianahop hornbeamPinus strobuswhite pinePinus sylvestris scotch pinePrunus serotinablack cherryQuercus alba white oakQuercus macrocarpabur oakQuercus rubrared oakQuercus speciesother oak species Ribes sp.gooseberry Rubus sp. | |||
blackberry Smilax sp.green briarTilia americana American basswoodViburnum sp.viburnum Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-64Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-10 Plant Species Observed at the Stevens Point Site(Sheet 2 of 2)Site LocaleScientific NameCommon NameCultivated Field EdgesAmbrosia artemisiifoliacommon ragweedAmorpha canescensleadplantBromus inermissmooth bromeConyza canadensishorseweedEuthamia graminifoliaflattop goldenrodPanicum sp.panic grassPotentilla quinquefoliacreeping cinquefoilRubus flagellarusdewberrySetaria glaucafoxtail grass Solidago sp.goldenrod Symphyotrichum sp. | |||
aster Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-65Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-11 Endangered Resources Known or Likely to Occur in the Stevens Point Site Area (a)a)Species designated by the WDNR in Endangered Resources Review (WDNR, 2011b). b)Global ranking system ranging from G1: critically imperiled globally to G5: common, widespread, and abundant according to the Wisconsin Natural Heritage Working List. c)State ranking system ranging from S1: critically imperiled in Wisconsin to S5: demonstrably secure in Wisconsin according to the Wisconsin Natural Heritage Working List. d)Classification signifying an issue with abundance or distribution to increase awareness before species becomes threatened or endangered. Species not legally protected by state or federal endangered species laws, but may be protected by other laws, policies, or permitting processes requiring or strongly encouraging protection of these resources. e)The term "threatened" is defined in the Endangered Species Act as "any species which is likely to become an endangered specie s within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range". Scientific NameCommon NameState StatusGlobal Rank (b)State Rank (c)MammalsMicrotus ochrogasterprairie voleSpecial Concern (No regulations) | |||
(d)G5S2PlantsAsclepias lanuginose woolly milkweedThreatened (e)G4S1Arabis missouriensisMissouri rock-cressSpecial Concern (d)G5S2ReptilesGlyptemys insculpta wood turtleThreatened (e)G4S2 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-66Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-12 Annual Average Hourly Traffic Counts in the Stevens Point Site Area(Sheet 1 of 2)Annual Average Hourly Traffic (WDOT, 2011)AM Peak (a)Midday Peak (b)PM Peak (c)Daily TotalI-39 southbound off-ramp from US-103724966416,898I-39 southbound on-ramp from US-103154374975,710 I-39 northbound off-ramp from US-103041881872,787I-39 northbound on-ramp from US-107746276118,734US-10 between I-39 and Maple Bluff 1,8952,8232,54932,681County Highway R north of US-101892612953,440County Highway R south of US-103966037047,962I-39 between US-10 and County Highway HH1,4221,4071,77022,086Old Highway 18 west of Burbank Road (d)181929281Old Highway 18 between Burbank and Stockton Road (d)222845390Burbank Road south of Old Highway 18 (d)151830260 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-67Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-12 Annual Average Hourly Traffic Counts in the Stevens Point Site Area(Sheet 2 of 2)a)Traffic count for the hour between 00:00 and 09:59 hours with the greatest traffic volume.b)Traffic count for the hour between 10:00 and 14:59 hours with the greatest traffic volume.c)Traffic count for the hour between 15:00 and 23:59 hours with the greatest traffic volume. | |||
d)Annual average hourly traffic counts from 2009. e)Annual average hourly traffic counts from 2010.Annual Average Hourly Traffic (WDOT, 2011) | |||
AM Peak (a)Midday Peak (b)PM Peak (c)Daily TotalI-39 southbound off-ramp to County Highway HH1712483203,383I-39 southbound on-ramp from County | |||
Highway HH1071862252,302I-39 northbound off-ramp to County Highway HH1692172312,888I-39 northbound on-ramp from County Highway HH2262182553,272County Highway HH between I-39 and | |||
County Highway R3514265226,125County Highway R north of Porter Road (e)413N/A7236,565 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-68Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-13 Minority and Poverty Populations within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Stevens Point Site (a)(Sheet 1 of 2)Minority Population (%)Block Group and TractHouseholdsLiving BelowPoverty LevelBlack orAfricanAmericanAmericanIndian andAlaska NativeAsianNative Hawaiianand Other PacificIslander aloneSomeOther RacealoneTwo orMore RacesHispanicor LatinoAggregateBlock Group 3, Census Tract 96015.6%0.0%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.6%2.0%3.0%Block Group 4, Census Tract 96025.3%0.1%0.2%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.4%1.1%Block Group 1, Census Tract 960339.2%0.9%0.1%5.0%0.0%0.1%0.9%1.6%8.8%Block Group 2, Census Tract 960318.1%0.9%0.1%16.8%0.1%0.1%1.3%2.8%22.1%Block Group 3, Census Tract 960336.4%1.4%0.8%4.7%0.1%0.2%2.0%3.3%12.7%Block Group 4, Census Tract 960348.7%0.3%0.8%6.9%0.0%0.2%0.9%2.4%11.6%Block Group 1, Census Tract 960459.5%0.7%0.5%2.2%0.2%0.0%1.6%2.3%7.4%Block Group 2, Census Tract 960418.0%0.7%0.0%3.7%0.0%0.0%0.6%4.0%9.1%Block Group 3, Census Tract 960428.9%1.6%0.3%5.8%0.0%0.0%0.7%2.9%11.3%Block Group 4, Census Tract 960414.8%0.0%0.7%3.0%0.0%0.0%0.8%1.6%6.1%Block Group 5, Census Tract 960416.1%1.4%0.5%3.6%0.2%0.1%1.5%2.3%9.5%Block Group 1, Census Tract 96050.0%0.0%0.1%2.4%0.0%0.0%1.0%1.4%5.0%Block Group 2, Census Tract 96055.8%0.3%0.3%1.3%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.8%3.1%Block Group 3, Census Tract 960511.0%0.3%0.6%0.9%0.0%0.0%0.9%5.7%8.5%Block Group 4, Census Tract 96051.4%0.5%0.5%2.8%0.0%0.1%0.6%1.5%6.0%Block Group 1, Census Tract 96062.3%0.1%0.2%0.7%0.0%0.0%0.4%1.3%2.7%Block Group 4, Census Tract 96062.5%0.3%0.1%0.4%0.0%0.4%1.0%0.9%3.1%Block Group 1, Census Tract 9607.0111.7%0.5%0.3%4.2%0.0%0.1%1.5%6.0%12.5%Block Group 2, Census Tract 9607.012.6%0.3%0.2%2.8%0. | |||
0%0.0%0.8%1.4%5.5%Block Group 3, Census Tract 9607.017.5%0.3%0.2%2.7%0. | |||
0%0.1%1.1%2.3%6.7%Block Group 1, Census Tract 9607.025.3%0.8%0.2%4.4%0. | |||
1%0.0%1.1%1.8%8.4%Block Group 2, Census Tract 9607.021.7%0.4%0.0%3.4%0. | |||
0%0.1%0.5%1.6%6.0% | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-69Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-13 Minority and Poverty Populations within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Stevens Point Site (a)(Sheet 2 of 2)a)Shaded cells indicate "Above Average Populations" (USCB, 2012c) Minority Population (%)Block Group and TractHouseholdsLiving BelowPoverty LevelBlack orAfricanAmericanAmericanIndian andAlaska NativeAsianNative Hawaiianand Other PacificIslander alone SomeOther RacealoneTwo orMore RacesHispanicor LatinoAggregateBlock Group 1, Census Tract 96086.5%0.6%0.0%2.8%0.0%0.0%0.9%2.0%6.3%Block Group 2, Census Tract 960824.5%1.3%0.4%5.9%0.0%0.5%1.7%2.4%12.3%Block Group 3, Census Tract 960819.3%1.4%0.3%4.8%0.0%0.0%1.3%1.0%8.7%Block Group 4, Census Tract 960810.8%0.9%0.2%5.1%0.0%0.0%3.0%3.0%12.4%Block Group 1, Census Tract 96099.9%1.3%0.5%3.4%0.0%0.0%1.0%2.9%9.1%Block Group 2, Census Tract 960919.1%0.4%0.5%2.6%0.0%0.0%1.8%2.6%7.8%Block Group 3, Census Tract 960924.8%0.2%0.0%4.2%0.0%0.0%2.1%3.5%10.0%Block Group 4, Census Tract 96099.6%1.4%0.5%3.3%0.0%0.0%2.0%4.2%11.4%Block Group 1, Census Tract 961038.1%0.9%0.3%2.0%0.1%0.0%1.2%3.3%7.7%Block Group 2, Census Tract 961025.8%1.9%0.2%2.2%0.1%0.0%0.9%2.1%7.4%Block Group 1, Census Tract 96113.0%0.2%0.1%3.9%0.1%0.0%1.2%2.6%8.1%Block Group 2, Census Tract 961115.0%0.0%0.4%0.4%0.0%0.0%1.1%2.2%4.1%Block Group 3, Census Tract 961110.9%0.5%0.5%6.3%0.1%0.1%0.8%2.5%10.7%Block Group 4, Census Tract 961114.9%0.2%0.2%0.6%0.0%0.0%1.3%2.1%4.4%Block Group 2, Census Tract 96124.2%0.4%0.3%3.7%0.0%0.0%1.0%5.1%10.6%Block Group 3, Census Tract 961215.6%0.7%0.5%5.3%0.0%0.0%1.1%4.6%12.2%Total Area, 5 Mi. Radius13.6%0.6%0.3%3.5%0.0%0.1%1.1%2.5%8.1%Portage County12.4%0.5%0.3%2.8%0.0%0.0%1.0%2.6%7.3%State of Wisconsin11.2%6.2%0.9%2.3%0.0%0.1%1.4%5.9%16.7% | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-70Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-14 Potentially Significant Projects Identified within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Stevens Point Site Vicinity(Sheet 1 of 2)Project/Company NameSummary of ProjectLocationDistancefrom SiteStatusReferenceCentral Wisconsin Alcohol, Inc.Construction of an ethanol plant based on whey fermentation.Plover1 mi. (1.6 km)Air construction permit denied by the state March 20, 2012. WDNR, 2012hNAPA Distribution Center Replacing current parking lot with a new lot with 105 stalls. Also planning a 25,000 sq. ft. addition to distribution center.Stevens Point1 mi. (1.6 km)Plans approved in January 2012.City of Stevens Point, 2012aDonaldson Company Inc.Modifications to equipment configurations at existing filter manufacturing facility.Stevens Point1 mi. (1.6 km)Air construction permit issued in Oct. 2011, expires June 2013.WDNR, 2012iMunicipal Transit CenterDevelopment of a 35,070 sq. ft vacant lot for a parking lot with 57 parking spaces.Stevens Point1 mi. (1.6 km)Plans approved in January 2012.City of Stevens Point, 2012aFocus on Energy Methane/ | |||
Natural Gas-Fueled Electric | |||
Generator New generator to be installed at existing Wastewater Treatment Facility; will burn digester gas (methane) produced there. Stevens Point3 mi. (4.8 km)Received funding in July 2012.City of Stevens Point, 2012bColumbia Energy Center (455 MW baseload, coal fired)Operating power plant with potential air pollution control projects for compliance with future regulatory requirements.Portage3 mi. (4.8 km)Operating, with possible addition of air pollution control equipment in the future.Jerde, 2011Copps Food CenterConstruction of a 70,000 sq. ft. store with 385 stall parking lot.Stevens Point3 mi. (4.8 km)Plans approved in January 2012.City of Stevens Point, 2012a Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-71Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-14 Potentially Significant Projects Identified within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Stevens Point Site Vicinity(Sheet 2 of 2)Project/Company NameSummary of ProjectLocationDistancefrom SiteStatusReferenceSchmeeckle Trails Housing DevelopmentExpansion of existing residential development.Stevens Point3.5 mi. (5.6 km)Beginning second phase of building "essential houses" in the development. iMakeSense, LLC, 2010WIMME Sand & GravelSand and gravel plant.Plover(Portage County)5 mi. (8.0 km)Operating.WDNR, 2012jU.S. Highway 10 Expansion ProjectNew four lane highway that will bypass downtown Stevens Point.Stevens Point5 mi. (8.0 km)Construction started in 2006, scheduled for completion in 2012.WDOT, 2012Water and Sewer Reconstruction Project Michigan Avenue and Fourth Avenue mains to be reconstructed.Stevens Point4 mi. (6.4 km)5 mi. (8.0 km)Scheduled to be completed in 2012.City of Stevens Point, 2012c Lake Dredging (several locations)Several areas are to be dredged and fill material hauled off-site.McDill Lake District(Portage County)5 mi. (8.0 km)Scheduled to start in 2012.City of Stevens Point, 2011bNeenah Paper Inc. | |||
Whiting Mill Biomass Plant (wood and waste fibers to steam)Operating power plant with potential air pollution control projects for compliance with future regulatory requirements.Stevens Point5 mi. (8.0 km)Operating, with possible addition of air pollution control equipment in the future.Environmental Leader, LLC, 2008 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-72Rev. 019.5.3COST-BENEFIT OF THE ALTERNATIVESThis section discusses the costs and benefits of each reasonable alternative and the proposed action, including a qualitative discussion of environmental impacts and identification of any assumptions and uncertainties. The following information on costs and benefits is provided:*Qualitative discussion of environmental degradation (including impacts to air and water quality; biotic resources; aesthetic resources; socioeconomic impacts, such as noise, traffic congestion, and increased demand for public services; and land use changes). *Qualitative discussion of effects on public health and safety.*Other costs (including lost tax revenue, decreased recreational value, and transportation, as appropriate).*Qualitative discussion of environmental benefits (comparable to the discussion of environmental degradation).*Average annual production of commercial products. | |||
*Expected increase in tax payments to state and local tax jurisdictions during (1) the construction period and (2) facility operations.*Creation and improvement of transportation infrastructure and other facilities.*Other benefits.The following types of alternatives are discussed:*Alternative sites | *Expected increase in tax payments to state and local tax jurisdictions during (1) the construction period and (2) facility operations.*Creation and improvement of transportation infrastructure and other facilities.*Other benefits.The following types of alternatives are discussed:*Alternative sites | ||
*Alternative technologies19.5.3.1ALTERNATIVE SITESThis subsection discusses the costs and benefits of the proposed site (Janesville) and the two alternative sites (Chippewa Falls and Stevens Point). For this evaluation, the SHINE facility design, described in Section 19.2, and the construction and operation practices, described in Section 19.4, are assumed to be the same for each site. This assumption allows for a comprehensive and consistent comparison of costs and benefits.19.5.3.1.1Janesville (Proposed) Site19.5.3.1.1.1Environmental DegredationThe environmental impacts expected to result from construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Janesville site are summarized below.Air Quality*Facility construction results in fugitive dust emissions and exhaust emissions due to on road and off-road vehicles.*Facility operation results in minor emissions of nitrogen oxides ( | *Alternative technologies19.5.3.1ALTERNATIVE SITESThis subsection discusses the costs and benefits of the proposed site (Janesville) and the two alternative sites (Chippewa Falls and Stevens Point). For this evaluation, the SHINE facility design, described in Section 19.2, and the construction and operation practices, described in Section 19.4, are assumed to be the same for each site. This assumption allows for a comprehensive and consistent comparison of costs and benefits.19.5.3.1.1Janesville (Proposed) Site19.5.3.1.1.1Environmental DegredationThe environmental impacts expected to result from construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Janesville site are summarized below. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical | Air Quality*Facility construction results in fugitive dust emissions and exhaust emissions due to on road and off-road vehicles.*Facility operation results in minor emissions of nitrogen oxides (NO x), particulate matter (PM), and sulfur dioxide (SO 2). Preliminary modeling indicates that the air quality impacts of these criteria pollutants are minimal and do not approach ambient air quality standards. However, the Significant Impact Level for 1-hour NO x may be exceeded, requiring more detailed modeling for state air pollution permitting. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-73Rev. 0Water Quality*Facility construction results in some discharge of suspended solids to local drainage ditch systems. Very small probability of affecting identified water resources due to low surface runoff potential and distance from the nearest surface water body (approximately 1.6 mi. [2.6 km]).*Construction activities will not reach groundwater. Dewatering of groundwater is not anticipated. *Increased potential for oil or chemical discharges to surface water and groundwater due to accidental spills during construction and operation. Very small probability of release, because of oil and chemical control measures. *Facility operation requires discharge of wastewater to the City of Janesville sanitary sewer system, which has adequate capacity. *Facility operation requires water withdrawal from the City of Janesville water supply system, which has adequate capacity. *Developed facility site results in minor pollutant loads and increased runoff from roadways, parking areas, industrial activities, and landscaping.Biotic Resources*Facility construction results in limited disturbance to on-site agriculture lands and minor displacement of migrating birds that use the agricultural lands to feed.*Construction activities, noise, and lighting result in some displacement of fauna, particularly birds and mammals.*Potential for bird collisions with man-made structures, such as cranes and buildings during construction.*Facility operation does not result in additional impacts except minor potential for bird collisions with buildings and minor disturbance of wildlife due to security lighting at night.Aesthetic Resources*During facility construction, dust, cranes, and facility structures partially obstruct views of existing landscape and create some visual elements that are out-of-character with the site setting. *During facility operation, the existing agricultural landscape is permanently altered, but the facility appearance is consistent with light industrial uses associated with the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport.*During both construction and operation, aesthetic impacts are limited by the presence of relatively few sensitive receptors in close proximity. | ||
Socioeconomics*Facility construction results in some temporary increases in noise, due to use of heavy equipment on the site and construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon.*Facility operation results in minor increases in noise primarily due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. Normal operations include noise from stationary equipment, such as heating, cooling, and ventilation equipment. Continuous noise levels at the site boundary are maintained below local and state noise limit criteria. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-74Rev. 0*During both construction and operation, noise impacts are limited by the presence of relatively few sensitive receptors in close proximity.*Facility construction results in some temporary increase in local traffic due to construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon and periodic construction vehicle traffic throughout the work day.*Facility operation results in minor increase in local traffic due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. *During both construction and operation, traffic impacts are limited by the capacity and good condition of the existing roads that serve the site area.*Facility construction results in some temporary increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and wastewater treatment facilities to serve construction workers who move into the site area.*Facility operation results in minor increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and treatment facilities to serve operations workers who move into the site area.*During both construction and operation, socioeconomic impacts are limited because most workers are expected to reside in Rock County (not relocate to the area) and because the housing market, public education resources, etc., generally have excess capacity.Land Use*Facility construction results in the permanent conversion of approximately 26 acres (ac.) (10.5 hectare [ha]) of agricultural lands to industrial land use, and the temporary conversion of approximately 14 ac. (5.7 ha) of agricultural lands to industrial land use.*All of the land permanently or temporarily converted to industrial land use is classified as Prime Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance.*Facility operation does not result in additional on-site land use impacts. | |||
*No off-site land use impacts are expected during construction or operation except for minor construction of housing to serve facility workers who move into the site area.19.5.3.1.1.2Effects on Public Health and SafetyDuring facility construction, minor impacts to public health and safety may result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and fugitive dust), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. Any such impacts are expected to be temporary and restricted to the immediate vicinity of the project site. | *No off-site land use impacts are expected during construction or operation except for minor construction of housing to serve facility workers who move into the site area.19.5.3.1.1.2Effects on Public Health and SafetyDuring facility construction, minor impacts to public health and safety may result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and fugitive dust), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. Any such impacts are expected to be temporary and restricted to the immediate vicinity of the project site. | ||
During facility operation, minor impacts to public health and safety may result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and emissions of conventional pollutants from stationary equipment), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. In addition, the public is exposed to minor doses of radiation due to transportation of radioactive materials to and from the site, as well as direct radiation and releases of gaseous effluents from the SHINE process. All radioactive materials are strictly controlled, and all radiological doses comply with regulatory limits. | During facility operation, minor impacts to public health and safety may result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and emissions of conventional pollutants from stationary equipment), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. In addition, the public is exposed to minor doses of radiation due to transportation of radioactive materials to and from the site, as well as direct radiation and releases of gaseous effluents from the SHINE process. All radioactive materials are strictly controlled, and all radiological doses comply with regulatory limits. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-75Rev. 019.5.3.1.1.3Other CostsNo other environmental costs, such as lost tax revenues or decreased recreational values, have been identified. The project is not expected to result in any transportation impacts except for the minor traffic impacts on local roads discussed in Subsection 19.5.3.1.1.1.19.5.3.1.1.4Environmental Benefits Facility construction is expected to create approximately 420 construction jobs during the peak of construction activities. Facility operation is expected to create approximately 150 permanent operational jobs. In addition, the wages earned and money spent by facility employees will stimulate additional economic activity, but this benefit has not been quantified. In addition to economic benefits, the project also will benefit the health of people who need diagnostic tests that require technetium-99m (Tc-99m) and other isotopes. The facility is expected to satisfy approximately half of the annual demand for Tc-99m in the United States, and to provide a more reliable supply of this isotope than currently exists. This represents a significant health benefit. The facility will also produce I-131 and Xe-133, which will have additional health benefits.19.5.3.1.1.5Production of Commercial ProductsThe facility has the capacity to produce an average of approximately 156,000 6-day Ci of Mo-99 per year. This translates to millions of doses of Tc-99m per year for diagnostic tests.In addition, the facility is expected to produce an average of approximately 100,000 Ci of I-131 and 100,000 Ci of Xe-133 per year.19.5.3.1.1.6Increase in Tax Payments The facility is expected to pay property taxes of approximately $635,000 per year during construction and approximately $660,000 per year during operation (after expiration of an initial 10-year TIF agreement), representing an increase of approximately 0.30 percent in the annual property tax revenues of Rock County. 19.5.3.1.1.7Creation and Improvement of InfrastructureNo creation or improvement of infrastructure is expected to result directly from the project. The City of Janesville plans to install a water main and a sewer main along the northern boundary of the site, but the project is not dependent on this construction.19.5.3.1.1.8Other BenefitsNo other significant benefits have been identified. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-76Rev. 019.5.3.1.2Chippewa Falls Site19.5.3.1.2.1Environmental DegredationThe environmental impacts that would be expected to result from construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site are summarized below. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical | Air Quality*Facility construction results in fugitive dust emissions and exhaust emissions due to on road and off-road vehicles.*Facility operation results in minor emissions of NO x, PM, and SO | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical | : 2. Although air quality modeling has not been performed at the Chippewa Falls site, it is expected that air quality impacts would be similar to those modeled at the Janesville site, meaning that pollutant concentrations would not approach ambient air quality standards but may exceed the Significant Impact Level for 1-hour NO x, requiring more detailed modeling for state air pollution permitting.Water Quality*Facility construction results in some discharge of suspended solids to local drainage ditch systems. Very small probability of affecting identified water resources due to low surface runoff potential and distance from the nearest surface water body (0.75 mi. [1.2 km]).*Construction activities will not reach groundwater. Dewatering of groundwater is not anticipated. *Increased potential for oil or chemical discharges to surface water and groundwater due to accidental spills during construction and operation. Very small probability of release, because of oil and chemical control measures. *Facility operation results in discharge of wastewater to City of Chippewa Falls sanitary sewer system, which has adequate capacity. *Facility operation requires water withdrawal from City of Chippewa Falls water supply system, which has adequate capacity. *Developed facility site results in minor pollutant loads and increased runoff from roadways, parking areas, industrial activities, and landscaping.Biotic Resources*Facility construction results in limited disturbance to on-site agricultural lands and minor displacement of migrating birds that use the agricultural lands to feed.*Construction activities, noise, and lighting result in some displacement of fauna, particularly birds and mammals.*Potential for bird collisions with man-made structures, such as cranes and buildings during construction.*Facility operation does not result in additional impacts except minor potential for bird collisions with buildings and minor disturbance of wildlife due to security lighting at night. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-77Rev. 0Aesthetic Resources*During facility construction, dust, cranes, and facility structures partially obstruct views of existing landscape and create some visual elements that are out of character with the site setting. *During facility operation, the existing agricultural landscape is permanently altered, but the facility appearance is generally consistent with nearby commercial land uses.*During facility construction, aesthetic impacts may result in complaints from the public about a changed sense of place or a diminution in enjoyment of the physical environment, due to the presence of several sensitive receptors in close proximity to the site. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical | Socioeconomics*Facility construction results in some temporary increases in noise, due to use of heavy equipment on the site and construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon.*Facility operation results in minor increases in noise primarily due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. Normal operations include noise from stationary equipment, such as heating, cooling, and ventilation equipment. Continuous noise levels at the site boundary are maintained below local and state noise limit criteria. *During facility construction, noise impacts may result in complaints from the public due to the presence of several sensitive receptors in close proximity to the site.*Facility construction results in some temporary increase in local traffic due to construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon and periodic construction vehicle traffic throughout the work day.*Facility operation results in minor increase in local traffic due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. *During facility construction, project-related traffic may noticeably alter transportation conditions on local roads, due to the condition of the existing roads that serve the site area.*Facility construction results in some temporary increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and wastewater treatment facilities to serve construction workers who move into the site area.*Facility operation results in minor increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and treatment facilities to serve operations workers who move into the site area.*During both construction and operation, socioeconomic impacts are limited because most workers are expected to reside in Chippewa County (not relocate to the area) and because the housing market, public education resources, etc., generally have excess capacity.Land Use*Facility construction results in the permanent conversion of approximately 15 ac. (6.1 ha) of agricultural lands and 3 ac. (1.2 ha) of fallow lands to industrial land use, and the temporary conversion of approximately 14 ac. (5.7 ha) of agricultural lands to industrial land use. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-78Rev. 0*Almost all of the land permanently or temporarily converted to industrial land use is classified as Prime Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance.*Facility operation does not result in additional on-site land use impacts.*No off-site land use impacts are expected during construction or operation except for minor construction of housing to serve facility workers who move into the site area.19.5.3.1.2.2Effects on Public Health and SafetyDuring facility construction, minor impacts to public health and safety might result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and fugitive dust), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. Any such impacts would be temporary and restricted to the immediate vicinity of the project site.During facility operation, minor impacts to public health and safety might result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and emissions of conventional pollutants from stationary equipment), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. In addition, the public would be exposed to minor doses of radiation due to transportation of radioactive materials to and from the site, as well as direct radiation and releases of gaseous effluents from the SHINE process. All radioactive materials would be strictly controlled, and all radiological doses would comply with regulatory limits.19.5.3.1.2.3Other CostsNo other environmental costs, such as lost tax revenues or decreased recreational values, have been identified. The project would not be expected to result in any transportation impacts except for the traffic impacts on local roads discussed in Subsection 19.5.3.1.2.1.19.5.3.1.2.4Environmental BenefitsFacility construction is expected to create approximately 420 construction jobs during the peak of construction activities. Facility operation is expected to create approximately 150 permanent operational jobs. In addition, the wages earned and money spent by facility employees will stimulate additional economic activity, but this benefit has not been quantified. In addition to economic benefits, the project also would benefit the health of people who need diagnostic tests that require Tc-99m and other isotopes. The facility is expected to satisfy approximately half of the annual demand for Tc-99m in the United States, and to provide a more reliable supply of this isotope than currently exists. This represents a significant health benefit. The facility will also produce I-131 and Xe-133, which will have additional health benefits.19.5.3.1.2.5Production of Commercial Products The facility has the capacity to produce an average of approximately 156,000 6-day Ci of Mo-99 per year. This translates to millions of doses of Tc-99m per year for diagnostic tests.In addition, the facility is expected to produce an average of approximately 100,000 Ci of I-131 and 100,000 Ci of Xe-133 per year. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-79Rev. 019.5.3.1.2.6Increase in Tax PaymentsThe facility would be expected to pay approximately the same amount of property taxes at the Chippewa Falls site as at the Janesville site. This means that the facility would pay approximately $635,000 per year during construction and approximately $660,000 per year during operation, representing an increase of approximately 4.4 percent in the annual property tax revenues of Chippewa County.19.5.3.1.2.7Creation and Improvement of InfrastructureNo creation or improvement of infrastructure is expected to result directly from the project. However, improvements such as widening or adding turning lanes to existing roads near the project site might be necessary to alleviate traffic congestion during construction.19.5.3.1.2.8Other BenefitsNo other significant benefits have been identified.19.5.3.1.3Stevens Point Site19.5.3.1.3.1Environmental DegredationThe environmental impacts that would be expected to result from construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site are summarized below. | ||
Air Quality*Facility construction results in fugitive dust emissions and exhaust emissions due to on road and off-road vehicles.*Facility operation results in minor emissions of NO x, PM, and SO | |||
: 2. Although air quality modeling has not been performed at the Stevens Point site, it is expected that air quality impacts would be similar to those modeled at the Janesville site, meaning that pollutant concentrations would not approach ambient air quality standards but may exceed the Significant Impact Level for 1-hour NO x, requiring more detailed modeling for state air pollution permitting.Water Quality*Facility construction results in some discharge of suspended solids to local drainage ditch systems. Very small probability of affecting identified water resources due to low surface runoff potential and distance from the nearest surface water body (2.0 mi. [3.2 km]). *Construction activities will likely reach groundwater. Soil borings drilled on-site encountered groundwater at a depth of 8 to 11 ft. (2.4 to 3.4 m), and groundwater was observed inside water wells between the depths of 7 and 20 ft. (2.1 and 6.1 m). Dewatering of groundwater is anticipated during construction. *Increased potential for oil or chemical discharges to surface water and groundwater due to accidental spills during construction and operation. Very small probability of release, because of oil and chemical control measures. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-80Rev. 0*Facility operation results in discharge of wastewater to the City of Stevens Point sanitary sewer system, which has adequate capacity. *Facility operation requires water withdrawal from the City of Stevens Point water supply system, which has adequate capacity. *Developed facility site results in minor pollutant loads and increased runoff from roadways, parking areas, industrial activities, and landscaping.Biotic Resources*Facility construction results in limited disturbance to on-site agricultural lands and minor displacement of migrating birds that use the agricultural lands to feed.*Facility construction results in clearing of on-site woodlot (partial or complete) and some displacement of fauna, particularly birds and mammals that inhabit the woodlot. *Construction activities, noise, and lighting result in some displacement of fauna, particularly birds and mammals.*Potential for bird collisions with man-made structures, such as cranes and buildings during construction.*Facility operation does not result in additional impacts except minor potential for bird collisions with buildings and minor disturbance of wildlife due to security lighting at night.Aesthetic Resources*During facility construction, dust, cranes, and facility structures partially obstruct views of existing landscape and create some visual elements that are out-of-character with the site setting. *During facility operation, the existing agricultural landscape and woodlot is permanently altered, but the facility appearance may be consistent with the City of Stevens Point's plan to develop the area as a business park. *During facility construction, aesthetic impacts may result in complaints from the public about a changed sense of place or a diminution in enjoyment of the physical environment, due to the presence of several sensitive receptors in close proximity to the site. | |||
Socioeconomics*Facility construction results in some temporary increases in noise due to use of heavy equipment on the site and construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon.*Facility operation results in minor increases in noise primarily due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. Normal operations include noise from stationary equipment, such as heating, cooling, and ventilation equipment. Continuous noise levels at the site boundary are maintained below local and state noise limit criteria. *During facility construction, noise impacts may result in complaints from the public due to the presence of several sensitive receptors in close proximity to the site.*Facility construction results in some temporary increase in local traffic due to construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon and periodic construction vehicle traffic throughout the work day.*Facility operation results in minor increase in local traffic due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-81Rev. 0*During facility construction, project-related traffic may noticeably alter transportation conditions on local roads, due to the condition of the existing roads that serve the site area.*Facility construction results in some temporary increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and wastewater treatment facilities to serve construction workers who move into the site area.*Facility operation results in minor increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and treatment facilities to serve operations workers who move into the site area.*During both construction and operation, socioeconomic impacts are limited because most workers are expected to reside in Portage County (not relocate to the area) and because the housing market, public education resources, etc., generally have excess capacity.Land Use*Facility construction results in the permanent conversion of approximately 3.6 ac. (1.4 ha) of agricultural lands and 13.9 ac. (5.6 ha) of wooded lands to industrial land use, and the temporary conversion of approximately 13.6 ac. (5.5 ha) of agricultural lands to industrial land use.*Almost all of the land permanently or temporarily converted to industrial land use is classified as Prime Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance.*Facility operation does not result in additional on-site land use impacts.*Off-site land use impacts expected are construction of two public streets along the northern and western site boundaries and minor construction of housing to serve facility workers who move into the site area. 19.5.3.1.3.2Effects on Public Health and SafetyDuring facility construction, minor impacts to public health and safety might result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and fugitive dust), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. Any such impacts would be temporary and restricted to the immediate vicinity of the project site.During facility operation, minor impacts to public health and safety might result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and emissions of conventional pollutants from stationary equipment), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. In addition, the public would be exposed to minor doses of radiation due to transportation of radioactive materials to and from the site, as well as direct radiation and releases of gaseous effluents from the SHINE process. All radioactive materials would be strictly controlled, and all radiological doses would comply with regulatory limits.19.5.3.1.3.3Other Costs No other environmental costs, such as lost tax revenues or decreased recreational values, have been identified. The project would not be expected to result in any transportation impacts except for the traffic impacts on local roads discussed in Subsection 19.5.3.1.3.1. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-82Rev. 019.5.3.1.3.4Environmental BenefitsFacility construction is expected to create approximately 420 construction jobs during the peak of construction activities. Facility operation is expected to create approximately 150 permanent operational jobs. In addition, the wages earned and money spent by facility employees will stimulate additional economic activity, but this benefit has not been quantified.In addition to economic benefits, the project also would benefit the health of people who need diagnostic tests that require Tc-99m and other isotopes. The facility is expected to satisfy approximately half of the annual demand for Tc-99m in the United States, and to provide a more reliable supply of this isotope than currently exists. This represents a significant health benefit. The facility will also produce I-131 and Xe-133, which will have additional health benefits.19.5.3.1.3.5Production of Commercial ProductsThe facility has the capacity to produce an average of approximately 156,000 6-day Ci of Mo-99 per year. This translates to millions of doses of Tc-99m per year for diagnostic tests.In addition, the facility is expected to produce an average of approximately 100,000 Ci of I-131 and 100,000 Ci of Xe-133 per year.19.5.3.1.3.6Increase in Tax PaymentsThe facility would be expected to pay approximately the same amount of taxes at the Stevens Point site as at the Janesville site. This means that the facility would pay approximately $635,000 per year during construction and approximately $660,000 per year during operation, representing an increase of approximately 2.7 percent in the annual property tax revenues of Portage County .19.5.3.1.3.7Creation and Improvement of InfrastructureThe City of Stevens Point would be expected to construct public streets along the northern and western site boundaries of the site in connection with the project. Other potential modifications of transportation infrastructure, such as widening or adding turning lanes to existing roads, might be necessary to alleviate traffic congestion during construction. 19.5.3.1.3.8Other BenefitsNo other significant benefits have been identified. | |||
19.5.3.2ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGIESThis subsection discusses the costs and benefits of the proposed SHINE SHINE technology and the two alternative technologies. For this evaluation, the alternative technologies are assumed to be constructed at the proposed Janesville site. This assumption allows for a comprehensive and consistent comparison of costs and benefits. | 19.5.3.2ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGIESThis subsection discusses the costs and benefits of the proposed SHINE SHINE technology and the two alternative technologies. For this evaluation, the alternative technologies are assumed to be constructed at the proposed Janesville site. This assumption allows for a comprehensive and consistent comparison of costs and benefits. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-83Rev. 019.5.3.2.1SHINE (Proposed) Technology19.5.3.2.1.1Environmental DegredationThe environmental impacts expected to result from construction and operation of the SHINE SHINE technology are summarized below. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical | Air Quality*Facility construction results in fugitive dust emissions and exhaust emissions due to on road and off-road vehicles.*Facility operation results in minor emissions of NO x, PM, and SO | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical | : 2. These emissions result primarily from natural gas heating of the facility buildings and periodic testing of the emergency diesel generator, plus small amounts of NO x from the SHINE process. Water Quality*Facility construction results in some discharge of suspended solids to local drainage ditch systems. *Construction activities will not reach groundwater. Dewatering of groundwater is not anticipated. *Increased potential for oil or chemical discharges to surface water and groundwater due to accidental spills during construction and operation. Very small probability of release, because of oil and chemical control measures. *Facility operation requires water for use in SHINE (target solution and makeup water for the Target Solution Vessel), isotope processing (isotope extraction and purification, uranium extraction, and waste processing), potable water, fire protection, and facility heating and cooling systems. All required water is withdrawn from the City of Janesville water supply system. *Facility operation requires discharge of wastewater, including sanitary wastes, blowdown from building heating boilers, and liquid wastes from thermal denitration and vent system scrubbers. All wastewater is discharged to the City of Janesville sanitary sewer system and complies with local, state, and federal pre-treatment and wastewater discharge requirements.*Developed facility site results in minor pollutant loads and increased runoff from roadways, parking areas, industrial activities, and landscaping.Biotic Resources*Facility construction results in limited disturbance to on-site agriculture lands and minor displacement of migrating birds that use the agricultural lands to feed.*Construction activities, noise, and lighting result in some displacement of fauna, particularly birds and mammals.*Potential for bird collisions with man-made structures, such as cranes and buildings during construction.*Facility operation does not result in additional impacts except minor potential for bird collisions with buildings and minor disturbance of wildlife due to security lighting at night. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-84Rev. 0Aesthetic Resources*During facility construction, dust, cranes, and facility structures partially obstruct views of existing landscape and create some visual elements that are out-of-character with the site setting.*During facility operation, the existing agricultural landscape is permanently altered, but the facility appearance is consistent with light industrial uses associated with the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport. | ||
Socioeconomics*Facility construction results in some temporary increases in noise due to use of heavy equipment on the site and construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon.*Facility operation results in minor increases in noise primarily due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. Normal operations include noise from stationary equipment, such as heating, cooling, and ventilation equipment. Continuous noise levels at the site boundary are maintained below local and state noise limit criteria. *Facility construction results in some temporary increase in local traffic due to construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon and periodic construction vehicle traffic throughout the work day.*Facility operation results in minor increase in local traffic due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. *Facility construction results in some temporary increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and wastewater treatment facilities to serve construction workers who move into the site area.*Facility operation results in minor increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and treatment facilities to serve operations workers who move into the site area.Land Use*Facility construction results in the permanent conversion of approximately 26 ac. (10.5ha) of agricultural lands to industrial land use, and the temporary conversion of approximately 14 ac. (5.7 ha) of agricultural lands to industrial land use.*Facility operation does not result in additional on-site land use impacts.*No off-site land use impacts are expected during construction or operation except for minor construction of housing to serve facility workers who move into the site area.19.5.3.2.1.2Effects on Public Health and SafetyDuring facility construction, minor impacts to public health and safety may result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and fugitive dust), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. Any such impacts are expected to be temporary and restricted to the immediate vicinity of the project site. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-85Rev. 0During facility operation, minor impacts to public health and safety may result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and emissions of conventional pollutants from stationary equipment), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. In addition, the public is exposed to minor doses of radiation due to transportation of radioactive materials to and from the site, as well as direct radiation and releases of gaseous effluents from the SHINE process. All radioactive materials are strictly controlled, and all radiological doses comply with regulatory limits.19.5.3.2.1.3Other CostsNo other environmental costs, such as lost tax revenues or decreased recreational values, have been identified. The project is not expected to result in any transportation impacts except for the minor traffic impacts on local roads discussed in Subsection 19.5.3.2.1.1.19.5.3.2.1.4Environmental BenefitsFacility construction is expected to create approximately 420 construction jobs during the peak of construction activities. Facility operation is expected to create approximately 150 permanent operational jobs. In addition, the wages earned and money spent by facility employees will stimulate additional economic activity, but this benefit has not been quantified .In addition to economic benefits, the project also will benefit the health of people who need diagnostic tests that require Tc-99m and other isotopes. The facility is expected to satisfy approximately half of the annual demand for Tc-99m in the United States, and to provide a more reliable supply of this isotope than currently exists. This represents a significant health benefit. The facility will also produce I-131 and Xe-133, which will have additional health benefits.19.5.3.2.1.5Production of Commercial ProductsThe facility has the capacity to produce an average of approximately 156,000 6-day Ci of Mo-99 per year. This translates to millions of doses of Tc-99m per year for diagnostic tests.In addition, the facility is expected to produce an average of approximately 100,000 Ci of I-131 and 100,000 Ci of Xe-133 per year.19.5.3.2.1.6Increase in Tax Payments The facility is expected to pay property taxes of approximately $635,000 per year during construction and approximately $660,000 per year during operation (after expiration of an initial 10-year TIF agreement), representing an increase of approximately 0.30 percent in the annual property tax revenues of Rock County .19.5.3.2.1.7Creation and Improvement of InfrastructureNo creation or improvement of infrastructure is expected to result directly from the project. The City of Janesville plans to install a water main and a sewer main along the northern boundary of the site, but the project is not dependent on this construction.19.5.3.2.1.8Other BenefitsNo other significant benefits have been identified. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-86Rev. 019.5.3.2.2Linear Accelerator Approach (Production of Mo-99 Only)19.5.3.2.2.1Environmental DegradationThe environmental impacts expected to result from construction and operation of the linear accelerator technology are summarized below. | |||
Air Quality*Facility construction results in fugitive dust emissions and exhaust emissions due to on road and off-road vehicles.*Facility operation results in minor emissions of conventional air pollutants. Similarly to the SHINE facility, these emissions would be expected to result from natural gas heating of the facility buildings, periodic testing of the emergency diesel generator, and the SHINE process. Water Quality*Facility construction results in some discharge of suspended solids to local drainage ditch systems. *No information is available on the depth of excavation required for this type of facility. However, the depth to the lowest subfloor is assumed to be similar to the SHINE facility, and on that basis dewatering of groundwater is not expected to be required. *Increased potential for oil or chemical discharges to surface water and groundwater due to accidental spills during construction and operation. Very small probability of release, because of oil and chemical control measures. *Facility operation requires water for use in SHINE, isotope processing, potable water, fire protection, and facility heating and cooling systems. All required water is withdrawn from the City of Janesville water supply system. *Facility operation requires discharge of wastewater, including sanitary wastes, blowdown from building heating boilers, and liquid wastes from SHINE and isotope processing. All wastewater is discharged to the City of Janesville sanitary sewer system and complies with local, state, and federal pre-treatment and wastewater discharge requirements. *Developed facility site results in minor pollutant loads and increased runoff from roadways, parking areas, industrial activities, and landscaping.Biotic Resources*Facility construction results in limited disturbance to on-site agriculture lands and minor displacement of migrating birds that use the agricultural lands to feed.*Construction activities, noise, and lighting result in some displacement of fauna, particularly birds and mammals.*Potential for bird collisions with man-made structures, such as cranes and buildings during construction.*Facility operation does not result in additional impacts except minor potential for bird collisions with buildings and minor disturbance of wildlife due to security lighting at night. | Air Quality*Facility construction results in fugitive dust emissions and exhaust emissions due to on road and off-road vehicles.*Facility operation results in minor emissions of conventional air pollutants. Similarly to the SHINE facility, these emissions would be expected to result from natural gas heating of the facility buildings, periodic testing of the emergency diesel generator, and the SHINE process. Water Quality*Facility construction results in some discharge of suspended solids to local drainage ditch systems. *No information is available on the depth of excavation required for this type of facility. However, the depth to the lowest subfloor is assumed to be similar to the SHINE facility, and on that basis dewatering of groundwater is not expected to be required. *Increased potential for oil or chemical discharges to surface water and groundwater due to accidental spills during construction and operation. Very small probability of release, because of oil and chemical control measures. *Facility operation requires water for use in SHINE, isotope processing, potable water, fire protection, and facility heating and cooling systems. All required water is withdrawn from the City of Janesville water supply system. *Facility operation requires discharge of wastewater, including sanitary wastes, blowdown from building heating boilers, and liquid wastes from SHINE and isotope processing. All wastewater is discharged to the City of Janesville sanitary sewer system and complies with local, state, and federal pre-treatment and wastewater discharge requirements. *Developed facility site results in minor pollutant loads and increased runoff from roadways, parking areas, industrial activities, and landscaping.Biotic Resources*Facility construction results in limited disturbance to on-site agriculture lands and minor displacement of migrating birds that use the agricultural lands to feed.*Construction activities, noise, and lighting result in some displacement of fauna, particularly birds and mammals.*Potential for bird collisions with man-made structures, such as cranes and buildings during construction.*Facility operation does not result in additional impacts except minor potential for bird collisions with buildings and minor disturbance of wildlife due to security lighting at night. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-87Rev. 0Aesthetic Resources*During facility construction, dust, cranes, and facility structures partially obstruct views of existing landscape and create some visual elements that are out-of-character with the site setting. *During facility operation, the existing agricultural landscape is permanently altered, but the facility appearance is consistent with light industrial uses associated with the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport. | ||
Socioeconomics*Facility construction results in some temporary increases in noise due to use of heavy equipment on the site and construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon.*Facility operation results in minor increases in noise primarily due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. Normal operations include noise from stationary equipment, such as heating, cooling, and ventilation equipment. Continuous noise levels at the site boundary are maintained below local and state noise limit criteria. *Facility construction results in some temporary increase in local traffic due to construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon and periodic construction vehicle traffic throughout the work day.*Facility operation results in minor increase in local traffic due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. *Facility construction results in some temporary increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and wastewater treatment facilities to serve construction workers who move into the site area.*Facility operation results in minor increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and treatment facilities to serve operations workers who move into the site area.Land Use*Facility construction would result in the permanent conversion of approximately 30 ac. (12.1 ha) of agricultural lands to industrial land use. Temporary conversion of land to support construction activities would be expected to be similar to the SHINE facility, which means that approximately 14 ac. (5.7 ha) of agricultural lands would be temporarily converted to industrial use.*Facility operation does not result in additional on-site land use impacts. | |||
*No off-site land use impacts are expected during construction or operation except for minor construction of housing to serve facility workers who move into the site area.19.5.3.2.2.2Effects on Public Health and SafetyDuring facility construction, minor impacts to public health and safety might result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and fugitive dust), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. Any such impacts would be temporary and restricted to the immediate vicinity of the project site. | *No off-site land use impacts are expected during construction or operation except for minor construction of housing to serve facility workers who move into the site area.19.5.3.2.2.2Effects on Public Health and SafetyDuring facility construction, minor impacts to public health and safety might result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and fugitive dust), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. Any such impacts would be temporary and restricted to the immediate vicinity of the project site. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-88Rev. 0During facility operation, minor impacts to public health and safety might result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and emissions of conventional pollutants from stationary equipment), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. In addition, the public would be exposed to minor doses of radiation due to transportation of radioactive materials to and from the site, as well as direct radiation and releases of gaseous effluents from the SHINE process. All radioactive materials would be strictly controlled, and all radiological doses would comply with regulatory limits.19.5.3.2.2.3Other CostsNo other environmental costs, such as lost tax revenues or decreased recreational values, have been identified. The project is not expected to result in any transportation impacts except for the minor traffic impacts on local roads discussed in Subsection 19.5.3.2.2.1.19.5.3.2.2.4Environmental BenefitsConstruction of this type of facility would be expected to create approximately the same number of construction jobs as the SHINE facility, which means approximately 420 construction jobs during the peak of construction activities. Facility operation would create approximately 150 permanent operational jobs. In addition, the wages earned and money spent by facility employees will stimulate additional economic activity, but this benefit has not been quantified. In addition to economic benefits, the project would also benefit the health of people who need diagnostic tests that require Tc-99m. The facility would be expected to produce approximately the same amount of Tc-99m as the SHINE facility, which means it would satisfy approximately half of the annual demand for these isotopes in the United States. This represents a significant health benefit. However, this type of facility would not produce I-131 and Xe-133, as the SHINE facility does.19.5.3.2.2.5Production of Commercial ProductsThe linear accelerator SHINE facility is designed for increasing production when required by demand. However, at full production the facility would be expected to produce 3,000 6-day Ci per week, which means it has the capacity to produce up to approximately 156,000 6-day Ci of Mo-99 per year. 19.5.3.2.2.6Increase in Tax PaymentsThe facility would be expected to pay approximately the same amount of taxes as the SHINE facility. This means that the facility would pay property taxes of approximately $635,000 per year during construction and approximately $660,000 per year during operation (after expiration of an initial 10-year TIF agreement), representing an increase of approximately 0.30 percent in the annual property tax revenues of Rock County .19.5.3.2.2.7Creation and Improvement of InfrastructureNo creation or improvement of infrastructure would be expected to result directly from the project. The City of Janesville plans to install a water main and a sewer main along the northern boundary of the site, but the project is not dependent on this construction. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-89Rev. 019.5.3.2.2.8Other BenefitsNo other significant benefits have been identified.19.5.3.2.3Low Enriched Uranium (LEU) Aqueous Homogeneous Reactor Approach (Production of Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133)19.5.3.2.3.1Environmental DegradationThe environmental impacts expected to result from construction and operation of the LEU Aqueous Homogeneous Reactor technology are summarized below. | ||
Air Quality*Facility construction results in fugitive dust emissions and exhaust emissions due to on road and off-road vehicles.*Facility operation results in minor emissions of conventional air pollutants. Similarly to the SHINE facility, these emissions would be expected to result from natural gas heating of the facility buildings, periodic testing of the emergency diesel generator, and the SHINE process. Water Quality*Facility construction results in some discharge of suspended solids to local drainage ditch systems. *No information is available on the depth of excavation required for this type of facility. However, the depth to the lowest subfloor is assumed to be similar to the SHINE facility, and on that basis dewatering of groundwater is not expected to be required. *Increased potential for oil or chemical discharges to surface water and groundwater due to accidental spills during construction and operation. Very small probability of release, because of oil and chemical control measures. *Facility operation requires water for use in SHINE, isotope processing, reactor cooling, potable water, fire protection, and facility heating and cooling systems. All required water is withdrawn from the City of Janesville water supply system. *Facility operation requires discharge of wastewater, including sanitary wastes, blowdown from building heating boilers, and liquid wastes from SHINE and isotope processing. All wastewater is discharged to the City of Janesville sanitary sewer system and complies with local, state, and federal pre-treatment and wastewater discharge requirements. *Developed facility site results in minor pollutant loads and increased runoff from roadways, parking areas, industrial activities, and landscaping.Biotic Resources*Facility construction results in limited disturbance to on-site agriculture lands and minor displacement of migrating birds that use the agricultural lands to feed.*Construction activities, noise, and lighting result in some displacement of fauna, particularly birds and mammals.*Potential for bird collisions with man-made structures, such as cranes and buildings during construction. | Air Quality*Facility construction results in fugitive dust emissions and exhaust emissions due to on road and off-road vehicles.*Facility operation results in minor emissions of conventional air pollutants. Similarly to the SHINE facility, these emissions would be expected to result from natural gas heating of the facility buildings, periodic testing of the emergency diesel generator, and the SHINE process. Water Quality*Facility construction results in some discharge of suspended solids to local drainage ditch systems. *No information is available on the depth of excavation required for this type of facility. However, the depth to the lowest subfloor is assumed to be similar to the SHINE facility, and on that basis dewatering of groundwater is not expected to be required. *Increased potential for oil or chemical discharges to surface water and groundwater due to accidental spills during construction and operation. Very small probability of release, because of oil and chemical control measures. *Facility operation requires water for use in SHINE, isotope processing, reactor cooling, potable water, fire protection, and facility heating and cooling systems. All required water is withdrawn from the City of Janesville water supply system. *Facility operation requires discharge of wastewater, including sanitary wastes, blowdown from building heating boilers, and liquid wastes from SHINE and isotope processing. All wastewater is discharged to the City of Janesville sanitary sewer system and complies with local, state, and federal pre-treatment and wastewater discharge requirements. *Developed facility site results in minor pollutant loads and increased runoff from roadways, parking areas, industrial activities, and landscaping.Biotic Resources*Facility construction results in limited disturbance to on-site agriculture lands and minor displacement of migrating birds that use the agricultural lands to feed.*Construction activities, noise, and lighting result in some displacement of fauna, particularly birds and mammals.*Potential for bird collisions with man-made structures, such as cranes and buildings during construction. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-90Rev. 0*Facility operation does not result in additional impacts except minor potential for bird collisions with buildings and minor disturbance of wildlife due to security lighting at night.Aesthetic Resources*During facility construction, dust, cranes, and facility structures partially obstruct views of existing landscape and create some visual elements that are out-of-character with the site setting. *During facility operation, the existing agricultural landscape is permanently altered, but the facility appearance is consistent with light industrial uses associated with the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical | Socioeconomics*Facility construction results in some temporary increases in noise due to use of heavy equipment on the site and construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon.*Facility operation results in minor increases in noise primarily due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. Normal operations include noise from stationary equipment, such as heating, cooling, and ventilation equipment. Continuous noise levels at the site boundary are maintained below local and state noise limit criteria. *Facility construction results in some temporary increase in local traffic due to construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon and periodic construction vehicle traffic throughout the work day.*Facility operation results in minor increase in local traffic due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. *Facility construction results in some temporary increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and wastewater treatment facilities to serve construction workers who move into the site area.*Facility operation results in minor increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and treatment facilities to serve operations workers who move into the site area.Land Use*Construction of this type of facility would be expected to result in approximately the same land disturbance as the SHINE facility, which means the permanent conversion of approximately 26 ac. (10.5 ha) of agricultural lands to industrial land use and the temporary conversion of approximately 14 ac. (5.7 ha) of agricultural lands to industrial land use.*Facility operation does not result in additional on-site land use impacts.*No off-site land use impacts are expected during construction or operation except for minor construction of housing to serve facility workers who move into the site area. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-91Rev. 019.5.3.2.3.2Effects on Public Health and SafetyDuring facility construction, minor impacts to public health and safety might result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and fugitive dust), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. Any such impacts would be expected to be temporary and restricted to the immediate vicinity of the project site.During facility operation, minor impacts to public health and safety might result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and emissions of conventional pollutants from stationary equipment), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. In addition, the public would be exposed to minor doses of radiation due to transportation of radioactive materials to and from the site, as well as direct radiation and releases of gaseous effluents from the SHINE process. All radioactive materials would be strictly controlled, and all radiological doses would comply with regulatory limits.19.5.3.2.3.3Other Costs No other environmental costs, such as lost tax revenues or decreased recreational values, have been identified. The project is not expected to result in any transportation impacts except for the minor traffic impacts on local roads discussed in Subsection 19.5.3.2.4.1.19.5.3.2.3.4Environmental BenefitsConstruction of this type of facility would be expected to create approximately the same number of construction jobs as the SHINE facility, which means approximately 420 construction jobs during the peak of construction activities. Facility operation would create approximately 150 permanent operational jobs. In addition, the wages earned and money spent by facility employees will stimulate additional economic activity, but this benefit has not been quantified. In addition to economic benefits, the project also would benefit the health of people who need diagnostic tests that require Tc-99m and other isotopes. The facility would be expected to produce approximately the same amount of Tc-99m as the SHINE facility, which means it would satisfy approximately half of the annual demand for these isotopes in the United States. This represents a significant health benefit. The facility would also produce I-131 and Xe-133, which would have additional health benefits.19.5.3.2.3.5Production of Commercial ProductsThe facility would be expected to produce 3,000 6-day Ci per week, which means it would produce approximately 156,000 6-day Ci of Mo-99 per year. This translates to approximately 9,500,000 doses of Tc-99m per year for diagnostic tests. In addition, the facility would be expected to produce approximately 100,000 Ci of I-131 and 100,000 Ci of Xe-133 per year.19.5.3.2.3.6Increase in Tax PaymentsThe facility would be expected to pay approximately the same amount of taxes as the SHINE facility. This means that the facility would pay property taxes of approximately $635,000 per year during construction and approximately $660,000 per year during operation (after expiration of an initial 10-year TIF agreement), representing an increase of approximately 0.30 percent in the annual property tax revenues of Rock County. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewComparison of the Potential Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-93Rev. 019.5.4COMPARISON OF THE POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS19.5.4.1ALTERNATIVE SITESThis section compares the environmental impacts, costs, and benefits | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-92Rev. 019.5.3.2.3.7Creation and Improvement of InfrastructureNo creation or improvement of infrastructure would be expected to result directly from the project. The City of Janesville plans to install a water main and a sewer main along the northern boundary of the site, but the project is not dependent on this construction.19.5.3.2.3.8Other BenefitsNo other significant benefits have been identified. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewComparison of the Potential Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-95Rev. 0Table 19.5.4-1 Comparison of Construction Impacts for the SHINE Site and Alternative SitesCategorySHINE (Janesville)Chippewa FallsStevens PointNo-Action Land Use | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewComparison of the Potential Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-93Rev. 019.5.4COMPARISON OF THE POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS19.5.4.1ALTERNATIVE SITESThis section compares the environmental impacts, costs, and benefits di scussed in Subsections 19.5.2 and 19.5.3 for the alternative sites with the impacts, costs, and benefits expected at the SHINE project site, and evaluates whether any of the alternatives would reduce or avoid adverse effects. Table 19.5.4-1 summarizes the expected environmental impacts of project construction at the SHINE project site (Janesville), each of the alternative sites (Chippewa Falls and Stevens Point), and the No-Action Alternative. Construction impacts at the SHINE project site are SMALL for every resource category. Both of the alternative sites have MODERATE construction impacts in several resource categories. Chippewa Falls and Stevens Point both have a MODERATE construction impact in Visual Resources, Noise, and Socioeconomic Transportation. In addition, Stevens Point has a MODERATE construction impact in Land Use and Ground Water Resources. As expected, the No-Action Alternative impacts are SMALL for every resource category as no construction would occur. However, the No-Action Alternative would not produce any of the benefits that would be produced by construction at the SHINE site or the alternative sites. These benefits include the creation of jobs and increases in tax payments to the local jurisdictions in which the site is located.Table 19.5.4-2 summarizes the expected environmental impacts of project operation at the SHINE project site, each of the alternative sites, and the No-Action Alternative. Operation impacts at the SHINE project site and both of the alternative sites are SMALL for every resource category. As expected, the No-Action Alternative impacts are SMALL for every resource category as project operation would not occur. Again, however, the No-Action Alternative would not produce any of the benefits that would be produced by operation at the SHINE project site or the alternative sites. These benefits include the of jobs, increases in tax payments to the local jurisdictions in which the site is located, the production of valuable commercial products, and the significant health benefits of having a reliable domestic source of diagnostic isotopes. Based on the information summarized above, neither of the alternative sites would reduce or avoid adverse effects as compared with the SHINE project site. The No-Action Alternative would avoid the environmental impacts associated with construction and operation, but since all of these impacts are SMALL at the SHINE project site, avoiding these impacts is not significant. The No-Action Alternative would not produce any of the benefits associated with the project.19.5.4.2ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGIESThis section compares the environmental impacts, costs, and benefits di scussed in Subsections 19.5.2 and 19.5.3 for the alternative technologies with the impacts, costs, and benefits expected for the SHINE technology, and evaluates whether any of the alternatives would reduce or avoid adverse effects. Table 19.5.4-3 summarizes the expected environmental impacts of project construction for the SHINE technology, each of the alternative technologies (linear accelerator technology and LEU aqueous homogeneous reactor), and the No-Action Alternative. Construction impacts for the SHINE technology are SMALL for every resource category. The alternative technologies also have SMALL construction impacts for every resource category. As expected, the No-Action Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewComparison of the Potential Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-94Rev. 0Alternative impacts are SMALL for every resource category as no construction would occur. However, the No-Action Alternative would not produce any of the benefits that would be produced by construction of the SHINE technology or the alternative technologies. These benefits include the creation of jobs and increases in tax payments to the local jurisdictions in which the project is located. Table 19.5.4-4 summarizes the expected environmental impacts of project operation for the SHINE technology, each of the alternative technologies, and the No-Action Alternative. Operational impacts for the SHINE technology are SMALL for every resource category. The alternative technologies also have SMALL operational impacts for every resource category. As expected, the No-Action Alternative impacts are SMALL for every resource category as project operation would not occur. Again, however, the No-Action Alternative would not produce any of the benefits that would be produced by operation of the SHINE technology or the alternative technologies. These benefits include the creation of jobs, increases in tax payments to the local jurisdictions in which the site is located, the production of valuable commercial products, and the significant health benefits of having a reliable domestic source of diagnostic isotopes. Based on the information summarized above, none of the alternative technologies would reduce or avoid adverse effects as compared with the SHINE technology. The No-Action Alternative would avoid the environmental impacts associated with construction and operation, but since all of these impacts are SMALL for the SHINE technology, avoiding these impacts is not significant. The No-Action Alternative would not produce any of the benefits associated with the project. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewComparison of the Potential Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-95Rev. 0Table 19.5.4-1 Comparison of Construction Impacts for the SHINE Site and Alternative SitesCategorySHINE (Janesville)Chippewa FallsStevens PointNo-Action Land Use Impacts SMALLSMALLMODERATESMALLVisual Resources Impacts SMALLMODERATEMODERATESMALLAir Quality Impacts SMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLNoise Impacts SMALLMODERATEMODERATESMALLGeology, Soils, and Seismology Impacts SMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLWater Resources Impacts Surface Water Impacts SMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL Ground Water ImpactsSMALLSMALLMODERATESMALLEcological Resources Impacts Aquatic Resource sSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL Terrestrial Resour cesSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLHistorical and Cultural Resources Impacts SMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLSocioeconomic Impacts HousingSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL Public Services SMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL Public EducationSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL TaxesSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL TransportationSMALLMODERATEMODERATESMALLHuman Health Impacts Nonradiological ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL Radiological ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLWaste Management Impacts SMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLTransportation Impacts SMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLPostulated Accident Impacts SMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLEnvironmental Justice Impacts SMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLEnvironmental Benefits - Jobs 420420 420 NoneEnvironmental Benefits - HealthNoneNoneNoneNoneProduction of Commercial ProductsNoneNoneNoneNoneProperty Tax Payments$635,000 per year$635,000 per year$635,000 per yearNone Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewComparison of the Potential Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-96Rev. 0Table 19.5.4-2 Comparison of Operation Impacts for the SHINE Site and Alternative Sitesa)The number of required operation workers and property tax payments are expected to be the same for all sites.CategorySHINE (Janesville)Chippewa FallsStevens PointNo-Action Land Use ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLVisual Resources ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLAir Quality ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLNoise ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLGeology, Soils, and Seismology ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLWater Resources Impacts Surface Water ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL Ground Water ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLEcological Resources Impacts Aquatic ResourcesSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL Terrestrial ResourcesSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLHistorical and Cultural Resources ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLSocioeconomic Impacts HousingSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL Public ServicesSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL Public EducationSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL TaxesSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL TransportationSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLHuman Health Impacts Nonradiological ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL Radiological ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLWaste Management ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLTransportation ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLPostulated Accident ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLEnvironmental Justice ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLEnvironmental Benefits - Jobs150150150NoneEnvironmental Benefits - HealthReliable source ofdiagnostic isotopesReliable source ofdiagnostic isotopesReliable source ofdiagnostic isotopesNoneProduction of Commercial Products Mo-99, I-131, Xe-133Mo-99, I-131, Xe-133Mo-99, I-131, Xe-133 NoneProperty Tax Payments(a)$660,000 per year$660,000 per year$660,000 per year None Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewComparison of the Potential Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-97Rev. 0Table 19.5.4-3 Comparison of Construction Impacts for the SHINE Technology and Alternative TechnologiesCategorySHINE TechnologyLinear Accelerator TechnologyLow Enriched Uranium Aqueous Homogeneous ReactorNo-Action Land Use ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLVisual Resources ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLAir Quality ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLNoise ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLGeology, Soils, and Seismology ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLWater Resources ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLEcological Resources ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLHistorical and Cultural Resources ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLSocioeconomic ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLHuman Health ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLWaste Management ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLTransportation ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLPostulated Accident ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLEnvironmental Justice ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLEnvironmental Benefits - Jobs420 420 420 NoneEnvironmental Benefits - HealthNoneNoneNoneNoneProduction of Commercial ProductsNoneNoneNoneNoneProperty Tax Payments$635,000 per year$635,000 per year$635,000 per yearNone Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewComparison of the Potential Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-98Rev. 0Table 19.5.4-4 Comparison of Operation Impacts for the SHINE Technology and Alternative Technologiesa)The number of required operation workers and property tax payments are assumed to be the same for all technologies.CategorySHINE TechnologyLinear Accelerator TechnologyLow Enriched Uranium Aqueous Homogeneous ReactorNo-Action AlternativeLand Use ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLVisual Resources ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLAir Quality ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLNoise ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLGeology, Soils, and Seismology ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLWater Resources ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLEcological Resources ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLHistorical and Cultural Resources ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLSocioeconomic ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLHuman Health ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLWaste Management ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLTransportation ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLPostulated Accident ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLEnvironmental Justice ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLEnvironmental Benefits - Jobs150 150 150 NoneEnvironmental Benefits - HealthReliable source of diagnostic isotopesReliable source of diagnostic isotopesReliable source of diagnostic isotopesNoneProduction of Commercial ProductsMo-99, I-131, Xe-133Mo-99 Mo-99, I-131, Xe-133NoneProperty Tax Payments (a)$660,000 per year$660,000 per year$660,000 per yearNone Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTable of ContentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-iRev. 0SECTION | |||
==19.6CONCLUSION== | ==19.6CONCLUSION== | ||
STable of | STable of Contents SectionTitlePage | ||
==19.6CONCLUSION== | ==19.6CONCLUSION== | ||
S.................................................................................................19.6-119.6.1UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS............................19.6-119.6.2RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SHORT-TERM USES AND LONG-TERMPRODUCTIVITY OF THE ENVIRONMENT....................................................19.6-1319.6.3IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCES.................................................................................................19.6-15 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-iiRev. 0List of | S.................................................................................................19.6-119.6.1UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS............................19.6-119.6.2RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SHORT-TERM USES AND LONG-TERMPRODUCTIVITY OF THE ENVIRONMENT....................................................19.6-1319.6.3IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCES.................................................................................................19.6-15 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-iiRev. 0List of Tables NumberTitle19.6.1-1Construction-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts19.6.1-2Operations-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts19.6.3-1United States Inventories for Minerals Used in Construction Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of FiguresSHINE Medical Technologies 19.6-iiiRev. 0List of Figures NumberTitleNone Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.6-ivRev. 0Acronyms and AbbreviationsAcronym/Abbreviation Definition ac.acreBMPbest management practice hahectarekgkilogramLOSlevel of service NOxnitrogen oxidesOSHAOccupational Safety and Health AdministrationROIRegion of InfluenceSHState HighwaySHINESHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. | ||
SWPPPStorm Water Pollution Prevention PlanUSU.S. HighwayWDNRWisconsin Department of Natural ResourcesWHSWisconsin Historical Society Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical | SWPPPStorm Water Pollution Prevention PlanUSU.S. HighwayWDNRWisconsin Department of Natural ResourcesWHSWisconsin Historical Society Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.6-1Rev. 0CHAPTER 19 | ||
==19.6CONCLUSION== | ==19.6CONCLUSION== | ||
S19.6.1UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTSUnavoidable adverse impacts are predicted adverse environmental impacts that cannot be avoided and for which there are no practical means of further mitigation. This section considers unavoidable adverse impacts from construction and operation of the proposed SHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. (SHINE) facility.19.6.1.1Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts of ConstructionConstruction impacts and measures and controls available to reduce or eliminate impacts are discussed in detail in Section 19.4. As described in the section, all impacts are SMALL, as they are either not detectable or are minor compared to the availability of the affected resources. Table 19.6.1-1 summarizes construction-related impacts that result in a measurable loss or permanent change in resources, the mitigation and control measures available to reduce those impacts, and the remaining unavoidable adverse impacts after mitigation and control measures are applied. For many of the impacts related to construction activities, the mitigation measures are referred to as best management practices (BMPs). Typically, these mitigation measures are based on the types of activities that are to be performed. The mitigation measures are implemented through permitting requirements, and plans and procedures developed for the construction activities.Unavoidable adverse impacts from construction of the SHINE facility include changing land use on 25.67 acres (ac.) (10.39 hectares [ha]) of agricultural/cultivated crop land to industrial facilities, the conversion of prime farmland and farmland of statewide importance to industrial land, and partial obstruction of views of the existing landscape. Since there are no streams, ponds, or water bodies present on the SHINE site, potential construction-related impacts to water resources are limited to off-site impacts associated with runoff and siltation. Impacts to agricultural/cultivated crop land from construction of the facility are mitigated by returning lands within the site boundary that surround the interior developed areas to either cultivated fields or restored native landscapes upon completion of construction. To minimize impacts to visual resources, landscaping of the site along U.S. Highway 51 (US 51) street frontage and bordering access road will be performed. Open spaces around the facility structures are vegetated with cool-season lawn and shrub borders. Impacts from stormwater runoff are mitigated with stormwater management plans and BMPs during construction. Construction activities also temporarily impact 14.54 ac. (5.88 ha) of agricultural lands used for the construction parking area, construction material staging or lay down area, and water and sewer line installation. Temporary impact areas are either returned to agriculture or restored with either cool-season grasses or native prairie.Construction activities result in unavoidable localized increases in air emissions and noise. Activities associated with the use of construction equipment may result in varying amounts of dust, air emissions, noise, and vibration that may potentially impact both on-site workers and off-site residents of the community. Potential noise impacts also include traffic noise associated with the construction workforce traveling to and from the SHINE site, particularly during shift Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical | S19.6.1UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTSUnavoidable adverse impacts are predicted adverse environmental impacts that cannot be avoided and for which there are no practical means of further mitigation. This section considers unavoidable adverse impacts from construction and operation of the proposed SHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. (SHINE) facility.19.6.1.1Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts of ConstructionConstruction impacts and measures and controls available to reduce or eliminate impacts are discussed in detail in Section 19.4. As described in the section, all impacts are SMALL, as they are either not detectable or are minor compared to the availability of the affected resources. Table 19.6.1-1 summarizes construction-related impacts that result in a measurable loss or permanent change in resources, the mitigation and control measures available to reduce those impacts, and the remaining unavoidable adverse impacts after mitigation and control measures are applied. For many of the impacts related to construction activities, the mitigation measures are referred to as best management practices (BMPs). Typically, these mitigation measures are based on the types of activities that are to be performed. The mitigation measures are implemented through permitting requirements, and plans and procedures developed for the construction activities.Unavoidable adverse impacts from construction of the SHINE facility include changing land use on 25.67 acres (ac.) (10.39 hectares [ha]) of agricultural/cultivated crop land to industrial facilities, the conversion of prime farmland and farmland of statewide importance to industrial land, and partial obstruction of views of the existing landscape. Since there are no streams, ponds, or water bodies present on the SHINE site, potential construction-related impacts to water resources are limited to off-site impacts associated with runoff and siltation. Impacts to agricultural/cultivated crop land from construction of the facility are mitigated by returning lands within the site boundary that surround the interior developed areas to either cultivated fields or restored native landscapes upon completion of construction. To minimize impacts to visual resources, landscaping of the site along U.S. Highway 51 (US 51) street frontage and bordering access road will be performed. Open spaces around the facility structures are vegetated with cool-season lawn and shrub borders. Impacts from stormwater runoff are mitigated with stormwater management plans and BMPs during construction. Construction activities also temporarily impact 14.54 ac. (5.88 ha) of agricultural lands used for the construction parking area, construction material staging or lay down area, and water and sewer line installation. Temporary impact areas are either returned to agriculture or restored with either cool-season grasses or native prairie.Construction activities result in unavoidable localized increases in air emissions and noise. Activities associated with the use of construction equipment may result in varying amounts of dust, air emissions, noise, and vibration that may potentially impact both on-site workers and off-site residents of the community. Potential noise impacts also include traffic noise associated with the construction workforce traveling to and from the SHINE site, particularly during shift Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.6-2Rev. 0changes. Emissions from construction activities and equipment are minimized through implementation of mitigation measures, including proper maintenance of construction equipment and vehicles. Posted speed limits, traffic control and administrative measures, such as staggered shift hours, will reduce traffic noise during the weekday business hours. By implementation of mitigation measures, emissions and noise impacts associated with construction activities are temporary and localized at and near the SHINE site.19.6.1.2Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts of OperationsOperational impacts and measures and controls available to reduce or eliminate impacts are discussed in detail in Section 19.4. As described in the section, all impacts are SMALL, as they are either not detectable or are minor compared to the availability of the affected resources. | ||
Table 19.6.1-2 summarizes operations-related impacts that result in a measurable loss or permanent change in resources, the mitigation and control measures available to reduce these impacts, and the remaining adverse impacts after mitigation and control measures are applied. As indicated in Table 19.6.1-2 most of the adverse impacts are either avoidable or negligible after mitigation and control measures are considered. Unavoidable adverse impacts from operation of the SHINE facility include a change to the viewshed, potential storm water runoff to the intermittent stream or Rock River, and infrequent bird collisions with buildings. Minor visual impacts to the viewshed will occur as a result of the main building and exhaust vent stack. However, the surrounding viewshed includes light industrial development, therefore impacts are minor. Stormwater runoff during plant operation is controlled through a vegetated on-site detention swale. Infrequent bird collisions with buildings at the SHINE facility and associated structures may result in some bird mortality. Most buildings on the SHINE site have a relatively low profile, therefore effects on bird populations from collisions with buildings is minimized.The operation of the SHINE facility will result in a slight degradation in the level of service (LOS) at the signalized intersection of US 51 and State Highway (SH) 11. Specifically, the westbound SH 11 to southbound US 51 left-turning movement is affected during the morning peak hour. This condition is easily mitigated by optimizing the signal timing for this turning movement, which will improve the LOS to its existing level. 19.6.1.3Summary of Adverse Environmental Impacts from Construction and OperationsTables 19.6.1-1 and 19.6.1-2 indicate that all of the adverse environmental impacts associated with the new facility construction and operation are SMALL and are further reduced through the application of mitigation and control measures. Most of the impacts from construction and operation are SMALL due to design features that result in lower levels of impacts, BMPs that control and mitigate emissions and discharges to air and water, use of agricultural/cultivated crop lands that were previously altered or disturbed, and applicable federal and state permitting requirements designed to protect humans and biota. These SMALL impacts generally have no detectable adverse impacts or only minor adverse impacts. | Table 19.6.1-2 summarizes operations-related impacts that result in a measurable loss or permanent change in resources, the mitigation and control measures available to reduce these impacts, and the remaining adverse impacts after mitigation and control measures are applied. As indicated in Table 19.6.1-2 most of the adverse impacts are either avoidable or negligible after mitigation and control measures are considered. Unavoidable adverse impacts from operation of the SHINE facility include a change to the viewshed, potential storm water runoff to the intermittent stream or Rock River, and infrequent bird collisions with buildings. Minor visual impacts to the viewshed will occur as a result of the main building and exhaust vent stack. However, the surrounding viewshed includes light industrial development, therefore impacts are minor. Stormwater runoff during plant operation is controlled through a vegetated on-site detention swale. Infrequent bird collisions with buildings at the SHINE facility and associated structures may result in some bird mortality. Most buildings on the SHINE site have a relatively low profile, therefore effects on bird populations from collisions with buildings is minimized.The operation of the SHINE facility will result in a slight degradation in the level of service (LOS) at the signalized intersection of US 51 and State Highway (SH) 11. Specifically, the westbound SH 11 to southbound US 51 left-turning movement is affected during the morning peak hour. This condition is easily mitigated by optimizing the signal timing for this turning movement, which will improve the LOS to its existing level. 19.6.1.3Summary of Adverse Environmental Impacts from Construction and OperationsTables 19.6.1-1 and 19.6.1-2 indicate that all of the adverse environmental impacts associated with the new facility construction and operation are SMALL and are further reduced through the application of mitigation and control measures. Most of the impacts from construction and operation are SMALL due to design features that result in lower levels of impacts, BMPs that control and mitigate emissions and discharges to air and water, use of agricultural/cultivated crop lands that were previously altered or disturbed, and applicable federal and state permitting requirements designed to protect humans and biota. These SMALL impacts generally have no detectable adverse impacts or only minor adverse impacts. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.6-3Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-1 Construction-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 1 of 6)ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsLand Use and Visual ResourcesConstruction of new facility will permanently impact 25.67 ac. (10.39 ha) of agricultural/cultivated crop land.Impacts include conversion of prime farmland and farmland of statewide importance to industrial land.Construction activities comply with all relevant federal, state, and local regulatory requirements, including BMPs and stormwater management plans to control erosion and runoff.Impacts to agricultural/cultivated crop land are mitigated by returning lands within the site boundary that surround the interior developed areas to cultivated fields or restored native landscapes or cool-season grasses upon construction completion.A total of 25.67 ac. (10.39 ha) of agricultural/cultivated crop land is lost.Amount of prime farmland or farmland of statewide importance lost is minor in context of region.Partial obstruction of views of the existing landscape.Visual impacts are minimized through landscaping of the site. Open spaces around the facility structures are vegetated with cool-season lawn and shrub borders.A minor change in existing landscape is expected.Temporary impact of 14.54 ac. (5.88ha) of agricultural lands used for construction parking area, construction material staging or lay down area, and water and sewer line installation.Temporary impact areas are either returned to agriculture or restored with either cool-season grasses or native prairie.Some localized short-term impacts to temporary impact areas are expected. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.6-4Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-1 Construction-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 2 of 6)ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsGeologic ResourcesPotential local adverse impacts due to excavation and other construction related activities.Geologic resources at the site are the same throughout the region and do not include any unique or rare geological resources.No mitigation measures beyond compliance with local building codes are anticipated as no significant impacts due to large scale or local hazards are identified.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Water UseAll public water supplies in Rock County are sourced from groundwater. Additional needs during construction are identified and are satisfied under existing system capacities.Water and sewer utility lines will be installed by the City of Janesville in support of the overall TIF development on the north side of the site. No additional upgrades or mitigation measures are expected.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Water QualityPotential impacts are limited to off-site areas and are associated with runoff and siltation into roadside swales. BMPs will be used in accordance with the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) as required by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) to prevent sediment runoff and subsequent siltation in off-site areas during construction.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Terrestrial EcologyWildlife potentially affected by construction, includes bird, mammal, and/or herpetofauna | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical | species.Area is routinely disturbed for agriculture and there are no water resources on-site, therefore wildlife use of the site is low.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.6-5Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-1 Construction-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 3 of 6) ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsTerrestrial Ecology, cont'dThere is a potential for bird collisions with man-made structures such as cranes and buildings during construction.Based on findings of NUREG-1437, the effects of avian collisions with man-made structures occur at very low frequencies.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Artificial lighting could create or exacerbate an avian-collision hazard if tall cranes are illuminated during nighttime construction.For any nighttime construction, BMPs such as shielding and appropriate directional lighting are used to mitigate the hazards to wildlife associated with artificial nighttime illumination.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Potential impacts to state or federal threatened/endangered species or species of special concern identified within the region.Consultation identified state and federally listed species in the region, however none on the SHINE site. None of the listed species were observed on-site during field reconnaissance surveys.Sensitive species located in off-site riparian areas could be affected indirectly during construction via stormwater runoff from the site. The use of appropriate BMPs during construction combined with the distance to the nearest off-site areas minimizes impacts to any protected species.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Aquatic EcologyPotential impacts are limited to off-site areas associated with runoff and siltation into the small intermittent stream and Rock River.BMPs will be used in accordance with the SWPPP as required by the WDNR to prevent sediment runoff and subsequent siltation in receiving streams during construction.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.6-6Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-1 Construction-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 4 of 6)ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSocioeconomicsThere is a minor potential increase in the local population and associated increased demand for local public services, schooling, housing, and land.Estimated population increases are relatively small compared to the population in the ROI. Increases in local tax revenues support increased services. Specific measures and controls are not needed as impacts are minor.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Potential impacts in traffic infrastructure and patterns due to increased traffic from | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical | |||
construction-related vehicles.Construction-related traffic does not affect the level of service anywhere in the transportation infrastructure and no modifications to the infrastructure are necessary.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Human HealthPotential impacts to the general public and construction workforce include dust and other air emissions during construction.BMPs including dust control plans are implemented during construction to minimize fugitive dust.Minor localized increases in air emissions will occur, mostly at and near the SHINE site. Radiation ExposurePotential adverse impacts to the general public and construction workforce from the construction and handling of isotope production equipment and supplies.Exposure is minimized through safe handling procedures and robust Radiation Protection and ALARA Programs.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Air QualityActivities associated with the use of construction equipment may result in varying amounts of dust, air emissions, noise, and vibration and may potentially impact both on-site workers and off-site residents of the community.BMPs and dust control plans are used for controlling fugitive dust.Proper maintenance of construction equipment and vehicles is used to control air emissions.Minor localized increases in air emissions will occur, mostly at and near the SHINE site.Detectable changes to local meteorology are not anticipated. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.6-7Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-1 Construction-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 5 of 6)ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsAir Quality, cont'dPainting, coating and similar operations also generate emissions from the use of volatile organic compounds.Contractors, vendors, and subcontractors will adhere to appropriate federal and state occupational health and safety regulations. Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.On-site equipment use and traffic due to construction activities can result in local increases in emissions. Potential air quality impacts are limited as the project is in an attainment area and is largely surrounded by agricultural fields and other undeveloped areas.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated. | |||
NoisePotential impacts due to increase in noise levels from construction equipment, including to nearby residences, churches, and recreational areas.On-site noise level exposure is controlled through appropriate training, personnel protective equipment, periodic health and safety monitoring, and industry good practices. Noise levels from equipment are expected attenuate rapidly between the site and the nearest sensitive noise receptors.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Potential increase in traffic noise associated with construction workforce traveling to and from the SHINE site, particularly during shift changes.Posted speed limits, traffic control and administrative measures, such as staggered shift hours reduces traffic noise during weekday business hours.Potential noise impacts are intermittent and limited primarily to shift changes. Environmental | |||
JusticeThere is potential for adverse impacts to low-income and minority populations.Populations classified as low income are distant from the site not impacted by the SHINE facility.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.6-8Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-1 Construction-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 6 of 6)ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsHistoric and Cultural ResourcesNo adverse impacts on cultural or historic resources have been identified.A Phase I study was performed and the Wisconsin Historical Society (WHS) reviewed the findings and indicated that no further consultation is needed.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.6-9Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-2 Operations-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 1 of 4)ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsLand Use and Visual ResourcesVisual impacts as a result of the main building and exhaust vent stack.The majority of the facility structures have a relatively low profile. The exhaust vent stack will extend to 96 feet (29 meters) above grade. No mitigation is required.Minor impacts to viewscape will occur, however the surrounding viewshed includes similar light industrial development, therefore impacts are small.Geologic ResourcesPotential impacts from sediment erosion at the site.The primary soils present at the site are classified as slightly erodible and the secondary soils are classified as moderately erodible. No mitigation is required.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Water UsePotential impact on water supply for the region based on demand from SHINE facility.The City of Janesville has determined the current system has more than enough capacity to support the increase in demand. No mitigation is required.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Water QualityPotential impacts from stormwater runoff to the intermittent stream or Rock River.A vegetated on-site detention swale is used to control stormwater runoff.Mitigation measures in combination with the distance to the water bodies will minimize runoff and siltation to off-site areas.Terrestrial EcologyPossible exposure of terrestrial fauna and flora to herbicides due to vegetation management practices may occur.Herbicides are applied per an integrated pest management plan and applicable permit/BMP requirements.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Infrequent bird collisions with buildings resulting in mortality can occur.Most buildings on the SHINE site have a relatively low profile, minimizing bird collisions.Effects on bird populations from collisions with buildings are minimized and are not anticipated to be significant. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-10Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-2 Operations-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 2 of 4)ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsAquatic EcologyPotential impacts from stormwater runoff to the off-site intermittent stream or Rock River.A vegetated on-site detention swale is used to control storm water runoff.Mitigation measures in combination with the distance to the water bodies will minimize runoff and siltation to off-site receiving streams.SocioeconomicsAn increase in the Region of Influence (ROI) population of 0.08 percent will occur to support the operations workforce, potentially impacting social services.Adequate housing, school capacity, water supply and water treatment capacities exist to accommodate minor population increase; therefore, mitigation is not required.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Potential beneficial impacts to tax revenues to Janesville and Rock County.There is an increase in tax revenues collected by county and regional taxing authorities which does have beneficial impacts.No mitigation is required.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated. Increased traffic along US 51 coming from the north, resulting in a slight decrease in LOS at the intersection of US 51 and SH 11 during morning peak hour.Traffic impacts are mitigated by optimizing the signal timing at the intersection to accommodate a greater turning movement from westbound SH11 to southbound US 51.By optimizing signal timing at the intersection, the LOS for the intersection is improved to its existing level.Human HealthPotential pathways of public exposure to chemicals include air, land, and water.Control systems to minimize potential exposure to the public include conveyance of all wastewater produced from the facility to the City of Janesville wastewater treatment facility, use of swales to control off-site runoff, erosion control measures, and air emission controls. Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated. | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-10Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-2 Operations-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 2 of 4)ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsAquatic EcologyPotential impacts from stormwater runoff to the off-site intermittent stream or Rock River.A vegetated on-site detention swale is used to control storm water runoff.Mitigation measures in combination with the distance to the water bodies will minimize runoff and siltation to off-site receiving streams.SocioeconomicsAn increase in the Region of Influence (ROI) population of 0.08 percent will occur to support the operations workforce, potentially impacting social services.Adequate housing, school capacity, water supply and water treatment capacities exist to accommodate minor population increase; therefore, mitigation is not required.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Potential beneficial impacts to tax revenues to Janesville and Rock County.There is an increase in tax revenues collected by county and regional taxing authorities which does have beneficial impacts.No mitigation is required.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated. Increased traffic along US 51 coming from the north, resulting in a slight decrease in LOS at the intersection of US 51 and SH 11 during morning peak hour.Traffic impacts are mitigated by optimizing the signal timing at the intersection to accommodate a greater turning movement from westbound SH11 to southbound US 51.By optimizing signal timing at the intersection, the LOS for the intersection is improved to its existing level.Human HealthPotential pathways of public exposure to chemicals include air, land, and water.Control systems to minimize potential exposure to the public include conveyance of all wastewater produced from the facility to the City of Janesville wastewater treatment facility, use of swales to control off-site runoff, erosion control measures, and air emission controls. Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-11Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-2 Operations-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 3 of 4)ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsRadiation ExposurePotential adverse impacts to the general public and operations workforce from isotope production and associated waste.Site shielding design of the buildings minimizes radiation exposure of the public outside the buildings. Exposure of the workforce is minimized through compliance with OSHA standards.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Air QualityIncreased vehicle emissions and dust from the commuting workforce and routine deliveries to/from the SHINE facility.The volume of traffic during operations is considerably lower than during construction. | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-11Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-2 Operations-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 3 of 4)ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsRadiation ExposurePotential adverse impacts to the general public and operations workforce from isotope production and associated waste.Site shielding design of the buildings minimizes radiation exposure of the public outside the buildings. Exposure of the workforce is minimized through compliance with OSHA standards.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Air QualityIncreased vehicle emissions and dust from the commuting workforce and routine deliveries to/from the SHINE facility.The volume of traffic during operations is considerably lower than during construction. | ||
Vehicles are largely limited to paved areas, reducing the emissions of fugitive dust.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Emissions from the natural gas-fired boiler and heaters.Emissions of nitrogen oxides ( | Vehicles are largely limited to paved areas, reducing the emissions of fugitive dust.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Emissions from the natural gas-fired boiler and heaters.Emissions of nitrogen oxides (NO x) from the boiler are controlled using low-NO x burners, which produces lower NO x emissions during the combustion process.Emissions from the heaters are controlled using combustion controls and properly designed and tuned burners.No impacts exceed the primary ambient air quality standards that are established to protect public health; therefore unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.NoiseNoise generated during operations relates primarily to vehicular movements associated with employees and deliveries.The number of work-related trips is minor relative to the existing traffic flow on US 51 and does not result in notable increased noise emissions.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.External noise emissions from the SHINE facility during operation may impact surrounding sensitive noise receptors.Operational noise from the facility is primarily limited by the walls and other physical barriers of the facility itself.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-12Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-2 Operations-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 4 of 4)ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsEnvironmental JusticeNo adverse impacts on minority or low-income populations have been identified.Level of impact is comparable for all populations and mitigation is not required.Impacts to low income and minority populations are not anticipated.Historic and Cultural ResourcesNo adverse impacts on cultural or historic resources have been identified.A Phase I study was performed and the WHS reviewed the findings and indicated that no further consultation is needed.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated. | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-12Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-2 Operations-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 4 of 4)ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsEnvironmental JusticeNo adverse impacts on minority or low-income populations have been identified.Level of impact is comparable for all populations and mitigation is not required.Impacts to low income and minority populations are not anticipated.Historic and Cultural | ||
ResourcesNo adverse impacts on cultural or historic resources have been identified.A Phase I study was performed and the WHS reviewed the findings and indicated that no further consultation is needed.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewRelationship Between Short-Term Uses and Long-Term Productivity of the EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-13Rev. 019.6.2RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SHORT-TERM USES AND LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY OF THE ENVIRONMENTThis Environmental Report focuses on the analyses and resulting conclusions associated with the environmental impacts from activities during the new plant construction and operation at the SHINE site. These activities are considered short-term uses for purposes of this section. In this section, the long-term is considered to be initiated with the conclusion of new facility decommissioning at the SHINE site. This section includes an evaluation of the extent that the short-term uses preclude any options for future long-term use of the SHINE site.19.6.2.1Construction of the SHINE Facility and Long-Term ProductivitySubsection 19.6.1.1 summarizes the potential unavoidable adverse environmental impacts of construction and the measures proposed to reduce those impacts. Some SMALL adverse environmental impacts could remain after all practical measures to avoid or mitigate them are taken. However, none of these impacts represent long-term effects that preclude any options for future use of the SHINE site.The acreage disturbed during construction of the facility is larger than that required for the actual structures and other ancillary facilities because of the need for construction parking areas, and construction material staging and laydown areas. Preparation of these on-site areas coupled with noise from construction activities, may displace some wildlife and alter existing vegetation. Once the new facility is completed, the areas not needed for operations are returned to agricultural land or restored with either cool-season grasses or native prairie.Construction of the SHINE facility includes the installation of water and sewer lines that connect the facility to the City of Janesville water supply system. This additional infrastructure will be available and beneficial to any future use of the SHINE site after decommissioning.Noise emitted by some construction activities increases the ambient noise levels on-site and in adjacent off-site areas. During construction, the workforce is protected from excessive noise levels by adherence to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requirements within high noise environments. There are no effects on the long-term productivity of the SHINE site as a result of these impacts.Construction traffic increases the volume of traffic on local roads, but does not have an adverse impact on the LOS. Consequently, no modifications to the traffic infrastructure are necessary and there are no effects on long-term productivity.Facility construction has beneficial socioeconomic effects on the local area such as new construction-related jobs, local spending by the construction workforce, and payment of taxes within the area and region. The in-migration of the construction and operation workforce support the expansion of existing small businesses or locations for new small businesses that might serve SHINE and its employees. The beneficial impacts from the in-migration of the construction workforce and indirect economic output and employment resulting from construction expenditures to the communities within the region of influence (ROI) cease once construction is complete. However, the changes that are the result of increased tax revenues continue throughout the operational life of the facility. | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewRelationship Between Short-Term Uses and Long-Term Productivity of the EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-13Rev. 019.6.2RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SHORT-TERM USES AND LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY OF THE ENVIRONMENTThis Environmental Report focuses on the analyses and resulting conclusions associated with the environmental impacts from activities during the new plant construction and operation at the SHINE site. These activities are considered short-term uses for purposes of this section. In this section, the long-term is considered to be initiated with the conclusion of new facility decommissioning at the SHINE site. This section includes an evaluation of the extent that the short-term uses preclude any options for future long-term use of the SHINE site.19.6.2.1Construction of the SHINE Facility and Long-Term ProductivitySubsection 19.6.1.1 summarizes the potential unavoidable adverse environmental impacts of construction and the measures proposed to reduce those impacts. Some SMALL adverse environmental impacts could remain after all practical measures to avoid or mitigate them are taken. However, none of these impacts represent long-term effects that preclude any options for future use of the SHINE site.The acreage disturbed during construction of the facility is larger than that required for the actual structures and other ancillary facilities because of the need for construction parking areas, and construction material staging and laydown areas. Preparation of these on-site areas coupled with noise from construction activities, may displace some wildlife and alter existing vegetation. Once the new facility is completed, the areas not needed for operations are returned to agricultural land or restored with either cool-season grasses or native prairie.Construction of the SHINE facility includes the installation of water and sewer lines that connect the facility to the City of Janesville water supply system. This additional infrastructure will be available and beneficial to any future use of the SHINE site after decommissioning.Noise emitted by some construction activities increases the ambient noise levels on-site and in adjacent off-site areas. During construction, the workforce is protected from excessive noise levels by adherence to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requirements within high noise environments. There are no effects on the long-term productivity of the SHINE site as a result of these impacts.Construction traffic increases the volume of traffic on local roads, but does not have an adverse impact on the LOS. Consequently, no modifications to the traffic infrastructure are necessary and there are no effects on long-term productivity.Facility construction has beneficial socioeconomic effects on the local area such as new construction-related jobs, local spending by the construction workforce, and payment of taxes within the area and region. The in-migration of the construction and operation workforce support the expansion of existing small businesses or locations for new small businesses that might serve SHINE and its employees. The beneficial impacts from the in-migration of the construction workforce and indirect economic output and employment resulting from construction expenditures to the communities within the region of influence (ROI) cease once construction is complete. However, the changes that are the result of increased tax revenues continue throughout the operational life of the facility. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewRelationship Between Short-Term Uses and Long-Term Productivity of the EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-14Rev. 0Construction of the SHINE facility will have no impacts on populations identified as minority or low-income as minority populations are lacking within the region around the SHINE site, and low income populations are limited to isolated areas in the center of Janesville. Therefore, there are no effects on the long-term productivity of the SHINE site as a result of impacts on environmental justice. 19.6.2.2Operation of the SHINE Facility and Long-Term Productivity Subsection 19.6.1.2 summarizes the potential unavoidable adverse environmental impacts of operation and the measures proposed to reduce or eliminate those impacts. Some SMALL adverse environmental impacts could remain after all practical measures to avoid or mitigate them are taken. However, none of these impacts represent long-term effects that preclude any options for future use of the SHINE site.The SHINE site is located in an area that has previously been disturbed for agricultural use and is currently zoned for industrial use as an amendment to the Tax Increment Financing No.35 Project Plan. Therefore, operation of the new facility represents a continuation of the planned land use. Once the facility is decommissioned to Nuclear Regulatory Commission standards, the land could be available for other industrial or non-industrial uses.During operation, noise levels are expected to decrease to ambient levels as facility-generated noise is limited by the walls and other physical barriers of the facility itself. Operation of the new facility will slightly increase air emissions from the boiler and stacks. The equipment is operated in accordance with applicable federal, state, and local regulations, and is not expected to result in any long-term decrease in regional air quality. Preliminary modeling shows that for all pollutants except for the 1-hour nitrogen oxides ( | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewRelationship Between Short-Term Uses and Long-Term Productivity of the EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-14Rev. 0Construction of the SHINE facility will have no impacts on populations identified as minority or low-income as minority populations are lacking within the region around the SHINE site, and low income populations are limited to isolated areas in the center of Janesville. Therefore, there are no effects on the long-term productivity of the SHINE site as a result of impacts on environmental justice. 19.6.2.2Operation of the SHINE Facility and Long-Term Productivity Subsection 19.6.1.2 summarizes the potential unavoidable adverse environmental impacts of operation and the measures proposed to reduce or eliminate those impacts. Some SMALL adverse environmental impacts could remain after all practical measures to avoid or mitigate them are taken. However, none of these impacts represent long-term effects that preclude any options for future use of the SHINE site.The SHINE site is located in an area that has previously been disturbed for agricultural use and is currently zoned for industrial use as an amendment to the Tax Increment Financing No.35 Project Plan. Therefore, operation of the new facility represents a continuation of the planned land use. Once the facility is decommissioned to Nuclear Regulatory Commission standards, the land could be available for other industrial or non-industrial uses.During operation, noise levels are expected to decrease to ambient levels as facility-generated noise is limited by the walls and other physical barriers of the facility itself. Operation of the new facility will slightly increase air emissions from the boiler and stacks. The equipment is operated in accordance with applicable federal, state, and local regulations, and is not expected to result in any long-term decrease in regional air quality. Preliminary modeling shows that for all pollutants except for the 1-hour nitrogen oxides (NO x), the maximum concentrations are below the Significant Impact Level.Operation of the SHINE facility will have a comparable impact on all populations in the region around the site. No impacts are expected to either minority or low income populations as minority populations are lacking within the region around the SHINE site, and low income populations are limited to isolated areas in the center of Janesville. Therefore there are no long-term effects to environmental justice that preclude any options for future use of the SHINE site. 19.6.2.3Summary of the Relationship Between Short-Term Use and Long-Term ProductivityThe impacts resulting from the SHINE facility construction and operation result in both adverse and beneficial short-term impacts. The principal short-term adverse impacts are SMALL residual impacts (after mitigation measures are implemented) to land use, terrestrial ecology, local traffic, and air quality. There are no long-term impacts to the environment. The principal short-term benefits are the creation of additional jobs, additional tax revenues, and improvements to local infrastructure. The principal long-term benefit is the continued availability of the improved infrastructure and potential benefits from increased tax revenues after facility decommissioning. The short-term impacts and benefits and long-term benefits do not affect long-term productive use of the SHINE site. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIrreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-15Rev. 019.6.3IRREVERSIBLE AND | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIrreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-15Rev. 019.6.3IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIE VABLE COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCESThis subsection describes the expected irreversible and irretrievable environmental resource commitments used in the new facility construction and operation. The term irreversible commitments of resources describes environmental resources that are potentially changed by the new facility construction or operation and that could not be restored at some later time to the resource's state prior to construction or operation. Irretrievable commitments of resources are generally materials that are used for the new facility in such a way that they could not, by practical means, be recycled or restored for other uses.19.6.3.1Irreversible Environmental Commitments of ResourcesIrreversible environmental resource commitments resulting from the new facility, in addition to the materials used for radioisotope production are described in the following sections.19.6.3.1.1Land Use The land used for the SHINE facility is not irreversibly committed because once SHINE ceases operations and the facility is decommissioned in accordance with Nuclear Regulatory Commission requirements, the land supporting the facilities could be returned to other industrial or nonindustrial uses. There is no storage or disposal of radioactive and nonradioactive wastes at the site. Medical isotopes are not stored for any significant time period as these items are transported to clients as quickly as possible. Irradiated enriched uranium is not an issue as the facility cleans up and recycles this material rather than storing spent nuclear fuel. Approximately 26ac. (10.5ha) of prime farmland or farmland of statewide importance on the SHINE site could be irreversibly converted to developed land or experience surface soil damage during temporary use such that the soil properties responsible for the prime farmland designation would be irreversibly damaged.19.6.3.1.2Hydrologic ResourcesThe new facility requires water from the Janesville Water Utility to use for construction, isotope production, potable water, fire protection, and facility heating and cooling. The City of Janesville provides water supply for both public drinking and fire protection through groundwater wells. The average estimated water usage by the SHINE facility during operations is 6070 gallons (22,977 L) per day and a consumptive water use of 1560 gallons (5905 L) per week. According to the city of Janesville, the total pumping capacity of its eight groundwater wells is 29 Mgd (109.8 Mld). | ||
Average water usage is about 11 Mgd (41.6 Mld). Accordingly, the excess capacity of the Janesville water supply system is approximately 18 Mgd (68.1 Mld). Because there is excess capacity within the Janesville water supply system, there are no indirect effects associated with the demand from the SHINE facility. There are no direct impacts to water quality or hydrology from the SHINE facility; therefore there will be no irreversible impacts.19.6.3.1.3Ecological Resources Long-term irreversible losses of terrestrial biota are not anticipated. Subsequent to the completion of construction, floral and faunal resources are expected to recover in areas that are not affected by on-going operations. Floral resources at the site and in the region are limited to agricultural/cultivated crop plants. Losses of fauna due to operations are primarily attributable to Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIrreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-16Rev. 0bird collisions with buildings at the facility as wildlife occurrence on the site is relatively infrequent. There are no wetlands or water bodies located at the SHINE site.All water for the SHINE facility is provided by the Janesville Water Utility, therefore, water supply intake or cooling water intake structures on the Rock River are not needed. Thus, there are no operational impacts associated with impingement or entrainment of aquatic biota. Furthermore, the SHINE facility does not discharge directly into the Rock River or any other nearby water body thus, avoiding any impacts associated with pollutant or thermal discharges to aquatic resources. In addition, a vegetated on-site detention swale is used to control stormwater runoff which, when combined with the distance to the nearest off-site water bodies minimizes runoff and siltation to off-site receiving streams.19.6.3.1.4Socioeconomic Resources No irreversible commitments will be made to socioeconomic resources because they are reallocated for other purposes once the facility is decommissioned. | Average water usage is about 11 Mgd (41.6 Mld). Accordingly, the excess capacity of the Janesville water supply system is approximately 18 Mgd (68.1 Mld). Because there is excess capacity within the Janesville water supply system, there are no indirect effects associated with the demand from the SHINE facility. There are no direct impacts to water quality or hydrology from the SHINE facility; therefore there will be no irreversible impacts.19.6.3.1.3Ecological Resources Long-term irreversible losses of terrestrial biota are not anticipated. Subsequent to the completion of construction, floral and faunal resources are expected to recover in areas that are not affected by on-going operations. Floral resources at the site and in the region are limited to agricultural/cultivated crop plants. Losses of fauna due to operations are primarily attributable to Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIrreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-16Rev. 0bird collisions with buildings at the facility as wildlife occurrence on the site is relatively infrequent. There are no wetlands or water bodies located at the SHINE site.All water for the SHINE facility is provided by the Janesville Water Utility, therefore, water supply intake or cooling water intake structures on the Rock River are not needed. Thus, there are no operational impacts associated with impingement or entrainment of aquatic biota. Furthermore, the SHINE facility does not discharge directly into the Rock River or any other nearby water body thus, avoiding any impacts associated with pollutant or thermal discharges to aquatic resources. In addition, a vegetated on-site detention swale is used to control stormwater runoff which, when combined with the distance to the nearest off-site water bodies minimizes runoff and siltation to off-site receiving streams.19.6.3.1.4Socioeconomic Resources No irreversible commitments will be made to socioeconomic resources because they are reallocated for other purposes once the facility is decommissioned. | ||
19.6.3.1.5Historic and Cultural ResourcesNo known historic or cultural resources are irreversibly altered due to the SHINE facility.19.6.3.1.6Air Quality Dust and other emissions, such as vehicle exhaust, are released to the air during construction activities. Implementation of controls and limits at the source of emissions on the construction site result in reduction of impacts off-site. The dust control program reduces dust due to construction activities to minimize dust reaching site boundaries. Specific mitigation measures are discussed in Subsection 19.4.2.1.1. During operations, emissions will be a product of vehicle exhaust, isotope production, and fuel combustion resulting in very low levels of gaseous pollutants and particulates released from the facility into the air. Contractors, vendors, and subcontractors are required to adhere to appropriate federal and state occupational health and safety regulations to protect workers from adverse conditions, including air emissions. Emissions during operations are in compliance with applicable Federal and State regulations, minimizing their impact on public health and the environment.19.6.3.1.7Irretrievable Commitments of ResourcesIrretrievable commitments of resources during new plant construction are generally similar to that of any small-scale medical facility construction project. Unlike previous industrial construction, asbestos and other materials considered hazardous are not used or are used sparingly and in accordance with safety regulations and practices. Materials consumed during the construction phase are shown in Table 19.2.0-1. These materials are irretrievable unless they are recycled at decommissioning. Additionally, approximately 24,587gallons of diesel fuel (as a bounding assumption all fuel is assumed to be diesel) is expected to be used on an average monthly basis (Subsection 19.2.0). Use of construction materials in the quantities associated with the facility has a SMALL impact with respect to the availability of such resources. | 19.6.3.1.5Historic and Cultural ResourcesNo known historic or cultural resources are irreversibly altered due to the SHINE facility.19.6.3.1.6Air Quality Dust and other emissions, such as vehicle exhaust, are released to the air during construction activities. Implementation of controls and limits at the source of emissions on the construction site result in reduction of impacts off-site. The dust control program reduces dust due to construction activities to minimize dust reaching site boundaries. Specific mitigation measures are discussed in Subsection 19.4.2.1.1. During operations, emissions will be a product of vehicle exhaust, isotope production, and fuel combustion resulting in very low levels of gaseous pollutants and particulates released from the facility into the air. Contractors, vendors, and subcontractors are required to adhere to appropriate federal and state occupational health and safety regulations to protect workers from adverse conditions, including air emissions. Emissions during operations are in compliance with applicable Federal and State regulations, minimizing their impact on public health and the environment.19.6.3.1.7Irretrievable Commitments of ResourcesIrretrievable commitments of resources during new plant construction are generally similar to that of any small-scale medical facility construction project. Unlike previous industrial construction, asbestos and other materials considered hazardous are not used or are used sparingly and in accordance with safety regulations and practices. Materials consumed during the construction phase are shown in Table 19.2.0-1. These materials are irretrievable unless they are recycled at decommissioning. Additionally, approximately 24,587gallons of diesel fuel (as a bounding assumption all fuel is assumed to be diesel) is expected to be used on an average monthly basis (Subsection 19.2.0). Use of construction materials in the quantities associated with the facility has a SMALL impact with respect to the availability of such resources. | ||
| Line 690: | Line 1,293: | ||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
US Census Bureau, | US Census Bureau, 2012 MineralsYear2000200820092010Inventory in 1000 Metric Tons by Year Aluminum3688265817271720Copper1450131011801120 Lead449399406385 Titanium300200200200 Zinc796748710699Inventory in Million Metric Tons by YearIron Ore61542850 Portland Cement84836261 Masonry Cement4322 Construction Sand and Gravel11201040844760 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTable of ContentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.7-iRev. 0SECTION | ||
==19.7REFERENCES== | ==19.7REFERENCES== | ||
Table of | Table of Contents SectionTitlePage | ||
==19.7REFERENCES== | ==19.7REFERENCES== | ||
| Line 702: | Line 1,305: | ||
==7.6CONCLUSION== | ==7.6CONCLUSION== | ||
S...........................................................................................19.7-28 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies19.7-iiRev. 0List of | S...........................................................................................19.7-28 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies19.7-iiRev. 0List of Tables NumberTitleNone Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of FiguresSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-iiiRev. 0List of Figures NumberTitleNone Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-1Rev. 0CHAPTER 19 | ||
==19.7REFERENCES== | ==19.7REFERENCES== | ||
| Line 708: | Line 1,311: | ||
==7.1INTRODUCTION== | ==7.1INTRODUCTION== | ||
OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWBonet, 2005. Bonet, Henri, David Bernard, and Ponsard, Bernard, Production of | OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWBonet, 2005. Bonet, Henri, David Bernard, and Ponsard, Bernard, Production of Mo 99 in Europe: Status and Perspectives, April 2005.City of Janesville, 2012. Correspondence from Gale Price, Community Development Department, to Timothy Krause, Sargent & Lundy, January 13, 2012. | ||
COE, 2010. Interim Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Northcentral and Northeast Region, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Regulatory Assistance Program, March 1, 2010.Fissile Material, 2010. HFR Reactor at Petten Resumed Operations, Fissile Material, September 9, 2010, Website: http://www.fissilematerials.org/blog/2010/09/hfr_reactor_ar_petten_res.html, Date accessed: November 22, 2011.MSNBC, 2010. Isotope Shortage Makes Vital Medical Scans Costlier, Riskier, MSNBC, Website: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38882222/ns/technology_and_science-science/t/isotope-shortage-makes-vital- | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | COE, 2010. Interim Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Northcentral and Northeast Region, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Regulatory Assistance Program, March 1, 2010.Fissile Material, 2010. HFR Reactor at Petten Resumed Operations, Fissile Material, September 9, 2010, Website: http://www.fissilematerials.org/blog/2010/09/hfr_reactor_ar_petten_res.html, Date accessed: November 22, 2011.MSNBC, 2010. Isotope Shortage Makes Vital Medical Scans Costlier, Riskier, MSNBC, Website: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38882222/ns/technology_and_science-science/t/isotope-shortage-makes-vital-medic al-scans-costlier-riskier, Date accessed: November, 22, 2011.NM, 2012. News Medical, website: http://www.news-medical.net/health/Iodine-131-Medical-Use.aspx, Date accessed: August 9, 2012. | ||
NRCL, 2009. Medical Isotope Production Highly Enriched Uranium, National Academies Press, 2009.OECD, 2010. The Supply of Medical Radioisotopes: Interim Report of the OECD/NEA High-level Group on Security of Supply of Medical Isotopes, Nuclear Energy Agency, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2010.RxList, 2012. RxList, The Internet Drug IndexState of Wisconsin, 2012. License, Permit and Registration Services, Website: http://ww2.wisconsin.gov/state/license/app?COMMAND=gov.wi.state.cpp.license.command.LoadLicenseHome, Date accessed: February 1, 2012.U.S. Government, 1992. Energy Policy Act of 1992, 1992.Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 2012. | |||
Small Business Assistance - Permit Primer, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/permitprimer/, Date accessed: February 3, 2012.WNN, 2009. Restart for Isotope Reactor, World Nuclear News, February 13, 2009, Website: http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/newsarticle.aspx?id=24658, Date accessed: November 22, 2011. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-2Rev. 019.7.2PROPOSED ACTION N/A19.7.3DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENTAASHTO, 2012. Census Transportation Planning Products (CTPP) 3-year Data Based on 2006 -2008 American Community Survey (ACS), American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Website: http://ctpp.transportation.org/Pages/3yrdas.aspx | |||
, Date accessed: May 16, 2012. | |||
AFCCC, 1999. Engineering Weather Data, 2000 Interactive Edition, Air Force Combat Climatology Center, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, 1999.American Society of Mammologists, 2012. Mammals of Wisconsin, American Society of Mammologists, Website: http://www.mammalogy.org/mammals-wisconsin, Date accessed: July 11, 2012. | AFCCC, 1999. Engineering Weather Data, 2000 Interactive Edition, Air Force Combat Climatology Center, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, 1999.American Society of Mammologists, 2012. Mammals of Wisconsin, American Society of Mammologists, Website: http://www.mammalogy.org/mammals-wisconsin, Date accessed: July 11, 2012. | ||
ASCE, 2006. Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, ASCE Standard ASCE/SEI 7-05 Including Supplement No. 1, American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, Virginia, 2006.ASHRAE, 2009. 2009 ASHRAE Handbook - Fundamentals, American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc., IP edition. Chapter 14.6, American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc., Atlanta, Georgia, 2009.Bean, T., 2008. Noise on the Farm Can Cause Hearing Loss, University of Ohio, Agricultural Extension Fact Sheet AEX-590-08, Website: http://ohioline.osu.edu/aex-fact/pdf/AEX_590_08.pdf, Date accessed: August 13, 2012.Bird Nature, 2012. Migration Flyways: Mississippi Flyway, Bird Nature, Website: http://www.birdnature.com/mississippi.html, Date accessed: August 13, 2012.Bing Maps, 2012. Bing Maps Aerial, Microsoft Corporation and its Data Supplies, Website: http://www.esri.com/software/arcgis/arcgisonline/bing-maps.html, Date accessed: August 15, 2012.BLS, 2009. May 2009 Metropolitan and Nonmetropolitan Area Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Website: http://www.bls.gov/oes/2009/may/oes_27500.html, Date accessed: July 19, 2012.BLS, 2011. May 2009 Metropolitan and Nonmetropolitan Area Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Website: http://stat.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_27500.html, Date accessed: June 10, 2012.BLS, 2012a. Local Area Unemployment Statistics, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Website: http://www.bls.gov/data/#unemployment, Date accessed: June 8, 2012.BLS, 2012b. Consumer Price Index (CPI) Inflation Calculator, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Website: http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm, Date accessed: June 14, 2012. | ASCE, 2006. Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, ASCE Standard ASCE/SEI 7-05 Including Supplement No. 1, American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, Virginia, 2006.ASHRAE, 2009. 2009 ASHRAE Handbook - Fundamentals, American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc., IP edition. Chapter 14.6, American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc., Atlanta, Georgia, 2009.Bean, T., 2008. Noise on the Farm Can Cause Hearing Loss, University of Ohio, Agricultural Extension Fact Sheet AEX-590-08, Website: http://ohioline.osu.edu/aex-fact/pdf/AEX_590_08.pdf, Date accessed: August 13, 2012.Bird Nature, 2012. Migration Flyways: Mississippi Flyway, Bird Nature, Website: http://www.birdnature.com/mississippi.html, Date accessed: August 13, 2012.Bing Maps, 2012. Bing Maps Aerial, Microsoft Corporation and its Data Supplies, Website: http://www.esri.com/software/arcgis/arcgisonline/bing-maps.html, Date accessed: August 15, 2012.BLS, 2009. May 2009 Metropolitan and Nonmetropolitan Area Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Website: http://www.bls.gov/oes/2009/may/oes_27500.html, Date accessed: July 19, 2012.BLS, 2011. May 2009 Metropolitan and Nonmetropolitan Area Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Website: http://stat.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_27500.html, Date accessed: June 10, 2012.BLS, 2012a. Local Area Unemployment Statistics, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Website: http://www.bls.gov/data/#unemployment, Date accessed: June 8, 2012.BLS, 2012b. Consumer Price Index (CPI) Inflation Calculator, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Website: http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm, Date accessed: June 14, 2012. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-3Rev. 0BLS, 2012c. Injuries, Illnesses, and Fatalities, Bureau of Labor Statistics, OSHA Recordable Case Rates - Latest Incidence Rates, by Industry, for Nonfatal Work-Related Injuries and Illnesses, Website: http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/osh/os/ostb3191.pdf, Date accessed: February 14, 2013. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | BLS, 2012d. Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries (CFOI) - Current and Revised Data, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Hours-Based Fatal Injury Rates by Industry, Occupation, and Selected Demographic Characteristics, 2011, Website: http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfoi/cfoi_rates_2011hb.pdf, Date accessed: February 14, 2013.Buchwald, Cheryl A., 2011. Water Use in Wisconsin, 2005, U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2009-1076, Version 1.1, USGS, Wisconsin Water Science Center, November 2011.The CADMUS Group, Inc., 2011. Total Maximum Daily Loads for Total Phosphorus and Total Suspended Solids in the Rock River Basin. Columbia, Dane, Dodge, Fond du Lac, Green, Green Lake, Jefferson, Rock, Walworth, Washington, and Waukesha Counties, Wisconsin, Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/TMDLs/RockRiver/Final_Rock_River_TMDL_Report_with_Tables.pdf, Date accessed: June 11, 2012.California Department of Transportation, 1998. Technical Noise Supplement. | ||
Exelon, 2012. Byron Generating Station, Exelon Corporation, Website: http://www.exeloncorp.com/ | http://i80.dot.ca.gov/hq/env/noise/pub/Technical%20Noise%20Supplement.pdf, Date accessed: August 3, 2012. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | CERI, 2012. Seismic Information. Center for Earthquake Research and Information, Website: http://folkworm.ceri.memphis.edu/recenteqs/Quakes/quakes0.html), Date accessed: July25, 2012.Chagnon et al., 2004. Changnon, S. A., J. R. Angel, K. E. Kunkel, C. M. B. Lehmann, Climate Atlas of Illinois, Illinois State Water Survey, Champaign Illinois, March, 2004.City of Janesville, 2010. Water Utility, Water Conservation Plan, Website: http://www.ci.janesville.wi.us/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=573, Date accessed: October 5, 2012.City of Janesville, 2011a. City Ordinance Book. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | http://www.ci.janesville.wi.us/index.aspx?page=359, Date accessed: January 4, 2013City of Janesville, 2011b. Janesville Wisconsin's Park Plac e, Development Guide, City of Janesville, Wisconsin, Community Development, Draft April 6, 2011.City of Janesville, 2012a. Water Utility, Summary of Services, Website: http://www.ci.janesville.wi.us | ||
MHS, 2012b. Mercy Hospital and Trauma Center, Mercy Health System, Website: http://www.mercyhealthsystem.org/body.cfm?xyzpdqabc=0&id=10& | /index.aspx?page=115, Date accessed: December 21, 2012.City of Janesville, 2012b. Bus Transit, Website, http://www.ci.jane sville.wi.us/index.aspx?page=124, Date accessed: June 29, 2012.City of Janesville, 2012c. Janesville Transit System Map and Route Guide, http://www.ci.janesville.wi.us/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=854 | ||
NAIP, 2010a. USDA NAIP Imagery. Website: http://www.fsa.usda.gov/FSA/apfoapp?area=home&subject=prog&topic=nai, Date accessed: August 15, 2012.NAIP, 2010b. The National Map Seamless Server Viewer, U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agriculture Imagery Program. Website: http://seamless.usgs.gov/website/seamless/viewer.htm, Date accessed: April 6, 2012.NCDC, 1960. Storm Data, November 1960, Volume 2 No. 11, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. | , Date accessed: July 26, 2012. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-4Rev. 0City of Janesville, 2012d. Economic Development, Business Climate, Taxes, Website: http://www.ci.janesville.wi.us | ||
NCDC, 1971. Storm Data, November 1971, Volume 13 No. 11, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 1975. Storm Data, June 1975 Volume 17 No. 6, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 1980. Storm Data, June 1980, Volume 22 No. 6, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 1988. Storm Data, May 1988, Volume 30 No. 5, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 1991. Storm Data, March 1991, Volume 33 No. 3, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 1992. Storm Data, June 1992, Volume 34 No. 6, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. | /index.aspx?page=334 | ||
NCDC, 1996a. Daily Weather Maps, Weekly Series, July 15-21, 1996, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: October, 2011.NCDC, 1996b. International Station Meteorological Climate Summary, Ver 4.0, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/.NCDC, 1997. Storm Data, July 1996, Volume 38 No. 7, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 1998. Storm Data, June 1998, Volume 40 No. 6, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. | , Date accessed: June 29, 2012.City of Janesville, 2012e. Water Utility, Summary of Services, Website: http://www.ci.janesville.wi.us | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | /index.aspx?page=115, Date accessed: August 1, 2012.City of Janesville, 2012f. Park Locations and Amenities, Website: http://www.ci.janesville.wi.us | ||
NCDC, 2001b. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Arlington Univ Farm, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 2001c. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Baraboo, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. | /index.aspx?page=218, Date accessed: May 22, 2012.Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe, 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States, U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, FWS/OBS-79/31, December 1979.Del Greco, 2006. S. A. Del Greco and collaborators, Surface Data Integration at NOAA's National Climatic Data Center: Data Format, Processing, QC and Product Generation, 86th AMS Annual Meeting, 29 January - 2 February 2006, Atlanta, Georgia.Design Perspectives Inc, 2009. Rock County, WI 2009-2014 Parks, Outdoor Recreation & Open Space Plan, Website: http://www.co.rock.wi.us/images/web_documents/departments/parks/poros_rock_county_2009_final.pdf | ||
NCDC, 2001d. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Beaver Dam, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 2001e. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Beloit, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. | .DOR, 2011. The WI Corporate Income and Franchise Taxes, Wisconsin Department of Revenue, Division of Research and Policy, November 16, 2011, Website: http://www.revenue.wi.gov/ra/ | ||
NCDC, 2001f. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Brodhead, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 2001g. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Charmany Farm, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 2001h. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Dalton, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. | CorpIncFranchTax.pdf | ||
NCDC, 2001i. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, DeKalb, IL, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 2001j. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Fond du Lac, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. | , Date accessed: June 12, 2012.DOR, 2012. Tax Rates, Wisconsin Department of Revenue, Website: http://www.dor.state.wi.us/faqs/pcs/taxrates.html, Date accessed: July 7, 2012.DPI, 2012. 2011-2012 Public Enrollment by County by District by School by Gender, Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction, Website: http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/lbstat/pubdata2.html, Date accessed: June 4, 2012.DWD, 2012. Local Area Unemployment Statistics and Current Employment Statistics programs, Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development, Website: http://dwd.WI.gov/oea/employment_by_industry/#employment_by_industry, Date accessed: June11, 2012.EDS, 1968. Climatic Atlas of the United States, Environmental Data Service, U. S. Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington D. C., 1968.Ellefson, B.R., G.D. Mueller, and C.A. Buchwald, 2002. Water Use in Wisconsin in 2000. U.S.Geological Survey Open-File Report 02-356, prepared by the USGS in Cooperation with the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | Exelon, 2012. Byron Generating Station, Exelon Corporation, Website: http://www.exeloncorp.com/powerplant s/byron/Pages/profile.aspx, Date accessed: April 4, 2012.FAA, 1992. Non-Federal Navigational Aids and Air Traffic Control Facilities, Federal Aviation Administration Order 6700.20A, December 11, 1992. | ||
NCDC, 2001n. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Lake Geneva, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 2001o. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Lake Mills, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-5Rev. 0FAA, 2011. Automated Weather Observing Systems (AWOS) for Non-Federal Applications, Federal Aviation Administration Advisory Circular AC 150/5220-16D. April 28, 2011.FEMA, 2008. Flood Insurance Rate Map, Rock County, Wisconsin and Incorporated Areas, Map Number 55105C0316D, Federal Emergency Management Agency, August 19, 2008.Fenneman, Nevin Melancthon, 1946. Physical Divisions of the United States. Department of the Interior, Geological Survey.Find the Data, 2012. Unbiased, data-driven comparisons, Website: http://active-mines.findthedata.org/compare/2770-2771-2772-6438-6439-6440/Little-Limestone-Inc-vs-Custom-Ditching-Inc-vs-Frank-Bros-Inc-vs-Janesville-Sand-And-Gravel-Co-vs-Frank-Bros-Inc-vs-Paririe-Ave-Concrete-Inc, Date accessed: January 27, 2012.Flynn, Kathleen M., William H. Kirby, and Paul R. Hummel, 2006. User's Manual for Program PeakFQ, Annual Flood-Frequency Analysis Using Bulletin 17B Guidelines, Techniques and Methods 4-B4, U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey, Chapter 4 of Book4, Section B, Techniques and Methods 4-B4.Fry, J., Xian, G., Jin, S., Dewitz, J., Homer, C., Yang, L., Barnes, C., Herold, N., and Wickham, J., 2011. Completion of the 2006 National Land Cover Database for the Conterminous United States, PE&RS, Vol. 77(9):858-864. | ||
NCDC, 2001p. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Madison Dane Co AP, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 2001q. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Marengo, IL, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 2001r. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Oconomowoc, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 2001s. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Portage, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 2001t. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Prairie du Sac 2 N, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. | Google, 2012. Google Maps, Google, http://maps.google.com/, Date accessed: April 4, 2012.Higgins, J.J; G.E. Larson; and K.F. Higgins, 2001. Floristic Comparisons of Tallgrass Prairie Remnants Managed by Different Land Stewardships in Eastern South Dakota, Proceedings of the 17th North American Prairie Conference: 21-31, 2001, Proceedings of the 17 th North American Prairie Conference Website: http://images.library.wisc.edu/EcoNatRes/EFacs/NAPC/NAPC17/reference/econatres.napc17.jhiggins.pdf, Date accessed: August 15, 2012.Holzworth, G.C., 1972. "Mixing Heights, Wind Speeds, and Potential for Urban Air Pollution throughout the Contiguous United States", U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air Programs, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, January 1972. | ||
NCDC, 2001u. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Rockford, IL, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 2001v. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Stoughton, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. | Hormel, 2013. Hormel Foods Corporation, Locations, Website: http://www.hormelfoods.com/About/DivisionsLocations/Locations.aspx, Date accessed: February 14, 2013.Huff, Floyd A. and James R. Angel, 1992. Rainfall Frequency Atlas of the Midwest, Midwestern Climate Analysis Center, National Weather Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and Illinois State Water Survey, A Division of the Illinois Department of Energy and Natural Resources, Bulletin 71, MCC Research Report 92-03, Midwestern Climate Center and Illinois State Water Survey, Champaign, Illinois.Hughes, Denis A., Pauline Hannart and Deidre Watkins, 2003. Continuous Baseflow Separation from Time Series of Daily and Monthly Streamflow Data, Institute for Water Research, Rhodes University, Water SA Vol. 29 No. 1, January 30, 2003. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-6Rev. 0IAEA, 1987. Siting of Research Reactors, Internati onal Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Report IAEA-TECDOC-403, Vienna, Austria. 1987.IHPA, 2013. Historic Architectural Resource Geographic Information System, Illinois Historic Preservation Agency, Website: http://gis.hpa.state.il.us/hargis/, Date accessed: February 14, 2013.Janesville School District, 2012. Welcome to the School District of Janesville, Contact Us, School/Principal Contacts, Website, http://www.janesville.k12.wi.us/default.aspx | ||
NCDC, 2011d. 2010 Local Climatological Data, Annual Summary with Comparative Data, Springfield, Illinois (KSPI), National Climatic Data Center, Asheville North Carolina, 2011.NCDC, 2011e. Climatological Data Annual Summary Illinois 2010, Volume 115, Number 13, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/.NCDC, 2011f. Climatological Data Annual Summary Wisconsin 2010, Volume 115 Number 13, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/.NCDC, 2011g. NCDC Storm Event Database, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www4.ncdc.noaa.gov/cgi- | , Date accessed: July 26, 2012.Knopf, Chad and Kari Krause, 2012. A Phase I Archaeological Survey of the Proposed SHINE Medical Isotope Production Facility Near Janesville, Rock County, Wisconsin. AMEC, Louisville, Kentucky.Korshover, J., 1967. "Climatology of Stagnating Anticyclones East of the Rocky Mountains 1936-1965", U.S. Department of Health Education and Welfare Public Health Service (PHS), PHS Publication No. 999-AP-34, National Center for Air Pollution Control, Cincinnati, Ohio, 1967.LeRoux E.F., 1963. Geology and Ground-Water Resources of Rock County, Wisconsin, Geological Survey, Water-Supply Paper 1619-X, Prepared in cooperation with the Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey.MacFarlane Pheasants, Inc., 2012. MacFarlane Pheasants, Inc., Website: http://www.pheasant.com/Home/tabid/38/Default.aspx, Date accessed: June 22, 2012.MHS, 2012a. Mercy Clinic South, Mercy Health System, Website: | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | http://www.mercyhealthsystem.org/body.cfm?xyzpdqabc=0&id=10&acti on=detail&ref=42 | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | , Date accessed: April 4, 2012. | ||
MHS, 2012b. Mercy Hospital and Trauma Center, Mercy Health System, Website: | |||
http://www.mercyhealthsystem.org/body.cfm?xyzpdqabc=0&id=10&acti on=detail&ref=54 | |||
, Date accessed: April 4, 2012.Moran, J. M. and E. J. Hopkins, 2002. Wisconsin's Weather and Climate, The University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, Wisconsin, 2002. | |||
NAIP, 2010a. USDA NAIP Imagery. Website: http://www.fsa.usda.gov/FSA/apfoapp?area=home&subject=prog&topic=nai, Date accessed: August 15, 2012.NAIP, 2010b. The National Map Seamless Server Viewer, U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agriculture Imagery Program. Website: http://seamless.usgs.gov/website/seamless/viewer.htm, Date accessed: April 6, 2012. | |||
NCDC, 1960. Storm Data, November 1960, Volume 2 No. 11, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-7Rev. 0NCDC, 1961. Storm Data, September 1961, Volume 3 No. 9, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 1967a. Storm Data, April 1967, Volume 9 No. 4, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 1967b. Storm Data, August 1967, Volume 9 No. 8, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 1970. Storm Data, October 1970, Volume 12 No. 10, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 1971. Storm Data, November 1971, Volume 13 No. 11, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 1975. Storm Data, June 1975 Volume 17 No. 6, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 1980. Storm Data, June 1980, Volume 22 No. 6, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 1988. Storm Data, May 1988, Volume 30 No. 5, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 1991. Storm Data, March 1991, Volume 33 No. 3, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 1992. Storm Data, June 1992, Volume 34 No. 6, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 1996a. Daily Weather Maps, Weekly Series, July 15-21, 1996, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: October, 2011.NCDC, 1996b. International Station Meteorological Climate Summary, Ver 4.0, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
.NCDC, 1997. Storm Data, July 1996, Volume 38 No. 7, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 1998. Storm Data, June 1998, Volume 40 No. 6, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-8Rev. 0NCDC, 1999. Daily Weather Maps, Weekly Series, December 28 1998 - January 3, 1999, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2000. Storm Data, January 1999, Volume 41 No. 1, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 2001a. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Arboretum Univ Wis, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2001b. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Arlington Univ Farm, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2001c. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Baraboo, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2001d. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Beaver Dam, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2001e. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Beloit, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2001f. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Brodhead, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2001g. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Charmany Farm, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2001h. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Dalton, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2001i. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, DeKalb, IL, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 2001j. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Fond du Lac, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-9Rev. 0NCDC, 2001k. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Fort Atkinson, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2001l. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Hartford 2 W, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2001m. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Horicon, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2001n. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Lake Geneva, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2001o. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Lake Mills, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2001p. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Madison Dane Co AP, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2001q. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Marengo, IL, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2001r. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Oconomowoc, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2001s. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Portage, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2001t. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Prairie du Sac 2 N, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2001u. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Rockford, IL, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2001v. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Stoughton, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-10Rev. 0NCDC, 2001w. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Watertown, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2001x. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Wisconsin Dells, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 2002. Climate Atlas of the United States, Version 2.0 CD, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
.NCDC, 2005a. Data Documentation for Data Set 3280 (DSI-3280) Surface Airways Hourly, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, May 4, 2005. | |||
NCDC, 2005b. Storm Data, August 2005, Volume 47 No. 8, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 2006. Federal Climate Complex Data Documentation for Integrated Surface Data, National Climatic Data Center Air Force Combat Climatology Center Fleet Numerical Meteorology and Oceanography Detachment, Asheville, North Carolina, August 25, 2006. | |||
NCDC, 2008. Storm Data, January 2008 Volume 50 No. 1, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 2011a. 2010 Local Climatological Data, Annual Summary with Comparative Data, Madison, Wisconsin (KMSN), National Climatic Data Center, Asheville North Carolina, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2011b. 2010 Local Climatological Data, Annual Summary with Comparative Data, Moline, Illinois (KMLI), National Climatic Data Center, Asheville North Carolina, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2011c. 2010 Local Climatological Data, Annual Summary with Comparative Data, Rockford, Illinois (KRFD), National Climatic Data Center, Asheville North Carolina, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2011d. 2010 Local Climatological Data, Annual Summary with Comparative Data, Springfield, Illinois (KSPI), National Climatic Data Center, Asheville North Carolina, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2011e. Climatological Data Annual Summary Illinois 2010, Volume 115, Number 13, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
.NCDC, 2011f. Climatological Data Annual Summary Wisconsin 2010, Volume 115 Number 13, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
.NCDC, 2011g. | |||
NCDC Storm Event Database, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www4.ncdc.noaa.gov/cgi-wi n/wwcgi.dll?wwEvent~Storms | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-11Rev. 0NCDC, 2011h. TD3280 - Airways Surface Observations, Surface weather observations in TD 3280 digital format from 1948-2009, for NWS-Madison, WI. National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), data purchased from NCDC, Asheville, NC. | |||
NCDC, 2011i. TD 3280 - Airways Surface Observations, Surface weather observations in TD 3280 digital format from 1973-2009, for NWS-Rockford, IL. National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), data purchased from NCDC, Asheville, NC. | |||
NCDC, 2011j. TD3505 - Airways Surface Observations, Surface weather observations in TD 3505 digital format from 2005-2010, for NWS-Madison, WI. National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), data purchased from NCDC, Asheville, NC. | |||
NCDC, 2011k. TD3505 - Airways Surface Observations, Surface weather observations in TD 3505 digital format from 2005-2010, for NWS-Rockford, IL. National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), data purchased from NCDC, Asheville, NC. | |||
NCDC, 2011l. TD3505 - Airways Surface Observations, Surface weather observations in TD 3505 digital format from 2005-2010, for Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, Janesville, WI. National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), data purchased from NCDC, Asheville, NC. | |||
NCDC, 2011m. TD3505 - archive data server. Accessed from: ftp://ftp3.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/noaa/. National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), | |||
data purchased from NCDC, Asheville, NC, Date accessed: December, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2012a. Data file "anem_elev_inf" referenced in "Data Documentation for Data Set 6421 (DSI-6421) Enhanced hourly wind station data for the contiguous United States" National Climatic Data Center, Asheville North Carolina. Website: | |||
http://www.wcc.nrcs.usda.gov/ftpref/support/climate/wind_daily/td6421.pdf | |||
. NCDC, 2012b. Data file "ISH-HISTORY.TXT" Integrated Surface Database Station History, June 2012. National Climatic Data Center, Asheville North Carolina. Website: ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/inventories/ISH-HISTORY.TXT. Date accessed: July, 2012.NLSI, 2011. Vaisala 5-Year Flash Density Map - U. S. (1996-2000), National Lightning Safety Institute (NLSI), Website: http://www.lightningsafety.com/nlsi_info/lightningmaps/US_FD_Lightning.pdf, Date accessed: December, 2011.NOAA, 1999. Air Stagnation Climatology for the United States (1948-1998), Julian X.L. Wang and J.K. Angell. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Air Resources Laboratory, Environmental Research Laboratories, Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research Silver Spring, MD 20910, April 1999.NOAA, 2012. Summary of Monthly Normals, 1981-2010, Afton, Wisconsin.NPS, 2011. Class I Area Locations, National Park Service, U.S. Department of Interior (NPS). Available from: http://www.nature.nps.gov/air/Maps/classILoc.cfm, Date accessed: December, 2011.NRC, 2012a. Sources of Radiation, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Website: http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/radiat ion/around-us/sources.html, Date accessed: April 4, 2012. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-12Rev. 0NRC, 2012b. Natural Background Sources, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Website: http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/radiation/around-us/sources/nat-bg-sources.html, Date accessed: April 4, 2012.NRC, 2012c. Man-Made Sources, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Website: http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/radiation/around-us/sources/man-made-sources.html, Date accessed: April 4, 2012.Olcott, Perry G., 1968. A Summary of Geology and Mineral and Water Resources of Rock County, Open-File Report 68-4. University of Wisconsin-Extension, Geological and Natural History Survey, Madison, Wisconsin.Olcott, Perry G., 1992. Groundwater Atlas of the United States Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin. HA 730-J, United States Geologic Survey. | |||
Omernik, J.M, S.S. Chapman, R.A. Lillie, and R.T. Dumke, 2008. Ecoregions of Wisconsin. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. May 2008. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/org/water/swims/datasets/omernik_eco/index.htm, Dated accessed: July 24, 2012.Rand McNally, 1982. Goode's World Atlas, 16th edition, Rand McNally & Company, Skokie, Illinois, 1982. | Omernik, J.M, S.S. Chapman, R.A. Lillie, and R.T. Dumke, 2008. Ecoregions of Wisconsin. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. May 2008. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/org/water/swims/datasets/omernik_eco/index.htm, Dated accessed: July 24, 2012.Rand McNally, 1982. Goode's World Atlas, 16th edition, Rand McNally & Company, Skokie, Illinois, 1982. | ||
Rand McNally, 2005. Goode's World Atlas, 21st edition, Rand McNally & Company, Skokie, Illinois, 2005. | Rand McNally, 2005. Goode's World Atlas, 21st edition | ||
Robertson, Ken, 2008. The Tallgrass Prairie in Illinois, Illinois Natural History Survey. Website: http://www.inhs.uiuc.edu/~kenr/tallgrass.html, Date accessed: August 6, 2012.Rock County, 2005. Rock County Floodplain Zoning, Chapter 32 of the Code of Ordinances, Adopted July 14, 2005, Resolution 05-6B-248, Amended June 26, 2008, Resolution 08-6A-024, and Amended August 28, 2008, Resolution 08-8A-060.Rock County, 2009. Rock County Comprehensive Plan 2035, Rock County, WI, http://www.co.rock.wi.us/images/ | , Rand McNally & Company, Skokie, Illinois, 2005. | ||
Rock County, 2012a. County Facts, Rock County, Wisconsin Website: http://www.co.rock.wi.us, Date accessed: January, 2012. | Robertson, Ken, 2008. The Tallgrass Prairie in Illinois, Illinois Natural History Survey. Website: http://www.inhs.uiuc.edu/~kenr/tallgrass.html, Date accessed: August 6, 2012.Rock County, 2005. Rock County Floodplain Zoning, Chapter 32 of the Code of Ordinances, Adopted July 14, 2005, Resolution 05-6B-248, Amended June 26, 2008, Resolution 08-6A-024, and Amended August 28, 2008, Resolution 08-8A-060.Rock County, 2009. Rock County Comprehensive Plan 2035, Rock County, WI, http://www.co.rock.wi.us/images/w eb_documents/departments/pl anning_developm ent/plans/comprehensive_plan_2035/2035_final_II_1_issues_opportunities.pdf | ||
Rock County, 2012b. Magnolia Bluff State Natural Area, Rock County, Wisconsin Website: http://www.co.rock.wi.us/, Date accessed: January, 2012.Rock County, 2012c. Rock County Parks-Happy Hollow Park. State of Wisconsin, Rock County, Website: http://www.co.rock.wi.us/images/web_documents/departments/parks/park_happy_hollow/happy_hollow_brochure.pdf, Date accessed: August 13, 2012 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | .Rock County, 2011. Rock County GIS Website. Website: http://199.233.45.152/Rock/, Date accessed: August 15, 2012. | ||
SSURGO, 2010. Soil Survey Staff, NRCS,USDA, | Rock County, 2012a. County Facts, Rock County, Wisconsin Website: http://www.co.rock.wi.us | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | , Date accessed: January, 2012. | ||
Rock County, 2012b. Magnolia Bluff State Natural Area, Rock County, Wisconsin Website: http://www.co.rock.wi.us/, Date accessed: January, 2012.Rock County, 2012c. Rock County Parks-Happy Hollow Park. State of Wisconsin, Rock County, Website: http://www.co.rock.wi.us/images/web_documents/departments/parks/park_happy_hollow/happy_hollow_brochure.pdf, Date accessed: August 13, 2012 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-13Rev. 0Rock County Development Alliance, 2011. Rock County Bond Rating Data, Website: http://www.rockcountyalliance.com/Portals/1/Aug%202011%20Bond%20Rating%20ED%20Report.pdf | |||
, Date accessed: March 1, 2012.Rock County Planning, Economic & Community Development Agency, 2009 | |||
. Rock County Comprehensive Plan 2035, Map 3.2, Website: http://www.co.rock.wi.us/images/web_documents/departments/planning_development/plans/comprehensive_plan_2035/2035_final_table_of_contents.pdf, Adopted September 9, 2009.Sloto, Ronald A. and Michele Y. Crouse, 1996. HYSEP: A Computer Program for Streamflow Hydrograph Separation and Analysis, U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 96-4040.Smith, Daryl D., 1990. Tallgrass Prairie Settlement: Prelude to Demise of the Tallgrass Ecosystem, Proceedings of the 12th North American Prairie Conference: 195-200, 1990, Proceedings of the 12th North American Prairie Conference, Website: http://images.library.wisc.edu/EcoNatRes/EFacs/NAPC/NAPC12/reference/econatres.napc12.dsmith.pdf, Date accessed: August 15, 2012.Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, 2004. Noise Contour Map, Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, Land Use Drawing, prepared by Mead & Hunt. Latest revision date, August, 2004. Date accessed: July 3, 2012.Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, 2012a. Airport, Facilities and Facts, Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, Website: | |||
http://www.jvlairport.com/Air port/FacilitiesFacts.aspx | |||
, Date accessed: April 2, 2012.Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, 2012b. Airport Facilities and Facts, Website: http://www.jvlairport.com/Airport/FacilitiesFacts.aspx, Date accessed: July 12, 2012.Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, 2012c. General Aviation Terminal Project Advances, Website: http://www.jvlairport.com/NewsUpdates/CapitalImprovementPlans.aspx, Date accessed: July 20, 2012. | |||
SSURGO, 2010. Soil Survey Staff, NRCS,USDA, SSUR GO Database for Rock County, WI. Website: http://soildatamart.nrcs.usda.gov, Date accessed: August 15, 2012.Stern, A.C., 1973. "Fundamentals of Air Pollution", Academic Press, New York, New York, 1973.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.SWWDB, 2009. Rock County Profile, Website: http://www.swwdb.org/PDFs/Region/Rock%20County%20Profile%20-%20Revised%2011-23-09.pdf, Date accessed: June 7, 2012. | |||
TBEES, 2011. Byron Nuclear Generating Station Units 1 and 2: Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report, 1 January Through 31 December 2010, ADAMS Database Accession Number ML11137A061, Exelon Nuclear, May 13, 2011. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-14Rev. 0Trewartha, G. T., 1954. An Introduction to Climate, McGraw Hill Book Company, New York, New York, 1954.Trewartha, G. T., 1961. The Earth's Problem Climates, The University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, Wisconsin, 1961. | |||
Turner, D.B, 1964. A Diffusion Model for an Urban Area, Journal of Applied Meteorology, Vol. 3, pp 83-91. February, 1964. | Turner, D.B, 1964. A Diffusion Model for an Urban Area, Journal of Applied Meteorology, Vol. 3, pp 83-91. February, 1964. | ||
USACE, 2009. Interim Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Northcentral and Northeast Region, ERDC/EL TR-09-19, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, October 2009.USCB, 2000a. Summary File 1, American FactFinder, U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, Website: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml. Date accessed: June 7, 2012.USCB, 2000b. Summary File 3, American FactFinder, U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S.Census Bureau, Website: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml, Date accessed: June 7, 2012.USCB, 2008-2010. Three Year American Community Survey (ACS), American Factfinder, U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, Website: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml, Date accessed: June14, 2012.USCB, 2010a. 2010 Census TIGER/Line Shapefiles. U.S. Census Bureau, Geography Division, Geographic Productions Branch, Website: http://www.census.gov/geo/www/tiger/tgrshp2010/tgrshp2010.html, Date accessed: August 15, 2012.USCB, 2010b. 2010 Census TIGER/Line Shapefiles, United States Census Bureau, Geography Division, Geographic Productions Branch, Website: http://www.census.gov/geo/www/tiger/tgrshp2010/tgrshp2010.html Date Accessed: August 15, 2012.USCB, 2010c. Demographic Profile 1, American Factfinder http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml, Date accessed: April 25, 2012.USCB, 2010d. Summary File 1, American FactFinder, U.S. Department of Commerce, US Census Bureau, Website: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml, Date accessed: June 7, 2012.USCB, 2011. County and City Data Book: 2007, Website: http://www.census.gov/prod/www/abs/ccdb07.html, Date accessed: November, 2011.USCB, 2012. Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) System web page: http://www.census.gov/epcd/ec97brdg/E97B1325.HTM, Date accessed: December 20, 2012.USDA NRCS, 2012a. SSURGO Database for Rock County, WI, Soil Data Mart. Website: http://soildatamart.nrcs.usda.gov, Date accessed: August 15, 2012. | USACE, 2009. Interim Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Northcentral and Northeast Region, ERDC/EL TR-09-19, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, October 2009.USCB, 2000a. Summary File 1, American FactFinder, U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, Website: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | . Date accessed: June 7, 2012.USCB, 2000b. Summary File 3, American FactFinder, U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S.Census Bureau, Website: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml, Date accessed: June 7, 2012.USCB, 2008-2010. Three Year American Community Survey (ACS), American Factfinder, U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, Website: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml, Date accessed: June14, 2012.USCB, 2010a. 2010 Census TIGER/Line Shapefiles. U.S. Census Bureau, Geography Division, Geographic Productions Branch, Website: http://www.census.gov/geo/www/tiger/tgrshp2010/tgrshp2010.html, Date accessed: August 15, 2012.USCB, 2010b. 2010 Census TIGER/Line Shapefiles, United States Census Bureau, Geography Division, Geographic Productions Branch, Website: http://www.census.gov/geo/www/tiger/tgrshp2010/tgrshp2010.html Date Accessed: August 15, 2012.USCB, 2010c. Demographic Profile 1, American Factfinder http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml, Date accessed: April 25, 2012.USCB, 2010d. Summary File 1, American FactFinder, U.S. Department of Commerce, US Census Bureau, Website: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml | ||
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, 1999. PCRAMMET.FOR," FORTRAN program, version 99169. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Technology Transfer Networks Support Center for Regulatory Atmospheric Modeling. Computer code available from: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/metobsdata_procaccprogs.htm, June, 1999.USEPA. 2008. Clean Watersheds Needs Survey, 2008 Data and Reports, Detailed listing of Wastewater Treatment Plant Flows for State of Wisconsin, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Website: http://water.epa.gov/scitech/datait/databases/cwns/2008reportdata.cfm, Date accessed: July 19, 2012.USEPA, 2009. Environmental Radiation Data, Report 139, July - September 2009, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Radiation and Indoor Air. | , Date accessed: June 7, 2012.USCB, 2011. County and City Data Book: 2007, Website: | ||
USEPA, 2011. Non-Attainment Status for Each County by year in Wisconsin as of August 30, 2011. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), Website: http://www.epa.gov/oaqps001/greenbk/anay_wi.html, Date accessed: December, 2011. | http://www.census.gov/prod/www/abs/ccdb07.html, Date accessed: November, 2011.USCB, 2012. Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) System web page: http://www.census.gov/epcd/ec97brdg/E97B1325.HTM, Date accessed: December 20, 2012. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | USDA NRCS, 2012a. SSURGO Database for Rock County, WI, Soil Data Mart. Website: http://soildatamart.nrcs.usda.gov, Date accessed: August 15, 2012. | ||
USEPA, 2012c. Designated Sole Source | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-15Rev. 0USDA NRCS, 2012b. Web Soil Survey. Website: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/HomePage.htm, Date accessed: August 13, 2012USDA, 1998. Rural Utilities Service Summary of Items of Engineering Interest, U. S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), August, 1998.USDA, 2011. Census of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Website: http://www.nass.usda.gov/Dataandstatistics/index.asp. Date accessed: June 24, 2012.USDA-SCS, 1974. Soil Survey of Rock County, Wisconsin. In cooperation with University of Wisconsin Department of Soil Science, Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey and the Wisconsin Agricultural Experiment Station, July 1974. | ||
USEPA, 2012d. Ecoregion Maps and GIS Resources, USEPA Western Ecology Division, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Website: http://www.epa.gov/wed/pages/ecoregions.htm, Date accessed: July 24, 2012.USEPA, 2012e. EnviroMapper for Envirofacts, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Website: http://www.epa.gov/emefdata/em4ef.html?ve=11,42.70109176635742,-89.08168029785156&pText=Janesville,%20WIUSFWS, 2012. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Resource Review and Input Response Letter from Peter J. Fasbender dated January 25, 2012.USGS, 1980. Rockford, Illinois; Wisconsin (Eastern U. S.) 1:250,000 Series (Topographic) Map, U. S. Geological Survey (USGS), Reston, Virginia 1980.USGS, 1981. U.S. Geological Survey Janesville quadrangle,Wisconsin [map].1:24,000. 7.5 Minute Series.Washington D.C.: USGS, 1981. | USDOC, 1978. Probable Maximum Precipitation Estimates, United States East of the 105th Meridian, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of the Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Department of Commerce (USDOC), Hydrometeorological Report No. 51. Washington, D.C. 1978. | ||
USGS, 2007. Protecting Wisconsin's Groundwater Through Comprehensive Planning, Rock County, U.S. Geological Survey, Website: http://wi.water.usgs.gov/gwcomp/find/rock/index_full.html, Date accessed: July 19,2012.USGS, 2012a. Volcano Environments, U.S. Geological Survey, Website: http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/volc/environments.html, Date accessed: September 11, 2012.USGS, 2012b. National Water Information System: Web Interface: http://waterdata.usgs.gov/wi/nwis/sw, Date accessed: August 13, 2012.USGS, 2012c. Protecting Wisconsin's Groundwater Through Comprehensive Planning, Website: (http://wi.water.usgs.gov/gwcomp/find/rock/index_full.html), Date accessed: December 21, 2012.USGS, 2012d. North American Breeding Bird Survey-Route 91320 (Beloit), 1966-2007. United States Geological Survey, Website: http://www.mgr-pwrc.usgs.gov/cgi-bin.rtena226.pl?91320, Date accessed: February 2, 2012.UWNR, 2011a. University of Wisconsin - Issuance of Renewed Facility License No. R-74 for the University of Wisconsin Nuclear Reactor (TAC. No. ME1585), ADAMS Database Accession Number ML102370104, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, March 25, 2011. | USDOI-BIA, 2012. Agency Letter: Map of All Ho-Chunk Trust Lands within a 50-Mile Radius of the Proposed SHINE Isotope Facility of Janesville WI, U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Great Lakes Agency, March 2012. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | USDOI-BLM, 1984. Visual Resource Inventory Manual H-8410-1, U.S. Department of Land Management, Bureau of Land Management, January 1986. | ||
Walker, J.F. and W.R. Krug, 2003. Flood-Frequency Characteristics of Wisconsin Streams, Water-Resources Investigations Report 03-4250. U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Wisconsin Department of Transportation.WBBA, 2012. Wisconsin Breeding Bird Atlas, Breeding Birds from the Janesville East Quad and the Janesville West Quad, 1995-2000. University of Wisconsin-Green Bay, Website: http://www.uwgb.edu/birds/wbba/quadlist.asp, Date accessed: February 2, 2012.WDNR, 2009. State Wildlife Areas, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | 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, 1999. PCRAMMET.FOR," FORTRAN program, version 99169. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Technology Transfer Networks Support Center for Regulatory Atmospheric Modeling. Computer code available from: | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | http://www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/metobsdata_procaccprogs.htm, June, 1999. | ||
California Energy Commission, 2009. Orange Grove Energy, L.P., Orange Grove Project, Application for Certification (08-AFC-4), San Diego County, Volume 3, Appendix 6.12 B, April 2009.Chepesiuk, Ron, 2009. Missing the Dark, Health Effects of Light Pollution, Environmental Health Perspectives, Volume 117, Number 1, January 2009.City of Janesville, 2012a. Tax Increment Finance District No. 35 Project Plan, Adopted August 22, 2011, Amendment No. 1, February 13, 2012.City of Janesville, 2012b. Tax Increment Finance District No. 35 Project Plan. Amendment No. 1, Website: | USEPA. 2008. Clean Watersheds Needs Survey, 2008 Data and Reports, Detailed listing of Wastewater Treatment Plant Flows for State of Wisconsin, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Website: http://water.epa.gov/scitech/datait/databases/cwns/2008reportdata.cfm, Date accessed: July 19, 2012. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies19.7-20Rev. 1CEQ, 1997. Considering Cumulative Effects Under the National Environmental Policy Act, Council on Environmental Quality, Executive Office of the President.DOE, 2012. Environmental Assessment for Northstar Medical Technologies LLC Commercial Domestic Production of the Medical Isotope Molybdenum-99 (DOE/EA-1929), U.S. Department of Energy, Website: http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/EA-1929-FEA-2012.pdf, Date accessed: October 9, 2012. | USEPA, 2009. Environmental Radiation Data, Report 139, July - September 2009, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Radiation and Indoor Air. | ||
DOR, 2012. County and Municipal Revenues and Expenditures 2010, Bulletin No. 110, January 2012, Website: http://www.revenue.wi.gov/slf/cotvc/cmreb10.pdf, Date accessed: August 19, 2012.DPI, 2012a. 2011-2012 Staff to Students Ratio, Website: http://data.dpi.state.wi.us/data/StaffPage.aspx?OrgLevel=st&GraphFile=BlankPageUrl&, Date accessed: October 22, 2012.DPI, 2012b. 2011-2012 Public Enrollment by County by District by School by Gender, Website: http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/lbstat/pubdata2.html, Date accessed: June 4, 2012.Fry, J., Xian, G., Jin, S., Dewitz, J., Homer, C., Yang, L., Barnes, C., Herold, N., and Wickham, J., 2011. National Land Cover Database 2006, Land Cover Change 2001/2006, National Land Cover Database for the Conterminous United States, PE&RS, Volume 77(9):858-864, September 2011.Hastings, 2011. Hastings HVAC Bulletin No. IRHS-1. | |||
NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, 2012. NorthStar Medical Technologies, Hendricks Commercial Properties Sign Agreement for Beloit Facility Development, Website: http://www.northstarnm.com/index.php?module=cms&page=31, Date accessed: October 9, 2012.NRC, 1977. Methods for Estimating Atmospheric Transport and Dispersion of Gaseous Effluents in Routine Releases from Light-Water-Cooled Reactors, Regulatory Guide 1.111, Revision 1, U.S.Nuclear Regulatory Commission, July 1977. | USEPA, 2011. Non-Attainment Status for Each County by year in Wisconsin as of August 30, 2011. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), Website: | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies19.7-21Rev. 1NRC, 2004. Policy Statement on the Treatment of Environmental Justice Matters in NRC Regulatory and Licensing Actions (69 FR 52040), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, August 24, 2004.NRC, 2009. Office Instruction No. LIC 203, Revision 2, Procedural Guidance for Preparing Environmental Assessments and Considering | http://www.epa.gov/oaqps001/greenbk/anay_wi.html, Date accessed: December, 2011. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-16Rev. 0USEPA, 2012a. Level III and IV Ecoregions of the Wisconsin U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Western Ecology Division, Level III and IV Ecoregions of the Continental United States, Website: http://www.epa.gov/wed/pages/ecoregions/level_iii_iv.htm, Date accessed: March 7, 2012.USEPA, 2012b. | ||
http://cfpub.epa.gov/surf/huc.cfm?huc_code=07090001. Date accessed: August 13, 2012. | |||
USEPA, 2012c. Designated Sole Source Aqui fers in EPA Region V, Website: | |||
(http://www.epa.gov/safewater/sourcewater/pubs/qrg_ssamap_reg5.pdf), Date accessed: October 5, 2012. | |||
USEPA, 2012d. Ecoregion Maps and GIS Resources, USEPA Western Ecology Division, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Website: http://www.epa.gov/wed/pages/ | |||
ecoregions.htm, Date accessed: July 24, 2012. | |||
USEPA, 2012e. EnviroMapper for Envirofacts, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Website: http://www.epa.gov/emefdata/em4ef.html?ve=11,42.70109176635742,-89.08168029785156&pText=Janesville,%20WIUSFWS, 2012. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Resource Review and Input Response Letter from Peter J. Fasbender dated January 25, 2012.USGS, 1980. Rockford, Illinois; Wisconsin (Eastern U. S.) 1:250,000 Series (Topographic) Map, U. S. Geological Survey (USGS), Reston, Virginia 1980.USGS, 1981. | |||
U.S. Geological Survey Janesville quadrangle,Wisconsin [map].1:24,000. 7.5 Minute Series.Washington D.C.: USGS, 1981. | |||
USGS, 2007. Protecting Wisconsin's Groundwater Through Comprehensive Planning, Rock County, U.S. Geological Survey, Website: http://wi.water.usgs.gov/gwcomp/find/rock/ | |||
index_full.html, Date accessed: July 19,2012.USGS, 2012a. Volcano Environments, U.S. Geological Survey, Website: http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/volc/environments.html, Date accessed: September 11, 2012.USGS, 2012b. National Water Information System: Web Interface: http://waterdata.usgs.gov/wi/ | |||
nwis/sw, Date accessed: August 13, 2012.USGS, 2012c. Protecting Wisconsin's Groundwater Through Comprehensive Planning, Website: | |||
(http://wi.water.usgs.gov/gwcomp/find/rock/index_full.html), Date accessed: December 21, 2012.USGS, 2012d. North American Breeding Bird Survey-Route 91320 (Beloit), 1966-2007. United States Geological Survey, Website: | |||
http://www.mgr-pwrc.usgs.gov | |||
/cgi-bin.rtena226.pl?91320 | |||
, Date accessed: February 2, 2012.UWNR, 2011a. University of Wisconsin - Issuance of Renewed Facility License No. R-74 for the University of Wisconsin Nuclear Reactor (TAC. No. ME1585), ADAMS Database Accession Number ML102370104, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, March 25, 2011. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-17Rev. 0UWNR, 2011b. University of Wisconsin - Madison Nuclear Reactor Laboratory Ltr. Enclosing Copy of 2010-2011 Annual Report as Required by Technical Specification 6.7.1 (1), ADAMS Database Accession Number ML11216A303, University of Wisconsin Nuclear Reactor, August 1, 2011.Vandewalle & Associates, 2006. City of Beloit 2006-2010 Parks and Open Space Plan, Adopted: November 20, 2006. Website: http://www.ci.beloit.wi.us/vertical/sites/%7B4AECD64A-01FA-4C24-8F53-D3281732C6AB%7D/uploads/%7B6900F9BC-BC53-49B3-99F4-B0C1670991FA%7D.PDF, Date accessed: July 26, 2012.Vandewalle & Associates, 2009a. City of Janesville Comprehensive Plan, Volume 1: Existing Conditions Report | |||
, Adopted on March 9, 2009, Website: http://www.ci.janesvi lle.wi.us/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=1449, Date accessed: July 26, 2012.Vandewalle & Associates, 2009b. City of Janesville Comprehensive Plan, Volume 2: Policies and Recommendations, 2009, March 2009. | |||
Walker, J.F. and W.R. Krug, 2003. Flood-Frequency Characteristics of Wisconsin Streams, Water-Resources Investigations Report 03-4250. U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Wisconsin Department of Transportation. | |||
WBBA, 2012. Wisconsin Breeding Bird Atlas, Breeding Birds from the Janesville East Quad and the Janesville West Quad, 1995-2000. University of Wisconsin-Green Bay, Website: http://www.uwgb.edu/birds/wbba/quadlist.asp, Date accessed: February 2, 2012. | |||
WDNR, 2009. State Wildlife Areas, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: | |||
http://dnr.wi.gov/org/land/wildlife/wildlife_areas/ | |||
, Date accessed: June 14, 2012. | |||
WDNR, 2010a. DNR Managed Lands web mapping application. Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/Lands/DMLmap/, Date accessed: August 15, 2012. | |||
WDNR, 2010b. Regulated Terrestrial Invasive Plants in WI, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, DNR PUB-FR-464-2010, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/files/pdf/pubs/fr/FR0464.pdf, Date accessed: August 6, 2012. | |||
WDNR, 2011a. Air Monitoring Network Plan 2012, June 2011. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR), Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/air/pdf/2012_Network_Plan_FINAL.pdf | |||
, Date accessed: December, 2012 | |||
.WDNR, 2011b. Water Use Registration and Reporting, June 2011, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: | |||
http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/WaterUse/documents/RegReportFactSheet.pdf, Date accessed: February 14, 2013. | |||
WDNR, 2012a. Ozone Non Attainment Areas, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR), Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/air/aq/ozone/nonattainment.htm#2007request, Date accessed: January, 2012. | |||
WDNR, 2012b. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Wisconsin Lakes web page - maps and inventory, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/lakes/, Date accessed: August 15, 2012. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-18Rev. 0WDNR, 2012c. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Endangered Resources Review (ERR#12-020), Proposed SHINE Medial Technologies Industrial Development, Town of Janesville, Rock County, WI. | |||
WDNR, 2012d. Rock River Prairie State Natural Area, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/org/land/er/sna/index.asp?SNA=289, Date accessed: August13, 2012 WDNR, 2012e. WDNR Fish Mapping Application. Search Criteria: >1980, Rock River, Rock County. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: http://infotrek.er.usgs.gov/ | |||
fishmap, Date accessed: July 11, 2012. | |||
WDNR, 2012f. Wisconsin Wildlife Primer: Reptiles and Amphibians. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/org/land/wildlife/PUBL/wildlifeprimam.pdf, Date accessed: August 15, 2012. | |||
WDNR, 2012g. Blanding's Turtle (Emydoidea blandingii). Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/EndangeredResources/Animals.asp?mode=detail&SpecCode=ARAAD04010. Date accessed: August 14, 2012. | |||
WDNR, 2012h. Invasives Rule - NR 40, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/invasives/classification.html, Date accessed: August 6, 2012.WHS, 2012a. Response to AMEC GIS Data Information Request for Properties within 10-mile Radius of SHINE Site, Wisconsin Historical Society.WHS, 2012b, Request for SHPO Comment and Consultation on a Federal Undertaking, Wisconsin Historical Society February 16, 2012.WHS, 2013. Wisconsin National Register of Historic Properties, Wisconsin Historical Society, Website: http://www.wisconsinhistory.org/hp/register/, Date accessed: February 13, 2013.Will-Wolf, S, and T.C. Montague, 1994. Landscape and Environmental Constraints on the Distribution of Presettlement Savannas and Prairies in Southern Wisconsin, Proceedings, North American Conference on Savannas and Barrens. Website: http://www.epa.gov/ecopage/upland/oak/oak94/Proceedings/Will-wolf.html, Date accessed: August 6, 2012.Wisconsin Department of Health Services, 2010. Rock County Environmental Health Profile, 2010, Website: http://www.dhs.wisconsin.gov/epht/CHP/Rock_profile.pdf | |||
.Wisconsin Department of Health Services, 2012. Rock County Environmental Health Profile, Website: http://www.dhs.wisconsin.gov/epht/CHP/Rock_profile.pdf, October 2010.Wisconsin Geological Survey, 2011. Educational Series 51, Available at: | |||
http://wisconsingeologicalsurvey.org/pdfs/espdf/ES51.pdf, Date accessed: November 8, 2012Wisconsin State Climatology Office, 2006. Monthly Historical State Climate Summaries, South Central Wisconsin Divisional Average Precipitation (inches), Website: | |||
http://www.aos.wisc.edu/~sco/clim-history/division/4708-R.html, Date accessed: August 15, 2012. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-19Rev. 0WisDOT, 2010. 2010, Lower Half, City of Janesville, Rock County, Daily Traffic Volume Map, Wisconsin Department of Transportation, Website: | |||
http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/travel/counts/docs/rock/janesville-2-2010.pdf | |||
, Date accessed: March 1, 2012.Woods, A.J., J.M. Omernik, C.L. Pederson, and B.C. Moran. 2006. Level III and IV Ecoregions of Illinois, September 2006.Zaporozec, Alexander, 1982. Ground-Water Quality of Rock County, Wisconsin, Information Circular Number 41, Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey in cooperation with Rock County Division Of Environmental Health, March 1982.19.7.4IMPACTS OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION, OPERATIONS, AND DECOMMISSIONINGAirNav, 2013. Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, Website: http://www.airnav.com/airport/KJVL, Date accessed: January 16, 2013.Beloit Daily News, 2011. High-tech firm picks Beloit for $194 million development, Website: http://www.beloitdailynews.com/news/top_news/high-tech-firm-picks-beloit-for-million-d/, Date accessed: August 21, 2012.BLS, 2009. May 2009 Metropolitan and Nonmetropolitan Area Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Website: http://www.bls.gov/oes/2009/may/oes_27500.html, Date accessed: July 19, 2012.BLS, 2011. May 2009 Metropolitan and Nonmetropolitan Area Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Website: http://stat.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_27500.html, Date accessed: June 10, 2012.Bureau of Indian Affairs, 2012. Indian Reservations in the Continental United States, Website: | |||
http://www.nps.gov/nagpra/DOCUMENTS/RESERV.PDF, Date accessed: August 30, 2012. | |||
California Energy Commission, 2009. Orange Grove Energy, L.P., Orange Grove Project, Application for Certification (08-AFC-4), San Diego County, Volume 3, Appendix 6.12 B, April 2009.Chepesiuk, Ron, 2009. Missing the Dark, Health Effects of Light Pollution, Environmental Health Perspectives, Volume 117, Number 1, January 2009.City of Janesville, 2012a. Tax Increment Finance District No. 35 Project Plan, Adopted August 22, 2011, Amendment No. 1, February 13, 2012.City of Janesville, 2012b. Tax Increment Finance District No. 35 Project Plan. Amendment No. 1, Website: | |||
http://www.ci.janesville.wi.us/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=1463, Date accessed: October 9, 2012. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies19.7-20Rev. 1CEQ, 1997. Considering Cumulative Effects Under the National Environmental Policy Act, Council on Environmental Quality, Executive Office of the President.DOE, 2012. Environmental Assessment for Northstar Medical Technologies LLC Commercial Domestic Production of the Medical Isotope Molybdenum-99 (DOE/EA-1929), U.S. Department of Energy, Website: http://energy.gov/sites/prod | |||
/files/EA-1929-FEA-2012.pdf | |||
, Date accessed: October 9, 2012. | |||
DOR, 2012. County and Municipal Revenues and Expenditures 2010, Bulletin No. 110, January 2012, Website: http://www.revenue.wi.gov/ | |||
slf/cotvc/cmreb10.pdf, Date accessed: August 19, 2012.DPI, 2012a. 2011-2012 Staff to Students Ratio, Website: http://data.dpi.state.wi.us/data/StaffPage.aspx?OrgLevel=st&GraphFile=BlankPageUrl&, Date accessed: October 22, 2012.DPI, 2012b. 2011-2012 Public Enrollment by County by District by School by Gender, Website: http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/lbstat/pubdata2.html, Date accessed: June 4, 2012.Fry, J., Xian, G., Jin, S., Dewitz, J., Homer, C., Yang, L., Barnes, C., Herold, N., and Wickham, J., 2011. National Land Cover Database 2006, Land Cover Change 2001/2006, National Land Cover Database for the Conterminous United States, PE&RS, Volume 77(9):858-864, September 2011.Hastings, 2011. | |||
Hastings HVAC Bulletin No. IRHS-1. Ha stings HVAC, Hastings, NE, December 2011, 20 pp, Website: http://www.hastingshvac.com/UserFiles/File/Bulletin%20IRHS-1%20December%202011.pdf | |||
, Date accessed: October 3, 2012.JSD, 2011a. Janesville School District Strategic Plan, Website: | |||
http://www.janesv ille.k12.wi.us/Portals/1/Strategic_Plan_Action_Steps_and_Dates_Final_w-o_Action_Steps%5B1%5D.pdf | |||
, Date accessed: October 18, 2012.JSD, 2011b. School District of Janesville, 2011-12 Budget, Website, http://www.janesville.k12.wi.us/Portals/1/Budget%202011-12.pdf,Date accessed: March 1, 2013.Karl, T. R., J.M. Melillo, and T.C. Peterson, eds., 2009. Global Climate Change Impacts, Cambridge University Press.Mercy Health System, 2012a. Mercy Clinic South, Website: | |||
http://www.mercyhealthsystem.org/body.cfm?xyzpdqabc=0&id=10&action=detail&ref=42 | |||
, Date accessed: October 16, 2012.Mercy Health System, 2012b. Mercy Hospital and Trauma Center, Website: | |||
http://www.mercyhealthsystem.org/body.cfm?xyz pdqabc=0&id=10&action=detail&ref=54, Date accessed: October 16, 2012. | |||
NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, 2012. NorthStar Medical Technologies, Hendricks Commercial Properties Sign Agreement for Beloit Facility Development, Website: http://www.northstarnm.com/index.php?module=cms&page=31, Date accessed: October 9, 2012. | |||
NRC, 1977. Methods for Estimating Atmospheric Transport and Dispersion of Gaseous Effluents in Routine Releases from Light-Water-Cooled Reactors, Regulatory Guide 1.111, Revision 1, U.S.Nuclear Regulatory Commission, July 1977. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies19.7-21Rev. 1NRC, 2004. Policy Statement on the Treatment of Environmental Justice Matters in NRC Regulatory and Licensing Actions (69 FR 52040), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, August 24, 2004. | |||
NRC, 2009. Office Instruction No. LIC 203, Revision 2, Procedural Guidance for Preparing Environmental Assessments and Considering Envi ronmental Issues, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, February 17, 2009.Ogden, L.J.E., 1996. Collision Course: The Hazards of Lighted Structures and Windows to Migrating Birds, Published by World Wildlife Fund Canada and the Fatal Light Awareness Program, September 1996.Olcott, Perry G., 1969. A Summary of Geology and Mineral and Water Resources of Rock County, Open-File Report 69-3, Geological and Natural History Survey.PNNL, 2012. GENII Version 2 Users' Guide, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, PNNL-14583, Revision4, September 2012.Reznor, 2002. The Reznor Gas-Fired Space Heating Handbook, Thomas & Betts Corp., 76 pp., Website: | |||
www.rezspec.com, Date accessed: October 3, 2012.State of Wisconsin Bureau of Migrant Labor Services, 2011. | |||
Migrant Population Report, Website: http://dwd.wisconsin.gov/migrants/pdf/migrantpoprep2011.pdf, Date accessed: September 4, 2012.Town of Rock, 2006. | |||
Official Zoning Map, Rock County Geographic Information Systems (GIS), Planning, Economic, and Community Development Agency, Website: http://199.233.45.158/images/web_documents/departments/planning_development/zoning_maps/trockzoning.pdf | |||
, Date accessed: October 03, 2012.Town of Rock, 2008. Zoning Ordinance Town of Rock, Rock County, Wisconsin, Website: | |||
http://www.tn.rock.wi.gov/docview.asp?docid=4000&locid=181, Date accessed: October 29, 2012.University of Wisconsin, 2009. Environmentally friendly upgrade planned for Charter Street plant, Website: | |||
http://www.news.wisc.edu/16755, Date accessed: October 9, 2012.USCB, 2006-2010. Table B17017, Poverty Status in the Past 12 Months by Household Type by Age of Householder, 2010 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, American Factfinder, Website: | |||
http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml, Date accessed: August 20, 2012. USCB, 2010a. Demographic Profile 1, American Factfinder, Website: http://factfinder 2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml, Date accessed: April 25, 2012. | |||
USCB, 2010b. Summary File 1: Table P14, Sex by Age for the Population under 20 Years, American FactFinder, Website: | |||
http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/js f/pages/index.xhtml, Date accessed: October 22, 2012. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-22Rev. 0USCB, 2010c. Demographic Profile 1, Profile of General Population and Housing Characteristics: 2010, American Factfinder, Website: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml. Date accessed: August 20, 2012. | |||
USEPA, 1995. Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors - Volume I: Stationary Point and Area Sources (AP-42), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Fifth Edition, January 1995. | |||
USEPA, 2012. U.S. Greenhouse Gas Inventory Report, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Website: http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/usinventoryreport.html | |||
, Date accessed: September 5, 2012.USFWS, 2012. Resource Review and Input Response Letter from Peter J. Fasbender dated January 25, 2012.USGS, 2012. The USGS Water Science School, Website: http://ga.water.usgs.gov/edu/qa-home-percapita.html, Date accessed: October 18, 2012. | |||
WDNR, 2010a. Air Pollution Control Operation Permit. West Campus Cogeneration Facility, Permit No. 113151500-P01, September 8, 2010. | |||
WDNR, 2010b. Air Pollution Control Operation Permit, Generac Power Systems-Whitewater, Permit No. 128105230-P20, November 22, 2010. | WDNR, 2010b. Air Pollution Control Operation Permit, Generac Power Systems-Whitewater, Permit No. 128105230-P20, November 22, 2010. | ||
WDNR, 2011a. PM2.5 Regional Background Concentrations (Draft) Memorandum from John Roth, dated April 15, 2011. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/AirPermits/documents/RegionalBackgroundConcentrationsIncDRAFTPM25.pdf, Date accessed: August 2012.WDNR, 2011b. Air Pollution Control Operation Permit, Alliant Energy- WP&L Turtle Generating Facility, Permit No. 154121880-P20, June 30, 2011.WDNR, 2011c. Air Pollution Control Operation Permit, University of Wisconsin Madison-Charter St., Permit No. 113008390-P04, November 8, 2011.WDNR, 2012a. Policy for Dispersion Modeling of Intermittent Operating Units, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Memorandum from Andrew Stewart dated March 6, 2012, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/AirPermits/documents/IntermittentSources2012.pdf, Date accessed: October 1, 2012.WDNR, 2012b. Endangered Resources Review (ERR #12-020), Proposed SHINE Medial Technologies Industrial Development, Town of Janesville, Rock County, WI. WDNR, 2012c. Air Pollution Control Construction Permit, University of Wisconsin Madison-Charter St., Permit No. 11-SDD-099, February 8, 2012. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | WDNR, 2011a. | ||
City of Chippewa Falls, 2011. Zoning Map, Chippewa Falls Website: http://www.chippewafalls-wi.gov/Maps/Zoning_map.pdf, Date accessed: December 2011.City of Stevens Point, 2011a. Comprehensive Plan, Stevens Point Website: http://www.co.portage.wi.us/Comprehensive%20Plan/Planning%20Program/Stevens%20Point/Stevens%20Point.html, Date accessed: December 2011.City of Stevens Point, 2011b. Report of City Plan Commission, Website: http://stevenspoint.com/archives/47/minutesPlan20111205.pdf, Date accessed: December 2011.City of Stevens Point, 2012a. City Plan Commission, Website: http://stevenspoint.com/archives/36/agendaPlan20120103b.pdf, Date accessed: September 2012.City of Stevens Point, 2012b. Stevens Point receives $225,640 from Focus on Energy, Website: http://www.ci.stevens-point.wi.us/CivicAlerts.aspx?AID=799&ARC=1671, Date accessed: September 2012. | PM2.5 Regional Background Concentrations (Draft) Memorandum from John Roth, dated April 15, 2011. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/AirPermits/documents/RegionalBackgroundConcentrationsIncDRAFTPM25.pdf, Date accessed: August 2012. | ||
HI, 2011. Health Imaging, Northstar chooses Wisconsin for isotope production, June 23, 2011, Website: http://www.healthimaging.com/index.php?option=com_articles&view=article&id=28423:northstar-chooses-wisconsin-for-isotope-production, Date accessed: April 17, 2012.iMakeSense, LLC, 2010. Revelations Architects/Builders Corporation News, Website: http://www.revarch.com/news.html, Date accessed: September 17, 2012.Jerde, 2011. Columbia Energy Center state's number 1 mercury emitter, Website: http://www.wiscnews.com/portagedailyregister/news/ | WDNR, 2011b. Air Pollution Control Operation Permit, Alliant Energy- WP&L Turtle Generating Facility, Permit No. 154121880-P20, June 30, 2011. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | WDNR, 2011c. Air Pollution Control Operation Permit, University of Wisconsin Madison-Charter St., Permit No. 113008390-P04, November 8, 2011. | ||
NRCS, 2012. Natural Resource Conservation Service Soil Survey Website: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/HomePage.htm, Date accessed: July 2012.Portage County, 2012a. Zoning Maps, Portage County Website: http://www.co.portage.wi.us/planningzoning/zoning_maps.htm, Date accessed: July 2012.Portage County, 2012b. Comprehensive Plan, Portage County Website: http://www.co.portage.wi. | WDNR, 2012a. Policy for Dispersion Modeling of Intermittent Operating Units, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Memorandum from Andrew Stewart dated March 6, 2012, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/AirPermits/documents/IntermittentSources2012.pdf | ||
Rubenzer, 2011. City of Chippewa Falls Board of Public Works Meeting Minutes, Website: http://www.chippewafalls-wi.gov/ | , Date accessed: October 1, 2012. | ||
WDNR, 2012b. Endangered Resources Review (ERR #12-020), Proposed SHINE Medial Technologies Industrial Development, Town of Janesville, Rock County, WI. | |||
WDNR, 2012c. Air Pollution Control Construction Permit, University of Wisconsin Madison-Charter St., Permit No. 11-SDD-099, February 8, 2012. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-23Rev. 0WDNR, 2012d. Air Pollution Control Construction Permit, United Ethanol, LLC, Permit No. 11-DCF-056, May 2, 2012. | |||
WDNR, 2012e. Air Pollution Control Construction a nd Operation Permit, Kraft Foods Global, Inc.-Madison, Permit Nos. 09-SSS-127-R1 and 113004650-P13, June 27, 2012.WHS, 2012. Wisconsin Historical Society, Response Received from Mr. Dan Duchrow re "Request for SHPO Comment and Consultation on a Federal Undertaking," dated March 7, 2012.Wisconsin Golf Courses, 2013. Glen Erin Golf Course Janesville WI, Website: http://www.gleneringolf.com/index.shtml, Date accessed: January 16, 2013.19.7.5ALTERNATIVESAmerican Engineering Testing, Inc., 2011. Report of Subsurface Exploration.B&W TSG, 2009a. B&W and Covidien to develop U.S. source of key medical isotope, Babcock & Wilcox Technical Services Group Inc., January 26, 2009, Website: http://www.babcock.com/news_and_events/2009/20090126a.html, Date accessed: February 3, 2012.B&W TSG, 2009b. Medical Isotope Production System, Babcock & Wilcox Technical Services Group Inc., 2011, Website: | |||
http://www.babcock.com/library/pdf/PS-301-110.pdf, Date accessed: February 3, 2012.B&W TSG, 2009c. B&W Medical Isotope Production System, Meeting with USNRC, Babcock & | |||
Wilcox Technical Services Group Inc., July 2009, Obtained from NRC Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS), ML091900270.Broihahn, 2011. Historic and Archaeological Resource Identification, Correspondence from John Broihahn, Wisconsin State Archeologist, to Katrina Pitas, SHINE Medical Technologies, November 1, 2011. | |||
City of Chippewa Falls, 2011. Zoning Map, Chippewa Falls Website: | |||
http://www.chippewafalls-wi.gov/Maps/Zoning_map.pdf, Date accessed: December 2011.City of Stevens Point, 2011a. Comprehensive Plan, Stevens Point Website: | |||
http://www.co.portage.wi.us/Comprehensive%20Plan/Planning%20Program/Stevens%20Point/ | |||
Stevens%20Point.html, Date accessed: December 2011.City of Stevens Point, 2011b. Report of City Plan Commission, Website: http://stevenspoint.com/archives/47/minutesPlan20111205.pdf | |||
, Date accessed: December 2011.City of Stevens Point, 2012a. City Plan Commission, Website: http://stevenspoint.com/archives/36/agendaPlan20120103b.pdf | |||
, Date accessed: September 2012.City of Stevens Point, 2012b. Stevens Point receives $225,640 from Focus on Energy, Website: http://www.ci.stevens-point.wi.us/CivicAlerts.aspx?AID=799&ARC=1671 | |||
, Date accessed: September 2012. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-24Rev. 0City of Stevens Point, 2012c. Website: http://stevenspoint.com, Date accessed: September 2012. CLS, 2012. Canadian Light Source, Inc., Medical Isotopes Backgrounder: Producing medical isotopes using X-rays, January 19, 2012, Website: http://www.lightsource.ca/medicalisotopes/ | |||
, Date accessed: April 17, 2012. | |||
DOE, 2012. Environmental Assessment for NorthStar Medical Technologies LLC Commercial Domestic Production of Medical Isotope Molybdenum-99 (EA-1929), U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation/Global Threat Reduction Initiative, August 2012.EDI, 2011. New "aftermarket services" facility will increase EDI's flat dies rework capabilities and reduce lead times for customers, Website: http://www.extrusiondies.com/news_leterature.phtml#1, Date accessed: September 17, 2012.Environmental Leader, LLC, 2008. Neenah paper to use biomass at Whiting Mill, Website: http://www.environmentalleader.com/2008/08/20/neenah-paper-to-use-biomass-at-whiting-mill/ | |||
, Date accessed: September 17, 2012. EOG Resources, 2012. EOG resources reports first quarter 2012 results and raises 2012 liquids production growth target, Website: http://investor.shareholder.com/eogresources/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=671644, Date accessed: September 17, 2012. | |||
GEH, 2010. Moly-99 Project Update for the US NRC August 2011, GE Hitach i Nuclear Energy, Obtained from NRC ADAMS, ML112240806.Greenberg and Brown, 1986. Bedrock Geology of Portage County, Wisconsin, Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey (WGNHS) Map 86-3. | |||
HI, 2011. Health Imaging, Northstar chooses Wisconsin for isotope production, June 23, 2011, Website: http://www.healthimaging.com/index.php?option=com_articles&view=article&id=28423:northstar-chooses-wisconsin-for-isotope-production, Date accessed: April 17, 2012.iMakeSense, LLC, 2010. | |||
Revelations Architects/Builders Corporation News, Website: http://www.revarch.com/news.html, Date accessed: September 17, 2012.Jerde, 2011. Columbia Energy Center state's number 1 mercury emitter, Website: http://www.wiscnews.com/portagedailyregister | |||
/news/article_bdc dca56-11a5-11e1-886d-001cc4c03286.html, Date accessed: September 17, 2012. Knolls, 2002. Nuclides and Isotopes, 16th edition, Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory, 2002.McCarthy, 2011. United State EPA Memorandum: Implementation of the Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard, Website: http://www.4cleanair.org/Documents/ImplementationoftheOzoneNAAQS92211.pdf | |||
, Date accessed: September 17, 2012.Mudrey et al., 1982. Bedrock Geologic Map of Wisconsin, University of Wisconsin Extension, Geological and Natural History Survey. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-25Rev. 0NAIP, 2010a. USDA NAIP Imagery. Website: http://www.fsa.usda.gov/FSA/apfoapp?area=home&subject=prog&topic=nai, Date accessed: August 15, 2012.National Atlas of the United States, 2012. Wisconsin Federal Lands and Indian Reservations, Website: http://nationalatlas.gov/printable/fedlands.html, Date accessed: September 14, 2012.NM, 2010. Nuclear Monitor, Medical Radioisotopes Production without a Nuclear Reactor, No.710/711, June 4, 2010. | |||
NRC, 2004. | |||
Policy Statement on the Treatment of Environmental Justice Matters in NRC Regulatory and Licensing Actions, 69 FR 52040, August 24, 2004. | |||
NRC, 2011. NRC Background Information, Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors Annual Meeting, May 2011. | |||
NRCS, 2012. Natural Resource Conservation Service Soil Survey Website: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/HomePage.htm, Date accessed: July 2012.Portage County, 2012a. Zoning Maps, Portage County Website: http://www.co.portage.wi.us/planningzoning/zoning_maps.htm, Date accessed: July 2012.Portage County, 2012b. Comprehensive Plan, Portage County Website: | |||
http://www.co.portage.wi.u s/Comprehensive%20Plan/Pl anning%20Program/Index.html, Date accessed: July 2012. | |||
Rubenzer, 2011. City of Chippewa Falls Board of Public Works Meeting Minutes, Website: http://www.chippewafalls-wi.gov/m eeting%20minutes/2011/B oard%20of%20Public%20Works/May%209%20%202011.pdf, Date accessed: September 17, 2012.The Chippewa Herald, 2009. County Loses $1.8 million on Wissota Green foreclosure, Website: http://chippewa.com/news/county-loses-million-on-wissota-green-foreclosure/article_08701daa-ea8f-54af-ad5b-f8dfbe1b7f97.html, Date accessed: September 17, 2012. The Chippewa Herald, 2012. EOG sand operation underway, Website: http://chippewa.com/news/local/eog-sand-operation-underway/article_8f360c64-398f-11e1-91cf-001871e3ce6c.html | |||
, Date accessed: September 17, 2012. | |||
ThinkResources, Inc. 2008. Wisconsin Power Plants, Website: http://www.powerplantjobs.com/ppj.nsf/powerplants1?openform&cat=wi&Count=500, Date accessed: September 17, 2012.UM, 2006a. Redacted - Safety Analysis Report for the University of Missouri-Columbia Application for License Renewal Application - (Volume 1 of 2), University of Missouri-Columbia, August 18, 2006. Obtained from NRC ADAMS, ML092110573.UM, 2006b. MURR Environmental Report for License Renewal, Facility License No. R-103, Docket No. 50-186, University of Missouri-Columbia, August 2006. Obtained from NRC ADAMS, ML062540121. | ThinkResources, Inc. 2008. Wisconsin Power Plants, Website: http://www.powerplantjobs.com/ppj.nsf/powerplants1?openform&cat=wi&Count=500, Date accessed: September 17, 2012.UM, 2006a. Redacted - Safety Analysis Report for the University of Missouri-Columbia Application for License Renewal Application - (Volume 1 of 2), University of Missouri-Columbia, August 18, 2006. Obtained from NRC ADAMS, ML092110573.UM, 2006b. MURR Environmental Report for License Renewal, Facility License No. R-103, Docket No. 50-186, University of Missouri-Columbia, August 2006. Obtained from NRC ADAMS, ML062540121. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-26Rev. 0USCB, 2012a. Demographic Profile 1: | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | Profile of General Population and Housing, American Factfinder, Website: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml | ||
UW, 1964. Ice Age Deposits of Wisconsin, | , Date accessed: August 19, 2012.USCB, 2012b. Chippewa County Quick Facts | ||
UW, 1989. Groundwater Contamination Susceptibility in Wisconsin, University of Wisconsin Extension Office. U.S. Government, 1992. Energy Policy Act of 1992, 1992.Vetter, 2012. Designs proposed for Irvine park Zoo addition, Website: http://www.leadertelegram.com/news/front_page/article_e30b61d6-5799-11e1-8b33-0019bb2963f4.html, Date accessed: September 17, 2012. WBN, 2011. NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, LLC moving to Beloit, Wisconsin, Wisconsin BrokerNET, June 22, 2011, Website: http://www. | , Website:http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/55/55017.html, Date accessed: September 6, 2012.USCB, 2012c. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | Five Year American Community Survey Estimates, Table 17017: Poverty Status in the Past 12 Months by Household Type by Age of Householder, Summary File Retrieval Tool, Website: http://www.census.gov/acs/www/data_documentation | ||
WDOT, 2012. US 10 (WIS 13 - I-39) expansion Marshfield to Stevens Point Portage and Wood counties, Website: http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/projects/us10/, Date accessed: September 17, 2012. WDPI, 2012. 2011-2012 Enrollment by County by District by School by Gender, Website: http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/lbstat/pubdata2.html, Date accessed: August 19, 2012.WGNHS, 2004. Scanned Images of Wisconsin Well Constructor's Reports- Chippewa County 1936-1989, Open File Report 2001-02 CH. WGNHS, 2005. Scanned Images of Wisconsin Well Constructor's Reports- Portage County 1936-1989, Open File Report 2001-02 PT. WGNHS, 2012. Wisconsin Carbonate Bedrock Map Website; http://wisconsingeologicalsurvey.org/karstbedrock.htm, Date accessed: July 2012.WNN, 2011. Clinton moving into molybdenum production, September 14, 2011, World Nuclear News, Website: http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS-Clinton_moving_into_molybdenum_production-1409118.html, Date accessed: February 2, 2012.19. | /summary_file/, Date accessed: August 22, 2012.USCB, 2012d. Summary File 1, P5: Hispanic or Latino Origin by Race, American Factfinder, Website: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml, Date accessed: August 19, 2012.USCB, 2012e. Portage County Quick Facts | ||
, Website:http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/55/55097.html, Date accessed: September 6, 2012. | |||
USEPA, 2012a. Non-Attainment Status for Each County by year in Wisconsin as of July 20 2012. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), Website: | |||
http://www.epa.gov/oaqps001/greenbk/anay_wi.html, Date accessed: July, 2012. | |||
USEPA, 2012b. Non-Attainment Status for Each County by year in Minnesota as of July 20, 2012. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), Website: | |||
http://www.epa.gov/oaqps001/greenbk/anay_mn.html, Date accessed: July, 2012. | |||
USEPA, 2012c. Cross-State Air Pollution Rule, Website: http://www.epa.gov/airtransport | |||
, Date accessed: September 17, 2012. USFWS, 2012a. Possible Industrial Development, City of Chippewa Falls, Chippewa County, Wisconsin, Correspondence from Jill Utrup, Field Supervisor of the USFWS, to Katrina Pitas, SHINE Medical Technologies, January 19, 2012. USFWS, 2012b. Possible Industrial Development Project Site and Vicinity Portage County, Wisconsin, Correspondence from Peter Fasbender, Field Supervisor of the USFWS, to Katrina Pitas, SHINE Medical Technologies, March 5, 2012. | |||
USGS, 2006. National Land Cover Dataset, Website: http://viewer.nationalmap.gov/viewer, Date accessed: July 2012. ESRI ArcGIS 9.3.1 software.USGS, 2012a. National Seismic Hazard Maps, Website: http://gldims.cr.usgs.gov/website/nshmp2008/viewer.htm, Date accessed: July 2012.USGS, 2012b. National Seismic Hazard Maps, Website: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/states/wisconsin/history.php, Date accessed: July 2012.USGS, 2012c. EHP Quaternary Faults, Website: http://geohazards.usgs.gov/qfaults/map.php | |||
, Date accessed: July 2012. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-27Rev. 0USGS, 2012d. Water Site: http://wi.water.usgs.gov/gwcomp/find/chippewa/brrts.html | |||
, Date accessed: July 2012.USGS, 2012e. Water Site: http://wi.water.usgs.gov/gwcomp/find/portage/brrts.html, Date accessed: July 2012. | |||
UW, 1964. Ice Age Deposits of Wisconsin, Univer sity of Wisconsin Extension Office. UW, 1983. Thickness of Unconsolidated Material in Wisconsin, University of Wisconsin Extension Office. | |||
UW, 1989. Groundwater Contamination Susceptibility in Wisconsin, University of Wisconsin Extension Office. U.S. Government, 1992. Energy Policy Act of 1992, 1992.Vetter, 2012. Designs proposed for Irvine park Zoo addition, Website: http://www.leadertelegram.com/news/front_page/article_e30b61d6-5799-11e1-8b33-0019bb2963f4.html | |||
, Date accessed: September 17, 2012. WBN, 2011. NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, LLC moving to Beloit, Wisconsin, Wisconsin BrokerNET, June 22, 2011, Website: | |||
http://www.wisconsinbroker net.com/2011/northstar-radiosotopes-llc-moving-to-beloit-wisconsin/, Date accessed: February 7, 2012. | |||
WDNR, 2011a. Endangered Resources Review (ERR Log # 11-491) Proposed Industrial Development Project in Chippewa County, WI, Correspondence from Emma Pelton, Endangered | |||
Resources Program WDNR, to Timothy Krau se, Sargent & Lundy, December 12, 2011. | |||
WDNR, 2011b. Endangered Resources Review (ERR Log # 11-492) Proposed Industrial Development Project in Portage County, WI, Correspondence from Lori Steckervetz, Endangered Resources Program WDNR, to Timothy Krause, Sargent & Lundy, December 7, 2011.WDNR, 2012a. Air Monitoring Network Plan 2013, June 2012. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR), Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/AirQuality/documents/2013NetworkPlanProposed.pdf, Date accessed: July, 2012 | |||
.WDNR, 2012b. WisconsinDNRWebView, Website: http://dnrmaps.wi.gov/imf/imf.jsp?site=webview, Date accessed: September 14, 2012. | |||
WDNR, 2012c. Air Management Program, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/cias/am/amexternal/AM_PermitTracking.aspx?id=3001907, Date accessed: September 17, 2012. | |||
WDNR, 2012d. Air Management Program, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/cias/am/amexternal/AM_PermitTracking.aspx?id=10641 | |||
, Date accessed: September 17, 2012. | |||
WDNR, 2012e. Air Management Program, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/cias/am/amexternal/AM_PermitTracking.aspx?id=19054951 | |||
, Date accessed: September 17, 2012. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-28Rev. 0WDNR, 2012f. Air Management Program, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/cias/am/amexternal/AM_PermitTracking.aspx?id=17105222 | |||
, Date accessed: September 17, 2012. | |||
WDNR, 2012g. Air Management Program, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/cias/am/amexternal/AM_PermitTracking.aspx?id=3001987 | |||
, Date accessed: September 17, 2012. | |||
WDNR, 2012h. Air Management Program, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/cias/am/amexternal/AM_PermitTracking.aspx?id=3002320, Date accessed: September 17, 2012. | |||
WDNR, 2012i. Air Management Program, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/cias/am/amexternal/AM_PermitTracking.aspx?id=3002137 | |||
, Date accessed: September 17, 2012. | |||
WDNR, 2012j. Air Management Program, Websites: http://dnr.wi.gov/cias/am/amexternal/AM_PermitTracking.aspx?id=4003218 and http://dnr.wi.gov/cias/am/amexternal/AM_PermitTracking.aspx?id=13797133 | |||
, Date accessed: September 17, 2012.WDOR, 2012a. County and Municipal Revenues and Expenditures 2010, Bulletin No. 110, January 2012, Website: http://www.revenue.wi.gov/slf/cotvc/cmreb10.pdf, Date accessed: August 19, 2012.WDOT, 2011. Annual average hourly traffic counts, Website: http://transportal.cee.wisc.edu | |||
, Date accessed: August 2012, Wisconsin Hourly Traffic Data of The WisTransPortal Project. | |||
WDOT, 2012. US 10 (WIS 13 - I-39) expansion Marshfield to Stevens Point Portage and Wood counties, Website: http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/projects/us10/ | |||
, Date accessed: September 17, 2012. WDPI, 2012. 2011-2012 Enrollment by County by District by School by Gender, Website: http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/lbstat/pubdata2.html, Date accessed: August 19, 2012. | |||
WGNHS, 2004. Scanned Images of Wisconsin Well Constructor's Reports- Chippewa County 1936-1989, Open File Report 2001-02 CH. | |||
WGNHS, 2005. Scanned Images of Wisconsin Well Constructor's Reports- Portage County 1936-1989, Open File Report 2001-02 PT. | |||
WGNHS, 2012. Wisconsin Carbonate Bedrock Map Website; http://wisconsingeologicalsurvey.org/karstbedrock.htm, Date accessed: July 2012.WNN, 2011. Clinton moving into molybdenum production, September 14, 2011, World Nuclear News, Website: | |||
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS-Clinton_moving_into_molybdenum_production-1409118.html, Date accessed: February 2, 2012.19. | |||
==7.6CONCLUSION== | ==7.6CONCLUSION== | ||
S US Census Bureau, 2012. The 2012 Statistical Abstract: Mining, Mineral Industries, Website, http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/cats/forestry_fishing_and_mining/mining_mineral_industries.html, Date accessed: January 18, 2013. | S US Census Bureau, 2012. The 2012 Statistical Abstract: Mining, Mineral Industries, Website, http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/cats/forestry_fishing_and_mining/mining_mineral_industries.html, Date accessed: January 18, 2013. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-29Rev. 0World Nuclear Association, 2012. Supply of Uranium-August 2012, Website: http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf75.html, Date accessed: December 28, 2012. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTable of ContentsSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTable of ContentsSHINE Medical Technologies 19-iRev. 0CHAPTER 19ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWTable of Contents SectionTitlePage | ||
==19.1INTRODUCTION== | ==19.1INTRODUCTION== | ||
OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT....................................19.1-119.1.1PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION.................................19.1-119.1.2REGULATORY PROVISIONS, PERMITS, AND REQUIREDCONSULTATIONS.............................................................................................19.1-319.2PROPOSED ACTION...........................................................................................19.2-119.2.1SITE LOCATION AND LAYOUT........................................................................19.2-619.2.2RADIOISOTOPE FACILITY DESCRIPTION......................................................19.2-1119.2.3WATER CONSUMPTION AND TREATMENT...................................................19.2-12 19.2.4COOLING AND HEATING DISSIPATION SYSTEMS........................................19.2-1319.2.5WASTE SYSTEMS............................................................................................19.2-14 19.2.6STORAGE, TREATMENT, AND TRANSPORTATION OF RADIOACTIVEAND NONRADIOACTIVE MATERIALS, INCLUDING LEU, WASTE, RADIOISOTOPES, AND ANY OTHER MATERIALS.........................................19.7-2119.3DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT........................................19.3-119.3.1LAND USE AND VISUAL RESOURCES...........................................................19.3-119.3.2AIR QUALITY AND NOISE................................................................................19.3-919.3.3GEOLOGIC ENVIRONMENT............................................................................19.3-65 19.3.4WATER RESOURCES.......................................................................................19.3-7119.3.5ECOLOGICAL RESOURCES............................................................................19.3-9619.3.6HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES......................................................19.3-12019.3.7SOCIOECONOMICS.........................................................................................19.3-13419.3.8HUMAN HEALTH...............................................................................................19.3-16419.4IMPACTS OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION, OPERATIONS, AND DECOMMISSIONING...........................................................................................19.4-119.4.1LAND USE AND VISUAL RESOURCES...........................................................19.4-119.4.2AIR QUALITY AND NOISE................................................................................19.4-619.4.3GEOLOGIC ENVIRONMENT............................................................................19.4-3119.4.4WATER RESOURCES.......................................................................................19.4-3419.4.5ECOLOGICAL RESOURCES............................................................................19.4-40 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTable of ContentsSHINE Medical | OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT....................................19.1-119.1.1PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION.................................19.1-119.1.2REGULATORY PROVISIONS, PERMITS, AND REQUIREDCONSULTATIONS.............................................................................................19.1-319.2PROPOSED ACTION...........................................................................................19.2-119.2.1SITE LOCATION AND LAYOUT........................................................................19.2-619.2.2RADIOISOTOPE FACILITY DESCRIPTION......................................................19.2-1119.2.3WATER CONSUMPTION AND TREATMENT...................................................19.2-12 19.2.4COOLING AND HEATING DISSIPATION SYSTEMS........................................19.2-1319.2.5WASTE SYSTEMS............................................................................................19.2-14 19.2.6STORAGE, TREATMENT, AND TRANSPORTATION OF RADIOACTIVEAND NONRADIOACTIVE MATERIALS, INCLUDING LEU, WASTE, RADIOISOTOPES, AND ANY OTHER MATERIALS.........................................19.7-2119.3DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT........................................19.3-119.3.1LAND USE AND VISUAL RESOURCES...........................................................19.3-119.3.2AIR QUALITY AND NOISE................................................................................19.3-919.3.3GEOLOGIC ENVIRONMENT............................................................................19.3-65 19.3.4WATER RESOURCES.......................................................................................19.3-7119.3.5ECOLOGICAL RESOURCES............................................................................19.3-9619.3.6HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES......................................................19.3-12019.3.7SOCIOECONOMICS.........................................................................................19.3-13419.3.8HUMAN HEALTH...............................................................................................19.3-16419.4IMPACTS OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION, OPERATIONS, AND DECOMMISSIONING...........................................................................................19.4-119.4.1LAND USE AND VISUAL RESOURCES...........................................................19.4-119.4.2AIR QUALITY AND NOISE................................................................................19.4-619.4.3GEOLOGIC ENVIRONMENT............................................................................19.4-3119.4.4WATER RESOURCES.......................................................................................19.4-3419.4.5ECOLOGICAL RESOURCES............................................................................19.4-40 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTable of ContentsSHINE Medical Technologies 19-iiRev. 0Table of Contents (cont'd) | ||
SectionTitlePage19.4.6HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES......................................................19.4-4919.4.7SOCIOECONOMICS.........................................................................................19.4-5019.4.8HUMAN HEALTH...............................................................................................19.4-6119.4.9WASTE MANAGEMENT....................................................................................19.4-81 19.4.10TRANSPORTATION..........................................................................................19.4-8319.4.11POSTULATED ACCIDENTS.............................................................................19.4-9219.4.12ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE............................................................................19.4-105 19.4.13CUMULATIVE EFFECTS...................................................................................19.4-11219.5ALTERNATIVES...................................................................................................19.5-119.5.1NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE.............................................................................19.5-119.5.2REASONABLE ALTERNATIVES.......................................................................19.5-219.5.3COST-BENEFIT OF THE ALTERNATIVES.......................................................19.5-72 19.5.4COMPARISON OF THE POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS...............19.5-93 | |||
==19.6CONCLUSION== | ==19.6CONCLUSION== | ||
| Line 800: | Line 1,686: | ||
==19.1INTRODUCTION== | ==19.1INTRODUCTION== | ||
OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTTable of | OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTTable of Contents SectionTitlePage | ||
==19.1INTRODUCTION== | ==19.1INTRODUCTION== | ||
OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT...............................19.1-119.1.1PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION........................19.1-119.1.2REGULATORY PROVISIONS, PERMITS, AND REQUIREDCONSULTATIONS....................................................................................19.1-3 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies19.1-iiRev. 0List of | OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT...............................19.1-119.1.1PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION........................19.1-119.1.2REGULATORY PROVISIONS, PERMITS, AND REQUIREDCONSULTATIONS....................................................................................19.1-3 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies19.1-iiRev. 0List of Tables NumberTitle19.1.2-1Permits and Approvals Required for Construction and Operation19.1.2-2Consultations Required for Construction and Operation Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of FiguresSHINE Medical Technologies 19.1-iiiRev. 0List of Figures NumberTitleNone Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.1-ivRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations Acronym/AbbreviationDefinition CFRCode of Federal Regulations COEU.S. Army Corps of Engineers CPConstruction Permit DOEU.S. Department of Energy EAEnvironmental Assessment EREnvironmental Report ERREndangered Resources ReviewFAAFederal Aviation Administration FDAU.S. Food and Drug Administration FWSU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service HEUhighly enriched uranium HFRHigh Flux ReactorI-131iodine-131 IREInstitut National des Radioéléments LEUlow enriched uranium Mo-99molybdenum-99NEPANational Environmental Policy Act NRCU.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission NRCLNational Research Council NRUNational Research Universal NTPNuclear Technology Products Radioisotopes OLOperating License SHINESHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. | ||
SHPOState Historic Preservation Office SPCCSpill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.1-vRev. 0Tc-99mtechnetium-99m U-235uranium-235WNNWorld Nuclear NewsXe-133xenon-133Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd) | |||
Acronym/AbbreviationDefinition Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies 19.1-1Rev. 0CHAPTER 19 | |||
==19.1INTRODUCTION== | ==19.1INTRODUCTION== | ||
OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTIn accordance with the provisions of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 50 "Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities," and supporting guidance, SHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. (SHINE) is providing this Environmental Report (ER) in support of an application to construct and operate a radioisotope facility in Janesville, Wisconsin. SHINE is providing this comprehensive ER as required with its application. The ER provides information to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to facilitate preparation of an Environmental Assessment (EA) in accordance with the provisions of 10CFR 51 Subpart A, National Environmental Policy Act - Regulations Implementing Section102 (2). This chapter provides an introduction to the assessment of the environmental effects of construction, operation, and decommissioning of this facility on the site and surrounding areas.This ER follows the content and organization of the Final Interim Staff Guidance Augmenting NUREG-1537, Part 1, Chapter 19 (NRC, 2012). This ER supports the | OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTIn accordance with the provisions of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 50 "Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities," and supporting guidance, SHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. (SHINE) is providing this Environmental Report (ER) in support of an application to construct and operate a radioisotope facility in Janesville, Wisconsin. SHINE is providing this comprehensive ER as required with its application. The ER provides information to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to facilitate preparation of an Environmental Assessment (EA) in accordance with the provisions of 10CFR 51 Subpart A, National Environmental Policy Act - Regulations Implementing Section102 (2). This chapter provides an introduction to the assessment of the environmental effects of construction, operation, and decommissioning of this facility on the site and surrounding areas.This ER follows the content and organization of the Final Interim Staff Guidance Augmenting NUREG-1537, Part 1, Chapter 19 (NRC, 2012). This ER supports the regulat ory review that is performed by the NRC under 10 CFR 51. This regulation requires that environmental impacts from the project be evaluated and described in a concise, clear, and analytical manner. This ER describes the project, potential alternatives, and the methods and sources used in the environmental impact analysis.This ER discusses the existing environment at the proposed Janesville, Wisconsin site (referred to throughout the ER as the SHINE site) and vicinity, and summarizes the environmental impacts of construction, operation, and decommissioning. In addition, this ER considers appropriate impact mitigation measures, and reviews alternative sites and technologies. | ||
The SHINE facility produces molybdenum-99 (Mo-99), iodine-131 (I-131), and xenon-133 (Xe-133). The decay product of Mo-99, technetium-99m (Tc-99m), is used for diagnostic nuclear medicine procedures. The purpose and need for the proposed action is provided in Section 19.1.1 and a description of the proposed action is provided in Section19.2.19.1.1PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTIONThe proposed federal action is the issuance of a Construction Permit (CP) and Operating License (OL), under the provisions of 10 CFR 50, that would allow SHINE to construct and operate a radioisotope facility to produce Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133. Further discussion of the proposed action is provided in Section 19.2.Molybdenum-99There is currently no domestic production of Mo-99 and its daughter isotope technetium-99m (Tc-99m). The U.S. is forced to import its entire supply of these isotopes, which are used in 80percent of nuclear medicine procedures. Tc-99m is an essential ingredient in diagnostic radiopharmaceuticals used for:*Bone scans*Lung perfusion imaging*Kidney scans and functional imaging*Liver scans Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical | The SHINE facility produces molybdenum-99 (Mo-99), iodine-131 (I-131), and xenon-133 (Xe-133). The decay product of Mo-99, technetium-99m (Tc-99m), is used for diagnostic nuclear medicine procedures. The purpose and need for the proposed action is provided in Section 19.1.1 and a description of the proposed action is provided in Section19.2.19.1.1PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTIONThe proposed federal action is the issuance of a Construction Permit (CP) and Operating License (OL), under the provisions of 10 CFR 50, that would allow SHINE to construct and operate a radioisotope facility to produce Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133. Further discussion of the proposed action is provided in Section 19.2.Molybdenum-99There is currently no domestic production of Mo-99 and its daughter isotope technetium-99m (Tc-99m). The U.S. is forced to import its entire supply of these isotopes, which are used in 80percent of nuclear medicine procedures. Tc-99m is an essential ingredient in diagnostic radiopharmaceuticals used for:*Bone scans*Lung perfusion imaging*Kidney scans and functional imaging*Liver scans Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies 19.1-2Rev. 0*Sentinel lymph node localization*Cardiac perfusion imaging*Brain perfusion imaging*Gall bladder function imaging | ||
*Blood pool imaging*Thyroid and salivary gland imaging*Meckel's scansBetween 95 and 98 percent of the world's supply of Mo-99 is produced by just four organizations (NRCL, 2009):*MDS Nordion (Canada). | *Blood pool imaging*Thyroid and salivary gland imaging*Meckel's scansBetween 95 and 98 percent of the world's supply of Mo-99 is produced by just four organizations (NRCL, 2009):*MDS Nordion (Canada). | ||
*Covidien (Netherlands). | *Covidien (Netherlands). | ||
*Institut National des Radioéléments (IRE) (Belgium).*Nuclear Technology Products Radioisotopes (Pty) Ltd. (NTP) (South Africa).Two of these companies (MDS Nordion [approximately 60 percent of the U.S. supply] and Covidien [approximately 40 percent of U.S. supply]) supply nearly all of the Mo-99 used in the U.S. These two companies obtain the vast majority of their Mo-99 from two reactors (NRCL, 2009):*National Research Universal (NRU) reactor in Chalk River, Ontario, Canada.*High Flux Reactor (HFR) in Petten, the Netherlands.The NRU reactor has been in operation since 1957 and HFR has been in operation since 1961. | *Institut National des Radioéléments (IRE) (Belgium).*Nuclear Technology Products Radioisotopes (Pty) Ltd. (NTP) (South Africa).Two of these companies (MDS Nordion [approximately 60 percent of the U.S. supply] and Covidien [approximately 40 percent of U.S. supply]) supply nearly all of the Mo-99 used in the U.S. These two companies obtain the vast majority of their Mo-99 from two reactors (NRCL, 2009):*National Research Universal (NRU) reactor in Chalk River, Ontario, Canada.*High Flux Reactor (HFR) in Petten, the Netherlands.The NRU reactor has been in operation since 1957 and HFR has been in operation since 1961. | ||
Due to the age of these reactors, disruption of the supply of Mo-99 is an ongoing concern.The most recent disruptions of Mo-99 supply resulted from the shutdown of HFR from August 2008 to February 2009 and again from February 2010 to September 2010 for repairs. Concurrent with the HFR shutdown, the NRU reactor was also shut down for repairs from May 2009 to August 2010 (WNN, 2009; Fissile Material, 2010; MSNBC, 2010). While both reactors were shut down, there was an increase in production from other Mo-99 producers in Europe and South Africa; however, the U.S. experienced a shortage of Mo-99/Tc-99m, resulting in hospitals and clinics postponing or cancelling | Due to the age of these reactors, disruption of the supply of Mo-99 is an ongoing concern.The most recent disruptions of Mo-99 supply resulted from the shutdown of HFR from August 2008 to February 2009 and again from February 2010 to September 2010 for repairs. Concurrent with the HFR shutdown, the NRU reactor was also shut down for repairs from May 2009 to August 2010 (WNN, 2009; Fissile Material, 2010; MSNBC, 2010). While both reactors were shut down, there was an increase in production from other Mo-99 producers in Europe and South Africa; however, the U.S. experienced a shortage of Mo-99/Tc-99m, resulting in hospitals and clinics postponing or cancelling diagn ostic imaging procedures (NRCL, 2009).In addition to the age of the HFR and NRU reactors, there are three other supply reliability concerns:*Increasing demand, both domestically and globally, for Mo-99.*Increasing difficulty of transporting Mo-99 across international borders, especially by air, due to security concerns.*The short half-life of Mo-99 (2.75 days) and Tc-99m (6.01 hours).Because of these supply reliability concerns and national security concerns, U.S. government policy and law is to encourage the domestic production of Mo-99. The SHINE facility makes a significant contribution toward accomplishing these goals.Current U.S. demand for Mo-99 is between 5000 and 7000 6-day curies per week, and this demand is projected to grow in the range of 3 to 10 percent per year (NRCL, 2009). The SHINE facility can produce up to 8200 6-day curies of Mo-99 per week. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies 19.1-3Rev. 0The SHINE facility also helps achieve U.S. government nonproliferation objectives. Most of the world's production of Mo-99 is achieved by irradiating highly enriched uranium (HEU) targets in research and test reactors. The U.S. is the primary supplier of HEU for Mo-99 production. In 1992 Congress passed the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (U.S. Government, 1992). One of the nonproliferation objectives of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 was to create a strategy to phase out U.S. exports of HEU for radioisotope production. Based on this, the U.S. is encouraging Mo-99 producers to eliminate use of HEU in medical isotope production. The SHINE facility uses LEU (less than 20 percent enrichment) to produce Mo-99.Iodine-131There are two methods used to produce I-131: irradiation of tellerium-130 in a nuclear reactor, and generation as a by-product of the irradiation of uranium-235 (U-235) for Mo-99 production. | ||
Both methods are used to supply the U.S. I-131 is used for (NM, 2012):*Radiation therapy. | Both methods are used to supply the U.S. I-131 is used for (NM, 2012):*Radiation therapy. | ||
*Radioactive labeling for | *Radioactive labeling for di agnostic radiopharmaceuticals.Currently, there is no commercial production of I-131 in the U.S. The U.S. supply of I-131 is provided by DRAXIMAGE (66 percent), Covidien (26 percent), and MDS Nordion (8 percent). | ||
These companies obtain their I-131 for U.S. consumption from two reactors (OECD, 2010):*NRU reactor in Chalk River, Ontario, Canada. | These companies obtain their I-131 for U.S. consumption from two reactors (OECD, 2010):*NRU reactor in Chalk River, Ontario, Canada. | ||
*SAFARI-1, Pelindaba, South Africa.The SAFARI-1 reactor has been in operation since 1965 (OECD, 2010). As discussed above for Mo-99, due to the ages of the reactors, disruption of the supply of I-131 is an ongoing concern.Xenon-133Xe-133 gas is produced as a by-product of the irradiation of U-235 for Mo-99 production. Xe-133 is used for (RxList, 2012):*Lung imaging. | *SAFARI-1, Pelindaba, South Africa.The SAFARI-1 reactor has been in operation since 1965 (OECD, 2010). As discussed above for Mo-99, due to the ages of the reactors, disruption of the supply of I-131 is an ongoing concern.Xenon-133Xe-133 gas is produced as a by-product of the irradiation of U-235 for Mo-99 production. Xe-133 is used for (RxList, 2012):*Lung imaging. | ||
*Diagnostic evaluation of pulmonary function. | *Diagnostic evaluation of pulmonary function. | ||
*Assessment of cerebral blood flow.19.1.2REGULATORY PROVISIONS, PERMITS, AND REQUIREDCONSULTATIONSThis section lists and summarizes the status of federal, state, local, and other permits and consultations required for the construction and operation of the proposed SHINE radioisotope facility. The applicable law, ordinance, or regulation that governs each permit and/or consultation is also identified.Table 19.1.2-1 lists the permits and other approvals required for construction and operation of the SHINE facility. The table provides the following information for each permit or approval, as applicable:*Name of the responsible regulatory agency*Applicable law, ordinance, or regulation Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical | *Assessment of cerebral blood flow.19.1.2REGULATORY PROVISIONS, PERMITS, AND REQUIREDCONSULTATIONSThis section lists and summarizes the status of federal, state, local, and other permits and consultations required for the construction and operation of the proposed SHINE radioisotope facility. The applicable law, ordinance, or regulation that governs each permit and/or consultation is also identified.Table 19.1.2-1 lists the permits and other approvals required for construction and operation of the SHINE facility. The table provides the following information for each permit or approval, as applicable:*Name of the responsible regulatory agency*Applicable law, ordinance, or regulation Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies 19.1-4Rev. 0*Name of the permit or approval*Activity covered by the permit or approval*Current statusTable 19.1.2-2 lists the consultations required for construction and operation of the SHINE facility. The table provides the following information for each consultation, as applicable:*Name of the responsible regulatory agency | ||
*Applicable law, ordinance, or regulation*Required consultation | *Applicable law, ordinance, or regulation*Required consultation | ||
*Summary of any surveys required to complete the consultation*Current statusIn addition to the formal consultations listed in Table 19.1.2-2, SHINE has made informal contacts with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the National Nuclear Security Administration, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Wisconsin Department of Health Services, and the City of Janesville Community Development Department. The purpose of these informal consultations was to inform the agencies about the project and to coordinate project planning.An on-site field delineation completed in accordance with U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) guidance (COE, 2010) found no jurisdictional wetlands or waters of the United States on the SHINE site. Therefore, no permitting or consultation with the COE is expected to be required.No potential administrative delays or other problems have been identified that would prevent any required agency consultations or approvals. The SHINE facility is designed and planned to comply with all applicable environmental quality standards and regulatory requirements. The facility also will comply with current Good Manufacturing Practices followed by the pharmaceutical industry. | *Summary of any surveys required to complete the consultation*Current statusIn addition to the formal consultations listed in Table 19.1.2-2, SHINE has made informal contacts with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the National Nuclear Security Administration, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Wisconsin Department of Health Services, and the City of Janesville Community Development Department. The purpose of these informal consultations was to inform the agencies about the project and to coordinate project planning.An on-site field delineation completed in accordance with U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) guidance (COE, 2010) found no jurisdictional wetlands or waters of the United States on the SHINE site. Therefore, no permitting or consultation with the COE is expected to be required.No potential administrative delays or other problems have been identified that would prevent any required agency consultations or approvals. The SHINE facility is designed and planned to comply with all applicable environmental quality standards and regulatory requirements. The facility also will comply with current Good Manufacturing Practices followed by the pharmaceutical industry. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies 19.1-5Rev. 0Table 19.1.2-1 Permits and Approvals Required for Construction and Operation (Sheet 1 of 5)AgencyRegulatory AuthorityPermit or ApprovalActivity CoveredStatusU.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atomic Energy Act10 CFR 50.50Construction PermitConstruction of the SHINE facilityAddressed in this license application10 CFR 50.57Operating LicenseOperation of the SHINE facilityAddressed in this license application10 CFR 40Source Material LicensePossession, use, and transfer of radioactive source materialAddressed in this license application10 CFR 30By-Product Material LicenseProduction, possession, and transfer of radioactive by-product materialAddressed in this license application10 CFR 70Special Nuclear Material LicenseReceipt, possession, use, and transfer of special nuclear materialAddressed in this license applicationNational Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)10 CFR 51Environmental Assessment or Environmental Impact Statement in accordance with NEPASite approval for construction and operation of a radioisotope facilityAddressed in this license applicationFederal Aviation Administration (FAA)Federal Aviation Act14 CFR 77Construction NoticeConstruction of structures that potentially may impact air navigation SHINE submitted structure evaluation requests on October 26, 2011. The FAA issued Determinations of No Hazard to Air Navigation on November 9 and 15, 2011.U.S. Environmental Protection AgencyResource Conservation and | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies19.1-11Rev. 0Native American Nations:-Citizen Potawatomi Nation, Oklahoma-Flandreau Santee Sioux Tribe of South Dakota-Forest County Potawatomi Community, Wisconsin-Hannahville Indian Community, Michigan-Ho-Chunk Nation of Wisconsin-Lower Sioux Indian Community, Minnesota-Prairie Band of Potawatomi Nation, Kansas-Prairie Island Indian Community, Minnesota-Santee Sioux Nation, Nebraska-Sisseton-Wahpeton Oyate, South Dakota-Spirit Lake Tribe, North Dakota-Upper Sioux Community, Minnesota-Winnebago Tribe of NebraskaNational Environmental Policy ActNational Historic Preservation ActNative American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act Consultation regarding protection of traditional Native American religious and cultural resourcesNoneConsultation letters were sent to the Native American tribes on July 26, 2012. The Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska responded on August 2, 2012, requesting notification if any burial sites are discovered. No other responses have been received.Table 19.1.2-2 Consultations Required for Construction and Operation (Sheet 2 of 2)AgencyRegulatory AuthorityRequired ConsultationSurveys RequiredStatus Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTable of ContentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.2-iRev. 0SECTION 19.2PROPOSED ACTIONTable of | |||
t or Ttritium Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.2-viiRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/ | Recovery Act40 CFR 261 and 262Acknowledgement of Notification of Hazardous Waste ActivityGeneration of hazardous | ||
wasteNotification not yet submittedClean Water Act40 CFR 112, Appendix FSpill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plans for Construction and OperationStorage of oil during construction and operationSPCC Plans not yet preparedU.S. Department of TransportationHazardous Material Transportation Act40 CFR 107Certificate of RegistrationTransportation of hazardous materialsRegistration application not yet submitted Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies 19.1-6Rev. 0Wisconsin Department of Natural ResourcesFederal Clean Air ActWisconsin Statutes Chapter 285Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapter NR 406Air Pollution Control Construction PermitConstruction of an air pollution emission source that is not specifically exemptedPermit application not yet | |||
submittedFederal Clean Air ActWisconsin Statutes Chapter 285Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapter NR 407Air Pollution Control Operation PermitOperation of an air pollution emission source that is not specifically exemptedPermit application not yet submittedTable 19.1.2-1 Permits and Approvals Required for Construction and Operation (Sheet 2 of 5)AgencyRegulatory AuthorityPermit or ApprovalActivity CoveredStatus Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies 19.1-7Rev. 0Wisconsin Department of | |||
Natural Resources, continuedFederal Clean Water ActWisconsin Statutes Chapter 283Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapter NR 216Construction Storm Water Discharge PermitDischarge of storm water runoff from the construction | |||
siteNotice of Intent to be covered by general permit not yet | |||
submittedFederal Clean Water ActWisconsin Statutes Chapter 283 Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapter NR 216Industrial Storm Water Discharge PermitDischarge of storm water runoff from the site during facility operationNotice of Intent to be covered by general permit not yet submitted. The facility may be eligible for an industrial Storm Water Discharge Permit exclusion under Wisconsin Admistrative Code NR 216.21(3)Wisconsin Statutes Chapters 280 ad 281Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapter NR 809Approval LettersConstruction by the City of Janesville of water and sanitary sewer extensions to the SHINE facilityPlans and specifications not yet submittedWisconsin Statutes Chapter 291Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapter NR 660, 662, and/or 666Compliance with hazardous waste notification, record keeping, and reporting requirementsGeneration of hazardous | |||
waste Notification not yet submitted; other requirements become applicable during operation Wisconsin Department of Safety and Professional ServicesWisconsin Statutes Chapter 101Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapters SPS 361 and 362Building Plan ReviewCompliance with state building codes; required before a local building permit can be issued for a commercial buildingPlans not yet submitted Wisconsin Department of TransportationWisconsin Statutes Chapter 85Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapters Trans 231Permit for Connection to State Trunk HighwayConstruction of driveway connection to U.S. Route 51Permit application not yet | |||
submittedTable 19.1.2-1 Permits and Approvals Required for Construction and Operation (Sheet 3 of 5)AgencyRegulatory AuthorityPermit or ApprovalActivity CoveredStatus Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies 19.1-8Rev. 0Wisconsin Department of Transportation continuedWisconsin Statutes Chapter 85Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapters Trans 231Right of Entry PermitConstruction by the City of Janesville of utility extensions | |||
across U.S. Route 51Permit application not yet | |||
submittedWisconsin Statutes Chapter 114Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapters Trans 56Variance from Height Limitation Zoning Ordinances Construction of structures that exceed height limitations established for Southern Wisconsin Regional AirportPlans not yet submitted for reviewCity of Janesville Community Development DepartmentCity of Janesville Ordinance 18.24.050.ASite Plan Approval (includes | |||
Building Site Permit for the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport Overlay District)Administrative approval of the site layout and plans for parking, lighting, landscaping, etc.Plans not yet submitted for reviewCity of Janesville Ordinance 15.06.070Storm Water Plan Approval (may be included in Site Plan Approval)Administrative approval of grading and drainage plansPlans not yet submitted for | |||
reviewCity of Janesville Ordinance 15.05.080Erosion Control Permit (may be included in Site Plan Approval)Administrative approval of erosion control plans Plans not yet submitted for | |||
reviewCity of Janesville Ordinance 15.01.100.ABuilding PermitConstruction of buildingsPermit application not yet submittedCity of Janesville Ordinance 15.01.100.APlumbing Plan ApprovalInstallation of plumbing systemsPermit application not yet | |||
submittedCity of Janesville Ordinance 15.04.010.AHVAC Plan ApprovalInstallation of heating, ventilation, and air conditioning systemsPermit application not yet submittedCity of Janesville Ordinance 8.32.010Fire Sprinkler and Alarm PermitInstallation of sprinkler and alarm systemsPermit application not yet | |||
submittedCity of Janesville Ordinance 15.01.190.AOccupancy PermitOccupancy of completed buildings Permit application not yet | |||
submittedTable 19.1.2-1 Permits and Approvals Required for Construction and Operation (Sheet 4 of 5)AgencyRegulatory AuthorityPermit or ApprovalActivity CoveredStatus Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies 19.1-9Rev. 0City of Janesville Community Development Department continuedCity of Janesville Ordinance 13.16Sanitary Sewer and Water Supply Facility ApprovalsAdministrative approval of construction, installation, and operation of connections to the municipal sewer and water supply systemsPermit application not yet | |||
submittedCity of Janesville Plan CommissionCity of Janesville Ordinance 18.24.040Conditional Use Permit (when the site property is annexed by the City, the property will automatically be zoned for industrial use)Construction of multiple buildings on the same sitePermit application not yet | |||
submitted Rock County Highway DepartmentWisconsin Statutes Chapter 84Rock County Utility Accommodation Policy 96.00Permit to Construct, Maintain, and Operate Utilities within Highway Right-of-WayConstruction by the City of Janesville of utility extensions across County Trunk Highway GPermit application not yet | |||
submittedNote: No jurisdictional wetlands or waters of the United States have been identified on the SHINE site; therefore, authorization under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act is not expected to be required for construction or operation.Sources for identification of permit requirements: City of Janesville, 2012; State of Wisconsin, 2012; Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 2012.Table 19.1.2-1 Permits and Approvals Required for Construction and Operation (Sheet 5 of 5)AgencyRegulatory AuthorityPermit or ApprovalActivity CoveredStatus Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies19.1-10Rev. 0Table 19.1.2-2 Consultations Required for Construction and Operation (Sheet 1 of 2)AgencyRegulatory AuthorityRequired ConsultationSurveys RequiredStatusU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS)Endangered Species Act, 16 USC 1536Consultation regarding potential to adversely impact protected species; concurrence with no adverse impact or consultation on appropriate mitigation measuresNoneConsultation letter was submitted to the FWS on December 16, 2011; FWS issued a response on January 25, 2012, stating no further action required.Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, 16 USC 668-668cConsultation regarding potential to adversely impact eagles; concurrence with no adverse impact or consultation on appropriate mitigation measuresNoneConsultation letter and response as above.Wisconsin State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)National Historic Preservation Act, Section 106Consultation regarding potential to adversely impact historic resources; concurrence with no adverse impact or consultation on appropriate mitigation measuresPhase I archaeological | |||
surveyPhase I survey was completed on December 15, 2011. Consultation letter was submitted to the SHPO on February 15, 2012; response was received on March 12, 2012 stating agreement with finding that no historic properties will be affected. | |||
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Wisconsin Statutes Chapter 29, Section 604Endangered Resources Review (ERR) to document recorded occurrence of protected species or rare natural habitatsNoneRequest for ERR was submitted on January 16, 2012; ERR response was issued on February 1, 2012, stating no further action required. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies19.1-11Rev. 0Native American Nations:-Citizen Potawatomi Nation, Oklahoma-Flandreau Santee Sioux Tribe of South Dakota-Forest County Potawatomi Community, Wisconsin-Hannahville Indian Community, | |||
Michigan-Ho-Chunk Nation of Wisconsin-Lower Sioux Indian Community, Minnesota-Prairie Band of Potawatomi Nation, | |||
Kansas-Prairie Island Indian Community, Minnesota-Santee Sioux Nation, Nebraska-Sisseton-Wahpeton Oyate, South Dakota-Spirit Lake Tribe, North Dakota-Upper Sioux Community, Minnesota-Winnebago Tribe of NebraskaNational Environmental Policy ActNational Historic Preservation ActNative American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act Consultation regarding protection of traditional Native American religious and cultural resourcesNoneConsultation letters were sent to the Native American tribes on July 26, 2012. The Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska responded on August 2, 2012, requesting notification if any burial sites are discovered. No other responses have been received.Table 19.1.2-2 Consultations Required for Construction and Operation (Sheet 2 of 2)AgencyRegulatory AuthorityRequired ConsultationSurveys RequiredStatus Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTable of ContentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.2-iRev. 0SECTION 19.2PROPOSED ACTIONTable of Contents SectionTitlePage19.2PROPOSED ACTION.....................................................................................19.2-119.2.1SITE LOCATION AND LAYOUT..................................................................19.2-619.2.2RADIOISOTOPE FACILITY DESCRIPTION................................................19.2-11 19.2.3WATER CONSUMPTION AND TREATMENT.............................................19.2-1219.2.4COOLING AND HEATING DISSIPATION SYSTEMS..................................19.2-1319.2.5WASTE SYSTEMS......................................................................................19.2-14 19.2.6STORAGE, TREATMENT, AND TRANSPORTATION OF RADIOACTIVEAND NONRADIOACTIVE MATERIALS, INCLUDING LEU, WASTE, RADIOISOTOPES, AND ANY OTHER MATERIALS...................................19.2-21 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies19.2-iiRev. 0List of Tables NumberTitle19.2.0-1Estimated Materials Consumed During Construction Phase19.2.0-2Proposed Construction/Demolition Equipment Used in the Construction, Preoperational, and Decommissioning Phases 19.2.1-1Sensitive Populations, Nearest Resident, and Landmarks within 5 Miles (8 km) of the Site19.2.5-1Estimated Type and Quantity of Radioactive Wastes Associated with the SHINE Facility Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of FiguresSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-iiiRev. 0List of Figures NumberTitle19.2.1-1SHINE Facility Site Layout19.2.2-1Isotope Production System High-Level Flow Diagram19.2.3-1Water Balance Diagram Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-ivRev. 2[Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]Acronyms and AbbreviationsAcronym/Abbreviation Definition | |||
°Fdegrees Fahrenheit | |||
°Cdegrees Celsius | |||
µS/cmmicro-Siemens per centimeter AEAAtomic Energy Act of 1954 ac.acreAHAacetohydroxamic acid[Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information]Btu/hrbritish thermal units per hour Btu/scfbritish thermal units per standard cubic feet CeCeriumcfmcubic feet per minute CFRCode of Federal Regulations CicuriesCO2carbon dioxideCPConstruction PermitCs-137cesium-137d or Ddeuterium D-Tdeuterium-tritium DSSIDiversified Scientific Services, Inc.EPAU.S. Environmental Protection Agency EREnvironmental Report ESEnergySolutions FDAU.S. Food and Drug Administrationft.feet Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.2-vRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition ft3cubic feetFPfission productg/Lgrams/liter gpmgallons per minute GTCCgreater than Class CgU/Lgrams of uranium per liter H2hydrogen4Heheliumhahectare HNO3nitric acidhrhourHVACheating, ventilation, and air conditioning IiodineI-129iodine-129I-131iodine-131 IUirradiation unit | |||
keffeffective multiplication factorkgkilogramskmkilometerkVkilovolts lbspounds LELlower explosive limit LEUlow enriched uranium Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-viRev. 0[Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition LSAlow specific activity mmetersMmolarMBtu/hrmillion british thermal units per hour MeVmillion electron volts mi.mileMLLWmixed low level waste MomolybdenumMo-99 or 99Momolybdenum-99nneutronNOxnitrogen oxidesNRCU.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission O2oxygenOLOperating LicensePPEpersonal protective equipment PSARPreliminary Safety Analysis Report psigpound-force per square inch gaugePuplutoniumRCAradiologically controlled area RCRAResource Conservation and Recovery Act scfstandard cubic feet SHINESHINE Medical Technologies, Inc.sol'nsolution[Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information] | |||
t or Ttritium Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.2-viiRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition TBPtri-butyl phosphate Tctechnetium Tc-99mtechnetium-99m TCLPToxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure TDNthermal denitration TRCSTSV Reactivity Control System TRPSTSV Reactivity Protection System TStarget solution TSVtarget solution vessel UuraniumU-235uranium-235 U3O8triuranium octoxide (yellowcake) | |||
UO3uranium trioxide (yellowcake)UREXuranium extractionUSGSUnited States Geological SurveyWCSWaste Control Specialists WIWisconsin Xe-133xenon-133 yryear Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-1Rev. 0CHAPTER 1919.2PROPOSED ACTIONThe proposed federal action is issuance of a Construction Permit (CP) and Operating License (OL) to SHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. (SHINE) for a radioisotope production facility to produce molybdenum-99 (Mo-99), iodine 131 (I-131), and xenon-133 (Xe-133). The decay product of Mo-99, technetium-99m (Tc-99m), is used for diagnostic medical isotope procedures.The applicant for this CP and the OL and owner of the radioisotope facility is SHINE Medical Technologies, Inc., a Wisconsin corporation. SHINE has the necessary authority, control, and rights related to the construction and operation of the isotope production facility once the CP and the OL are approved.The projected schedule for the SHINE facility is as follows:*Start date of construction: January 2015.*End date of construction: December 2015. | |||
*Date of commercial operation: June 2016. | *Date of commercial operation: June 2016. | ||
*Date of decommissioning: June 2046.SHINE plans on performing activities in accordance with 10 CFR 50.10(a)(2) prior to receiving the CP. The construction phase of this project requires an average of 248 workers (421 at peak times) and a monthly average of 303 truck deliveries and 9 off-site waste shipments. Materials consumed are shown in Table 19.2.0-1 and also include approximately 24,587 gallons of diesel fuel (as a bounding assumption fuel is assumed to be diesel) on an average monthly basis. The different types of construction equipment used during the construction phase are shown in Table19.2.0-2. These construction activities affect 51.0 acres (ac.) (20.6 hectares [ha]) of land of which approximately 25.1 ac. (10.2 ha) of land are only temporarily affected.Prior to full commercial operation, the SHINE facility equipment undergoes a thorough commissioning phase involving a series of test operations designed to ensure the facility is functioning as designed. Once the equipment has been commissioned, it is used to produce and ship quantities of Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133 for customer qualification and input to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval process. This preoperational phase requires an average of 390 workers (451 at peak times) and a monthly average of 190 truck deliveries and 9 off-site waste shipments. Materials consumed include approximately 11,721 gallons of diesel fuel (as a bounding assumption fuel is assumed to be diesel) on a monthly basis. The different types of construction equipment used during the preoperational phase are shown in Table 19.2.0-2.After the FDA approves SHINE's customer's final products for commercial use, the facility produces and ships several batches of Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133 per week. Production devices are normally operated on a weekly basis and the operation schedules for the devices are normally staggered to accommodate customer requirements. Operational activities require an Chapter 19 - Environmental | *Date of decommissioning: June 2046.SHINE plans on performing activities in accordance with 10 CFR 50.10(a)(2) prior to receiving the CP. The construction phase of this project requires an average of 248 workers (421 at peak times) and a monthly average of 303 truck deliveries and 9 off-site waste shipments. Materials consumed are shown in Table 19.2.0-1 and also include approximately 24,587 gallons of diesel fuel (as a bounding assumption fuel is assumed to be diesel) on an average monthly basis. The different types of construction equipment used during the construction phase are shown in Table19.2.0-2. These construction activities affect 51.0 acres (ac.) (20.6 hectares [ha]) of land of which approximately 25.1 ac. (10.2 ha) of land are only temporarily affected.Prior to full commercial operation, the SHINE facility equipment undergoes a thorough commissioning phase involving a series of test operations designed to ensure the facility is functioning as designed. Once the equipment has been commissioned, it is used to produce and ship quantities of Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133 for customer qualification and input to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval process. This preoperational phase requires an average of 390 workers (451 at peak times) and a monthly average of 190 truck deliveries and 9 off-site waste shipments. Materials consumed include approximately 11,721 gallons of diesel fuel (as a bounding assumption fuel is assumed to be diesel) on a monthly basis. The different types of construction equipment used during the preoperational phase are shown in Table 19.2.0-2.After the FDA approves SHINE's customer's final products for commercial use, the facility produces and ships several batches of Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133 per week. Production devices are normally operated on a weekly basis and the operation schedules for the devices are normally staggered to accommodate customer requirements. Operational activities require an Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-2Rev. 0average of 150 workers and a monthly average of 36 truck deliveries and 1 off-site waste shipment. Materials to be stored on-site in small quantities include 55 gallon drums of lubricating oil and grease for fans, pumps, hoists, trolleys and rotating equipment and hydraulic oil for heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) dampers and hydraulically operated equipment. | ||
Limited on-site storage of acid and caustic chemicals for regeneration of the water treatment demineralizer beds and processes are required. A bounding value of approximately 30,000 gallons (113,562 liters) of diesel fuel for the standby diesel generator are contained in an outside, underground storage tank. Approximately 25.9 acres (10.5 hectares) of land are permanently affected due to operational activities.Once the facility reaches the end of its useful life, it will be decommissioned. Any radioactive equipment and materials will be disposed of according to local and federal laws and regulations. Post-operational decommissioning activities require an average of 205 workers (257 at peak times) and a monthly average of 72 truck deliveries and 191 off-site waste shipments. Materials consumed include approximately 28,607 gallons (108,290 liters) of diesel fuel (as a bounding assumption fuel is assumed to be diesel) on a monthly basis. The different types of construction equipment used during the decommissioning phase are shown in Table 19.2.0-2. | Limited on-site storage of acid and caustic chemicals for regeneration of the water treatment demineralizer beds and processes are required. A bounding value of approximately 30,000 gallons (113,562 liters) of diesel fuel for the standby diesel generator are contained in an outside, underground storage tank. Approximately 25.9 acres (10.5 hectares) of land are permanently affected due to operational activities.Once the facility reaches the end of its useful life, it will be decommissioned. Any radioactive equipment and materials will be disposed of according to local and federal laws and regulations. Post-operational decommissioning activities require an average of 205 workers (257 at peak times) and a monthly average of 72 truck deliveries and 191 off-site waste shipments. Materials consumed include approximately 28,607 gallons (108,290 liters) of diesel fuel (as a bounding assumption fuel is assumed to be diesel) on a monthly basis. The different types of construction equipment used during the decommissioning phase are shown in Table 19.2.0-2. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-3Rev. 0Table 19.2.0-1 Estimated Materials Consumed During Construction PhaseMaterialAmountConcrete27,700 cubic yardsStructural Steel140 tonsMisc. Steel30 tonsSteel Liner100 tonsAsphalt2200 cubic yards Stone Granular Material16,000 cubic yards Roofing150 tons Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-4Rev. 0Table 19.2.0-2 Proposed Construction/Demolition Equipment Used in the Construction,Preoperational, and Decommissioning Phases (Sheet 1 of 2)EquipmentPresent During Construction (Y or N)Present During Preoperation (Y or N)Present During Decommissioning (Y or N)Asphalt Compactor, Cat CB434C, 107 HpYYNAsphalt Paver, Barber Greene AP-1000, 174 HpYYNBackhoe/Loader, Cat 430, 105 HpYYYBoom Lift, JLG 800AJ, 65 HpYYYConcrete Pump, Putzmeister 47Z-Meter, 300 HpYNNCrane, Lattice Boom, Manitowoc 8000, 80t, 205 HpYNYCrane, Picker, Grove RT530E-2 30t, 160 HpYNYCrane, Picker, Grove RT600E-2 50t, 173 HpYNYDump, Duel Axel (15 cy) | ||
Mack, 350 HpYYYExcavator, Large, Cat 345D L, 380 HpYNYExcavator, Medium, Cat 321D LCR,148 HpYNYExtended Forklift, Lull 1044C-54, 115 HpYYYFuel Truck, Mack MP6, 150 HpYNYMaterial Truck, 21/2 ton, F-650, 270 HpYYYMechanic's Truck, 21/2 ton, F-650, 270 HpYYY Chapter 19 - Environmental | |||
<50 HpYYYPortable Welders, <50 HpYYYWalk Behind Compactor, | Mack, 350 HpYYYExcavator, Large, Cat 345D L, 380 HpYNYExcavator, Medium, Cat 321D LCR,148 HpYNYExtended Forklift, Lull 1044C-54, 115 HpYYYFuel Truck, Mack MP6, 150 HpYNYMaterial Truck, 21/2 ton, F-650, 270 HpYYYMechanic's Truck, 21/2 ton, F-650, 270 HpYYY Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-5Rev. 0Table 19.2.0-2 Proposed Construction/Demolition Equipment Used in the Construction,Preoperational, and Decommissioning Phases (Sheet 2 of 2)EquipmentPresent During Construction (Y or N)Present During Preoperation (Y or N)Present During Decommissioning (Y or N)Motor Grader, Cat 140M, 183 HpYYYPickup Truck, F-250, 300 HpYYYSemi Tractor & Trailer (20 cy), Mack MP8, 450 HpYNYSkidsteer Loader, Case SR200, 75 HpYYYTracked Dozer, Cat D6, 150 HpYYYTracked Dozer, Cat D7, 235 HpYYYTracked Dozer, Cat D8, 310 HpYNYTracked Loader, Cat 973C, 242 HpYYYVibratory Soil Compactor, Cat CS74, 156 HpYYYWater Truck, Mack MP6, 150 HpYYYPortable Air Compressors, <50 HpYYYPortable Generators, | ||
<50 HpYYY Chapter 19 - Environmental | <50 HpYYYPortable Welders, <50 | ||
HpYYYWalk Behind Compactor, | |||
<50 HpYYY Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-6Rev. 019.2.1SITE LOCATION AND LAYOUT19.2.1.1Site LocationThe SHINE site is located approximately 4 miles (mi.) (6.4 kilometers [km]) south of Janesville, Rock County, Wisconsin. The SHINE facility is centered at approximately 42° 37' 26.9" N latitude, and 89° 1'29.5" W longitude.The sensitive populations (e.g., schools, daycare facilities, hospitals), nearest resident, and landmarks (including highways, transportation facilities, rivers and other bodies of water) within 5mi. (8 km) of the site are provided in Table 19.2.1-1. There are no daycare centers or retirement homes located within 5 mi. (8 km) of the SHINE facility.19.2.1.2Site LayoutFigure 19.2.1-1 shows the layout of major structures and the site boundary. The site boundaries cover approximately 91 ac. (36.8 ha). The following structures shown in Figure 19.2.1-1 are located on the site: *Production facility building*Support facility building*Waste staging and shipping building | |||
*Diesel generator building | *Diesel generator building | ||
*Administration building*Security station19.2.1.2.1Chemical, Diesel Fuel, and Hazardous and Radioactive Material Receipt, Holding, and Storage AreasThe following buildings and areas receive, store, hold, retain or process chemicals used in the facility and support buildings on the site:*Production facility building-Rejected material -Receiving area | *Administration building*Security station19.2.1.2.1Chemical, Diesel Fuel, and Hazardous and Radioactive Material Receipt, Holding, and Storage AreasThe following buildings and areas receive, store, hold, retain or process chemicals used in the facility and support buildings on the site:*Production facility building-Rejected material -Receiving area | ||
| Line 837: | Line 1,779: | ||
-CO2-compressed gases room-Mechanical room | -CO2-compressed gases room-Mechanical room | ||
-Boiler room-HVAC chiller room-Trade spaces | -Boiler room-HVAC chiller room-Trade spaces | ||
-General storage Chapter 19 - Environmental | -General storage Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-7Rev. 0-Fire brigade -Health physics (hot)-Health physics (cold)-Ion exchange assembly | ||
-FDA lab-Hot lab-Isolation pack room | -FDA lab-Hot lab-Isolation pack room | ||
-Radioactive waste packaging-Product packing-Material shipping | -Radioactive waste packaging-Product packing-Material shipping | ||
| Line 843: | Line 1,785: | ||
-Janitorial closet *Diesel generator building-Diesel room | -Janitorial closet *Diesel generator building-Diesel room | ||
-Underground storage tank*Waste staging and shipping facility building*Support facility building-Receiving area -Chemicals room | -Underground storage tank*Waste staging and shipping facility building*Support facility building-Receiving area -Chemicals room | ||
-General storage-Janitorial closet -Propane canister storage (for fork lifts)19.2.1.2.2Underground, Stormwater, and Sewage FeaturesAn underground storage tank near the diesel generator building provides storage for the diesel generator. A sanitary sewer pipeline carries wastewater from the SHINE facility to the city main sewage pipeline. A natural gas pipeline provides commercial natural gas to the SHINE facility. An underground electrical distribution line connecting to the electric transformers provides electricity to the SHINE site. A municipal water line lateral is accessed to provide the SHINE facility with water supply. Infrastructure improvements are discussed in Subsection 19.4.13.7.1.Per Figure 19.2.1-1, the SHINE facility buildings, storage, and miscellaneous structures/areas are surrounded by an exterior stormwater runon diversion berm with an interior and exterior ditch. The exterior ditch directs stormwater and farm field runoff to flow spreaders, which direct the excess water to the surrounding fields. The interior ditch directs excess water to the stormwater vegetated swale, which slopes towards an existing road side drainage. A stormwater overflow storage area is provided for beyond-design events. The stormwater systems are Chapter 19 - Environmental | -General storage-Janitorial closet -Propane canister storage (for fork lifts)19.2.1.2.2Underground, Stormwater, and Sewage FeaturesAn underground storage tank near the diesel generator building provides storage for the diesel generator. A sanitary sewer pipeline carries wastewater from the SHINE facility to the city main sewage pipeline. A natural gas pipeline provides commercial natural gas to the SHINE facility. An underground electrical distribution line connecting to the electric transformers provides electricity to the SHINE site. A municipal water line lateral is accessed to provide the SHINE facility with water supply. Infrastructure improvements are discussed in Subsection 19.4.13.7.1.Per Figure 19.2.1-1, the SHINE facility buildings, storage, and miscellaneous structures/areas are surrounded by an exterior stormwater runon diversion berm with an interior and exterior ditch. The exterior ditch directs stormwater and farm field runoff to flow spreaders, which direct the excess water to the surrounding fields. The interior ditch directs excess water to the stormwater vegetated swale, which slopes towards an existing road side drainage. A stormwater overflow storage area is provided for beyond-design events. The stormwater systems are Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-8Rev. 0designed to address 1-year, 2-year, 24-hour storm events per state regulations, and are also designed to address 10-year and 100-year events, as required by the City of Janesville.19.2.1.2.3Monitoring StationsRefer to Figure 19.4.8-1 for environmental monitoring station locations. The need for monitoring stations is discussed in the following subsections: *Air monitoring - Subsection 19.4.2*Groundwater monitoring - Subsection 19.4.4*Surface water monitoring - Subsection 19.4.4 | ||
*Meteorological monitoring - Subsection 19.4.2*Ecological monitoring - Subsection 19.4.5*Radiological monitoring - Subsection 19.4.8.3 Chapter 19 - Environmental | *Meteorological monitoring - Subsection 19.4.2*Ecological monitoring - Subsection 19.4.5*Radiological monitoring - Subsection 19.4.8.3 Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-9Rev. 0Table 19.2.1-1 Sensitive Populations, Nearest Resident, and Landmarks within 5 Miles (8 km) of the Site(Sheet 1 of 2)Facility Type Location of InterestDistance to Project Site BoundaryResidentialNearest Full-Time Resident0.33 mi. (0.53 km) northwest ParkAirport Park0.30 mi. (0.48 km) northwest Paw Print Park1.16 mi. (1.87 km) northwestMedicalFirst Choice Women's Health Center1.37 mi. (2.20 km) northMercy Clinic South1.58 mi. (2.54 km) northMercy Hospital4.21 mi. (6.78 km) northEducationalBlackhawk Technical College Aviation Center0.89 mi. (1.43 km) southwestRock County Christian School1.14 mi. (1.83 km) southJackson Elementary School1.28 mi. (2.06 km) southCommunity CenterCaravilla Education and Rehabilitation Comm Center1.62 mi. (2.61 km) southAnimal ProductionDairy Production0.51 mi. (0.82 km) eastHorse Pasture0.52 mi. (0.84 km) eastGoat Production0.69 mi. (1.11 km) northwestMacFarland Pheasants, Inc.0.86 mi. (1.38 km) northBeef Production Area0.97 mi. (1.56 km) southwest Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-10Rev. 0Table 19.2.1-1 Sensitive Populations, Nearest Resident, and Landmarks within 5 Miles (8 km) of the Site(Sheet 2 of 2)Facility Type Location of InterestDistance to Project Site BoundaryRivers/Creeks Rock River1.9 mi. (3.1 km) westSpring Brook3 mi. (4.8 km) northTurtle Creek4.5 mi. (7.2 km) southeastFisher Creek3 mi. (4.8 km) northwest Markham Creek2.5 mi. (4.0 km) northwestAirportsSouthern Wisconsin Regional Airport0.4 mi. (0.6 km) westRailroadUnion Pacific Railroad1.7 mi. (2.7 km) northwestHighwaysU.S. Highway 51Adjacent to the site boundaryU.S. Highway 143.75 mi. (6.0 km) northeastInterstate 39/902.1 mi. (3.4 km) east Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-11Rev. 0[Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]19.2.2RADIOISOTOPE FACILITY DESCRIPTIONSHINE proposes to build a radioisotope facility. This facility produces Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133. The SHINE facility consists of eight irradiation units (IUs) capable of producing up to 8200 6-day curies per week of Mo-99. Figure 19.2.2-1 provides a flow diagram of the isotope production process.[Proprietary Information]19.2.2.1General Description of the Isotope Production ProcessThe SHINE facility produces Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133 as fission products of uranium-235 (U-235) in a subcritical, low enriched uranium (LEU) target solution. The subcritical solution is located in an annular target solution vessel (TSV) and driven by an accelerator-based neutron source located on the center axis of the TSV annulus. The neutron source consists of a deuterium (d or D) beam impacting a tritium (t or T) gas target which produces energetic neutrons via the d(t, 4He)n reaction. The neutron source is supplied with tritium gas from a tritium purification system.The neutron population from the driver is increased as it travels through a neutron multiplier on its way to the TSV, and then further multiplied in the target solution itself via subcritical fission reactions. As the target solution is irradiated, radiolysis and fission will create off-gases that are handled by a system designed to recombine hydrogen and oxygen and trap certain volatile fission products.During normal operation, the IUs are operated on a weekly basis. At the end of each irradiation cycle, the target solution is removed from the TSV and transferred to a hot cell where isotopes are selectively extracted. Purified Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133 are tested by quality control, packaged, and shipped to customers.After the target solution passes through the extraction column, it is evaluated for re-use. In most cases, the solution is returned to the TSV with minimal adjustment. At some point, however, certain fission products that have built up over time may need to be removed from the solution, in which case the solution undergoes a clean-up process.Target solution preparation and clean-up, isotope extraction and purification, and any tanks containing target solution (besides the TSV) generate radioactive off-gases that are captured by a radioactive gas treatment system. The neutron generator, target solution preparation, tritium purification, TSV off-gas handling, radioactive gas treatment, target solution clean-up, isotope extraction, and isotope purification generate radioactive waste in various forms that is processed, packaged, (in some cases) staged, and disposed of according to its classification. Subsection 19.2.5 provides additional information on the radioactive waste treatment systems. Refer to Figure 19.2.2-1 for a flow diagram of the radioisotope production process. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-12Rev. 019.2.3WATER CONSUMPTION AND TREATMENT19.2.3.1Water ConsumptionThe Janesville municipal water system will supply the water needs of the SHINE facility. A water use diagram for the facility is provided in Figure 19.2.3-1. Water uses for the facility include the following:*Isotope production*Isotope processing | ||
*Potable water*Fire protection*Facility heating and coolingFor isotope production, water is required for the preparation of the target solution. Water required for isotope production amounts to 175 gallons/day (gpd) (662 liters/day [lpd]). Processing including isotope extraction and purification, target solution clean-up, and waste processing requires 1051 gpd (3979 lpd) of water. There will be no liquid discharges from the radiologically controlled area (RCA) to the Janesville municipal sanitary system.Wastewater from outside the RCA will be discharged to the Janesville municipal sanitary system.Potable water demand is 3270 gpd (12,378 lpd) and blowdown and makeup to the facility heating water system is 2580 gpd (9766 lpd). The makeup requirement to the fire protection system is 5gallons per minute (gpm) (19 liters per minute [lpm]). The largest automatic fire suppression system demand in the event of a fire is 390 gpm (1476 lpm). The automatic fire suppression demand will be supplied by a fire water tank. The makeup water requirement for the facility chilled water supply and distribution system is 5 gpm (19 lpm). The makeup water requirement for the facility heating water system is 5 gpm (19 lpm).19.2.3.2Water TreatmentThe SHINE facility includes the following water treatment processes:*Demineralization (i.e., deionization).*Cooling water treatment. | *Potable water*Fire protection*Facility heating and coolingFor isotope production, water is required for the preparation of the target solution. Water required for isotope production amounts to 175 gallons/day (gpd) (662 liters/day [lpd]). Processing including isotope extraction and purification, target solution clean-up, and waste processing requires 1051 gpd (3979 lpd) of water. There will be no liquid discharges from the radiologically controlled area (RCA) to the Janesville municipal sanitary system.Wastewater from outside the RCA will be discharged to the Janesville municipal sanitary system.Potable water demand is 3270 gpd (12,378 lpd) and blowdown and makeup to the facility heating water system is 2580 gpd (9766 lpd). The makeup requirement to the fire protection system is 5gallons per minute (gpm) (19 liters per minute [lpm]). The largest automatic fire suppression system demand in the event of a fire is 390 gpm (1476 lpm). The automatic fire suppression demand will be supplied by a fire water tank. The makeup water requirement for the facility chilled water supply and distribution system is 5 gpm (19 lpm). The makeup water requirement for the facility heating water system is 5 gpm (19 lpm).19.2.3.2Water TreatmentThe SHINE facility includes the following water treatment processes:*Demineralization (i.e., deionization).*Cooling water treatment. | ||
*Facility heating water system treatment.19.2.3.2.1Water DemineralizationWithin the SHINE facility, most of the water used within the process is demineralized in order to control the addition of chemicals within the water to process streams. This is particularly important given the radiological nature of some parts of the process (and the resultant potential for the formation of activation products), and the necessity of a highly pure Mo-99 product. | *Facility heating water system treatment.19.2.3.2.1Water DemineralizationWithin the SHINE facility, most of the water used within the process is demineralized in order to control the addition of chemicals within the water to process streams. This is particularly important given the radiological nature of some parts of the process (and the resultant potential for the formation of activation products), and the necessity of a highly pure Mo-99 product. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-13Rev. 019.2.3.2.2Cooling Water TreatmentWater for use in the closed-loop cooling water system is typically treated prior to addition to the loop, and then dosed periodically. The dosing is determined by testing. The types of chemicals added to the water are:*Biocides - added to inhibit microbial growth in the water, which can lead to fouling.*Corrosion inhibitors - added to inhibit corrosion of piping and components the cooling water flows through. Often corrosion is inhibited by halogen-based biocides.*Scale inhibitors - added to reduce scale formation, particularly within heat exchangers. The specific inhibitor(s) is selected based on the chemistry of the makeup water for the cooling water system.19.2.3.2.3Facility Heating Water System TreatmentThe SHINE facility uses a closed-circuit heated water system for building heating. This is referred to as a boiler by HVAC engineers, but the water does not change phases. The feedwater for this system is treated to reduce corrosion and to reduce scaling.The magnitude of corrosion and scaling in any specific application is a function of the feedwater chemistry and the operating conditions of the boiler system. In some instances, feedwater is demineralized prior to being fed to the boiler.The boiler capacity is calculated based on 100 pound-force per square inch gauge (psig) steam, and using a combined 5 percent blowdown and losses (i.e., make-up water is 5 percent of steam flow). The peak annual facility HVAC heat load (Btu/hr) is used as the sizing criteria for the required steam flow rate with a 50 percent margin included for other facility heating usage. 19.2.4COOLING AND HEATING DISSIPATION SYSTEMS19.2.4.1Cooling SystemsWater used for SHINE facility cooling is produced at a central location by multiple air-cooled chillers. The chilled water is circulated in primary-secondary fashion, utilizing heat exchangers (shell and tube type) to isolate the process and HVAC loops from the central chilled water loop. This allows for temperature regulation of the water loops. Chillers have N+1 redundancy (i.e.,there will be one redundant unit). They shut down upon a loss of power event.*Cooling water is used in the SHINE facility for process cooling. A water supply temperature of 85 degrees Fahrenheit (°F) (29 degrees Celsius [°C]) with a return average temperature of 100°F (38°C) is assumed.*Chilled water may be used in the facility for process cooling and is used for HVAC cooling. A chilled water supply temperature of 40°F (4°C) with a 50°F (10°C) return temperature is assumed. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-14Rev. 0The air-cooled chillers operate year-round, rejecting heat directly to the atmosphere through a sensible heat transfer process (forced air blowing over coils). No water is consumed or lost by evaporation in this arrangement. The total estimated heat of rejection witnessed by the chillers:*Estimated peak process load: 2.64 x 10 6 british thermal units per hour (Btu/hr) (2.79 x 10 6 kilojoules per hr [kJ/hr]).*Estimated peak HVAC load: 4.66 x 10 6 Btu/hr (4.92 x 10 6 kJ/hr).*Estimated heat of compression: 1.83 x 10 6 Btu/hr (1.93 x 10 6 kJ/hr).*Estimated total heat rejection load: 9.13 x 10 7 Btu/hr (9.63 x 10 6 kJ/hr).For bounding purposes, the units are considered to run continuously (i.e., 24 hrs per day, 7 days per week).Being a closed-loop system, makeup water is periodic and minimal (less than 10 percent of the system capacity per year). Makeup water is treated. Water treatment is standard chemical treatment.The chillers contain non-chlorofluorocarbon refrigerant and are located outdoors. The SHINE facility does not use cooling towers.19.2.4.2Heating SystemMultiple natural gas fired boilers provide heating water to the HVAC air handlers. The peak boiler load is 6.6 MBtu/hr (6.3 kJ/hr), with a total annual natural gas consumption of 7.67 x 10 7 standard cubic feet (scf) (2.17 x 10 6 cubic meters [m 3]). Ultimately, all of this heat ends up in the environment.This assumes a natural gas heat content of 900 Btu/scf, an 80 percent efficient boiler, no recirculation, operation 24 hours per day and 7 days per week, supply air volume of 156,000 cubic feet per minute (4417 cubic meters per minute) at site altitude and a reheat capability up to 75°F (24°C).19.2.5WASTE SYSTEMS19.2.5.1Sources of Radioactive Liquid, Solid, and Gaseous Waste Material 19.2.5.1.1FacilityThe sources of radioactive liquid, solid, gaseous waste generated by the operation of the SHINE facility are as follows:*Neutron generators.*Waste generated by the TSV solution preparation process includes used cans in which new uranium metal is received, personnel protective equipment (PPE), and spent filters.*Waste generated by the operation of the TSV off-gas system includes spent zeolite beds. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-15Rev. 0[Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]*Waste generated by operation of the Mo-99 recovery system includes the spent extraction columns, spent wash solution, and rotovap condensate.*Waste generated by the target vessel solution cleanup process includes [Proprietary Information] UREX raffinate, non-RCRA (Res ource Conservation and Recovery Act) spent solvent when replaced infrequently, spent resin columns, and spent caustic scrubber solution.*Routine waste from maintenance activities.*The Mo-99 purification process produces waste consisting of glassware and liquid waste.19.2.5.1.2Nearby Operating FacilitiesFacilities that handle and store radioactive materials in the area of the SHINE facility are discussed in Subsection 19.3.8.5.19.2.5.2Type and Quantity of Radionuclides and Hazardous MaterialsThe type and quantity of radionuclides and hazardous materials is provided in Table 19.2.5-1.19.2.5.3Description of Waste Systems19.2.5.3.1Solid Radioactive Waste Handling SystemClass A solid waste consists of Class A trash (e.g., personal protective equipment [PPE], Mo-99 purification glassware, filters), extraction columns, and the neutron generators. The Class A trash is consolidated for low specific activity (LSA) shipment. Extraction columns are replaced after each TSV processing batch. After a two week decay period in the Mo extraction cell, the columns are stored within the facility for further decay and consolidated for LSA shipment. The neutron generators are planned to be replaced on an approximately yearly basis. After replacement, the neutron generators are size-reduced and consolidated for shipment as LSA. The Class A trash, extraction columns, and the neutron generators are shipped approximately yearly to EnergySolutions' (ES) disposal site.The zeolite beds are associated with the TSV off-gas system. The toxicity characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP) may or may not result in th e classification of zeolite beds as Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) waste; however, testing of untreated silver mordenite at Hanford indicated the material ex ceeds TCLP limits prior to solidification. The waste is also radioactive and would be a mixed low level waste (MLLW). Tritium, iodine, xenon, and krypton enters these beds. Only iodine is adsorbed in the zeolite beds. The waste classification for this material is a function of both the efficiency of the zeolite beds and the change out frequency of the beds. It is likely the beds, in terms of operational lifetime, could build up enough iodine-129 to be greater than Class C (GTCC) waste. The zeolite is shipped to an off-site processor. The shipment is a Type B shipment and occurs infrequently. The processor for the zeolite beds is Waste Control Specialists (WCS) in Andrews, Texas. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies19.2-16Rev. 2[Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]The ion exchange resin used for removal of cesium-137 (Cs-137) and cerium (Ce) has a high capacity for Cs-137 capture and will be changed out based on curie limits at the receiving facility and also based on shipping limits. The spent resins are solidified in a shielded waste processing hot cell. The used resin is classified as GTCC waste and is shipped as Type B to an off-site location for long-term storage at WCS.As discussed above, the target solution cleanup system uses an anion exchange column to remove technetium and iodine. When the anion exchange resin is replaced, the spent resin is solidified on-site and sent off-site for disposal (WCS in Andrews, Texas). There will be no solid waste disposal at the SHINE site.19.2.5.3.2Liquid Radioactive Waste System Liquid waste discharged from the various processes at the SHINE facility (other than spent solvent) are combined into one of two tanks. Two tanks are needed to allow liquid waste to decay and also so that a somewhat consistent radiological environment exists for waste processing. Once the first tank is filled the other tank will begin to fill. At this point the pH is adjusted so that the waste can be passed through an ion exchange resin for removal of Cs-137 and Ce-144/ | ||
Pr-144. This allows the majority of the liquid stream to become Class A waste. This cleaned-up material is then sent to an evaporator for volume reduction. The evaporator overheads are reused and the bottoms are solidified and shipped to ES for final disposal. The spent resin treatment is discussed in the section above. No liquid radioactive waste is discharged from the SHINE facility.The spent solvent is not a RCRA waste and is replaced once per year. The solvent is sent to a processor (Diversified Scientific Services, Inc [DSSI], in Kingston, Tennessee) for thermal treatment.[Proprietary Information] This waste is classified as Class B waste and is shipped as Type B to WCS in Andrews, Texas. | Pr-144. This allows the majority of the liquid stream to become Class A waste. This cleaned-up material is then sent to an evaporator for volume reduction. The evaporator overheads are reused and the bottoms are solidified and shipped to ES for final disposal. The spent resin treatment is discussed in the section above. No liquid radioactive waste is discharged from the | ||
SHINE facility.The spent solvent is not a RCRA waste and is replaced once per year. The solvent is sent to a processor (Diversified Scientific Services, Inc [DSSI], in Kingston, Tennessee) for thermal treatment.[Proprietary Information] This waste is classified as Class B waste and is shipped as Type B to WCS in Andrews, Texas. | |||
[Proprietary Information] The waste is solidified in a hot cell using Portland cement. Some additives may be required based on the final chemistry of incoming resin and precipitate. These shipments are Type B shipments. There will be no liquid waste disposal at the SHINE site.19.2.5.4Proposed Hazardous Material Disposal ActivityThe only hazardous (or potentially hazardous) materials are [Proprietary Information] and the zeolite beds. Although small quantities of [Proprietary Information] is expected to pass TCLP, and is not considered hazardous waste. Waste streams with a hazardous component are mixed low-level waste such as the zeolite beds and are handled as described in Subsection 19.2.5.3.1. | [Proprietary Information] The waste is solidified in a hot cell using Portland cement. Some additives may be required based on the final chemistry of incoming resin and precipitate. These shipments are Type B shipments. There will be no liquid waste disposal at the SHINE site.19.2.5.4Proposed Hazardous Material Disposal ActivityThe only hazardous (or potentially hazardous) materials are [Proprietary Information] and the zeolite beds. Although small quantities of [Proprietary Information] is expected to pass TCLP, and is not considered hazardous waste. Waste streams with a hazardous component are mixed low-level waste such as the zeolite beds and are handled as described in Subsection 19.2.5.3.1. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-17Rev. 019.2.5.5Direct Radiation Sources Stored On-Site or near the SHINE Facility19.2.5.5.1Direct Radiation Sources Stored On-SiteThe wastes listed in Table 19.2.5-1 are stored on-site for a period of time before they are shipped off-site. The frequency of shipment of each type of waste is provided in Table19.2.5-1.LEU metal is stored in the target solution preparation area. Medical isotopes will not be stored for any significant time period as they must be shipped to clients as quickly as possible.19.2.5.5.2Direct Radiation Sources Stored near the SHINE FacilityThere are no direct radiation sources stored near the SHINE facility. Facilities that handle and store radioactive materials in the area of the SHINE facility are discussed in Subsection 19.3.8.5.19.2.5.6Pollution Prevention and Waste Minimization 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 SHINE facility will have a program for pollution prevention and waste minimization that includes the following:*Waste minimization and recycling for the various phases of the SHINE facility 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. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewProposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies19.2-18Rev. 2[Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]Table 19.2.5-1 Estimated Type and Quantity of Radioactive Wastes Associated with the SHINE Facility(Sheet 1 of 3)DescriptionMatrixClass as | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewProposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies19.2-18Rev. 2 | ||
[Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]Table 19.2.5-1 Estimated Type and Quantity of Radioactive Wastes Associated with the SHINE Facility(Sheet 1 of 3)DescriptionMatrixClass as GeneratedContentsVolume Volume as shipped (ft 3)55-gallon drum equivalent as shippedShipmentTypeNumber of Shipments/yrDestinationNeutron GeneratorSolidAActivated metal parts4338ft3/yr4338590LSA3.00ESExtraction ColumnsSolidAStainless resin columnsClass A TrashSolidAPPE, Mo-99 purification glassware, filters, etcSpent SolventLiquid(a)An-dodecane, tributyl phosphate22 gallons/ | |||
yr--0.4LSA1.00DSSITc/I columnsResinCResin16 gallons/ | |||
yr233.1Type B0.3WCSZeolite BedsSolidGTCCSilver coated beds0.4 ft3/yr0.40.05Type B1.00WCSCs/Ce MediaResinGTCCResin16 gallons/ | |||
yr233.1Type B0.3WCS[Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information]B[Proprietary Information]295 gallons/yr 7911Type B1.00WCS Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewProposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies19.2-19Rev. 0 | |||
[Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]Table 19.2.5-1 Estimated Type and Quantity of Radioactive Wastes Associated with the SHINE Facility(Sheet 2 of 3)DescriptionMatrixClass as GeneratedContentsVolume Volume as shipped (ft 3)55-gallon drum equivalent as shipped Shipment TypeNumber of Shipments/yrDestinationSpent WashesLiquid(a)A[Proprietary Information]59,708 gallons/yr97381324LSA18ESRotvap CondensateLiquid(a)A[Proprietary Information]UREX RaffinateLiquid(a)B[Proprietary Information]Decontamination WasteLiquid(a)ADecon fluid unknownSpent Eluate SolutionLiquid(a)A[Proprietary Information] | |||
NOx Scrubber SolutionLiquid(a)A[Proprietary Information] | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewProposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies19.2-20Rev. 0Table 19.2.5-1 Estimated Type and Quantity of Radioactive Wastes Associated with the SHINE Facility(Sheet 3 of 3)a)Liquid waste discharged from the various processes at the SHINE facility is either solidified and then shipped to a waste depository or reused. | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewProposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies19.2-20Rev. 0Table 19.2.5-1 Estimated Type and Quantity of Radioactive Wastes Associated with the SHINE Facility(Sheet 3 of 3)a)Liquid waste discharged from the various processes at the SHINE facility is either solidified and then shipped to a waste depository or reused. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-21Rev. 019.2.6STORAGE, TREATMENT, AND TRANSPORTATION OF RADIOACTIVE AND NONRADIOACTIVE MATERIALS, INCLUDING LEU, WASTE, RADIOISOTOPES, AND ANY OTHER MATERIALSThere are no storage needs for enriched uranium fuel, irradiated enriched uranium, or medical isotope product. LEU metal (not fuel) is stored in the target solution preparation area. Medical isotopes will not be stored for any significant time period as these items will be transported to clients as quickly as possible. Irradiated enriched uranium is not stored, as the facility cleans up and recycles this material. The radiological wastes listed in Table 19.2.5-1 are stored on-site for a period of time before they are shipped off-site. The frequency of shipment of each type of waste is provided in Table 19.2.5-1. Enough storage capacity is provided on-site to accommodate the amount of waste between shipments to the off-site repositories. Subsections 19.2.5.3.1 and 19.2.5.3.2 discuss solid and liquid radioactive waste handling. Radioactive waste gases are discussed in Subsection 19.4.8.2.The treatment and packaging for shipment of radioactive and nonradioactive wastes and medical isotopes are controlled with SHINE facility procedures.The packaging systems used to transport enriched uranium, radioactive wastes, and medical isotopes are licensed for the class and type of material that is being transported.The target solution for the SHINE irradiation unit is made on-site at the SHINE facility from LEU metal purchased from Y-12, located in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Y-12 is approximately 650 miles by road from Janesville, Wisconsin.The radioactive wastes will be transported to the destinations listed on Table 19.2.5-1. The distances from the SHINE facility to these facilities are provided in Subsection 19.4.10.1.1.The medical isotopes produced by SHINE are shipped to three processing facilities, as discussed in Subsection 19.4.10.1.1. The distances from the SHINE facility to these facilities are provided in Subsection 19.4.10.1.1. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Site Location and Layout | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Site Location and Layout SHINE Medical Technologies Rev. 0 Figure 19.2.1 SHINE Facility Site Layout | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Radioisotope Facility DescriptionSHINE Medical Technologies Rev. 1Figure 19.2.2 Isotope Production System High-Level Flow Diagram Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water Consumption and Treatment SHINE Medical Technologies Rev. 0 Figure 19.2.3 Water Balance Diagram | |||
Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4) | Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4) | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTable of ContentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-iRev. 0SECTION 19. | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTable of ContentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-iRev. 0SECTION 19.3 DESCRIPTION OF THE A FFECTED ENVIRONMENTTable of Contents SectionTitlePage19.3DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT..................................19.3-119.3.1LAND USE AND VISUAL RESOURCES.....................................................19.3-119.3.2AIR QUALITY AND NOISE..........................................................................19.3-919.3.3GEOLOGIC ENVIRONMENT.......................................................................19.3-6519.3.4WATER RESOURCES.................................................................................19.3-7119.3.5ECOLOGICAL RESOURCES......................................................................19.3-9619.3.6HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES................................................19.3-12019.3.7SOCIOECONOMICS....................................................................................19.3-13419.3.8HUMAN HEALTH.........................................................................................19.3-164 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-iiRev. 0List of Tables NumberTitle19.3.1-1Summary of 2006 Land Use/Land Cover within SHINE Site and Region19.3.1-2Crop Production Estimates for SHINE Site and Rock County, Wisconsin19.3.1-3City of Janesville Land Use19.3.2-1Selected Characteristics of Wisconsin Physiographic Provinces19.3.2-2Madison, Wisconsin Climatic Means and Extremes19.3.2-3Rockford, Illinois Climatic Means and Extremes 19.3.2-4Madison, Wisconsin and Rockford, Illinois Additional Climatic Means and Extremes19.3.2-5List of NOAA ASOS Stations Located within the Site Climate Region19.3.2-6List of NOAA COOP Stations in the Site Climate Region for which Clim-20 Summaries are Available19.3.2-6List of NOAA COOP Stations in the Site Climate Region for which Clim-20 Summaries are Available19.3.2-7Nearest Federal Class I Areas to the SHINE Site 19.3.2-8Regional Tornadoes and Waterspouts 19.3.2-9Details of Strongest Tornadoes in Rock County, Wisconsin19.3.2-10 Details of Strongest Tornadoes in Surrounding Counties Adjacent to Rock County, Wisconsin19.3.2-11Precipitation Extremes at Local and Regional NOAA COOP Meteorological Monitoring Stations within the Site Climate Region19.3.2-12Mean Seasonal and Annual Hail or Sleet Frequencies at Rockford, Illinois and Madison, Wisconsin19.3.2-13Ice Storms that have Affected Rock County, Wisconsin19.3.2-14Mean Seasonal Thunderstorm Frequencies at Rockford, Illinois and Madison, Wisconsin Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-iiiRev. 0List of Tables(Continued) | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical | NumberTitle19.3.2-15Design Wet and Dry Bulb Temperatures19.3.2-16Estimated 100-Year Return Maximum and Minimum DBT, MCWB coincident with the 100-Year Return Maximum DBT, Historic Maximum WBT and Estimated 100-Year Annual Maximum Return WBT19.3.2-17Dry Bulb Temperature Extremes at Local and Regional NOAA COOP Meteorological Monitoring Stations within the Site Climate Region19.3.2-18FAA Specifications for Automated Weather Observing Stations19.3.2-19Annual Data Recovery Rates (in Percent) of Dry Bulb Temperatures, Relative Humidity, Wind Speed, and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport for 2005-201019.3.2-20Historical Dry Bulb Temperatures, Relative Humidity, and Wind Speed from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport for 2005-201019.3.2-21Annual Joint Data Recovery Rates of Wind Speed, Wind Direction, and Computed Pasquill Stability Class from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport19.3.2-22Pasquill Stability Class Frequency Distributions from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (Percent) 2005-201019.3.2-23Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class A)19.3.2-24Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class B)19.3.2-25Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class C)19.3.2-26Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class D)19.3.2-27Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class E)19.3.2-28Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class F) | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of FiguresSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-ivRev. 0List of Tables(Continued) | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical | NumberTitle19.3.2-29Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class G)19.3.2-30Representative Environmental Noise Levels19.3.4-1Rockford, Illinois Climatic Means and Extremes19.3.4-2Rainfall Depth-Duration-Frequency Data for Janesville Vicinity19.3.4-3USGS Streamflow Monitoring Stations in Rock County, Wisconsin19.3.4-4Flood Discharge Frequency Data - Rock River at Afton, Wisconsin19.3.4-5Annual Minimum Low Flows - Rock River at Afton19.3.4-6Groundwater Monitoring Well Water Table Elevations19.3.4-7Surface Water Analytical Results19.3.4-8SHINE Medical Surface Water Field Data - Janesville19.3.4-9Groundwater Analytical Results for Monitoring Wells19.3.4-10SHINE Medical Groundwater Field Data - Janesville19.3.5-1Fish Potentially Occurring near the SHINE Site 19.3.5-2Benthic Macroinvertebrates Collected in an Unnamed Stream (Tributaryof the Rock River) near the SHINE Site19.3.5-3Terrestrial Plants Observed on or near the SHINE Site19.3.5-4Mammals Potentially Occurring on or near the SHINE Site19.3.5-5Avifaunal Species Potentially Occurring on or near the SHINE Site 19.3.5-6Reptiles and Amphibians Potentially Occurring on or near the SHINE Site19.3.5-7Protected Species near the SHINE Site19.3.6-1Previously Recorded Cultural Resources Surveys within 1-mi. (1.6-km) of the Site Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-vRev. 0List of Tables(Continued) | ||
NumberTitle19.3.6-2Eligible or Listed Archaeological Sites within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site, Rock County, Wisconsin19.3.6-3Historic Structures and Districts Listed on the NRHP within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site19.3.7-1Rock County Labor Force Distribution by County of Employee Residence19.3.7-2Comparison of Estimated Major SHINE Labor Force Needs with Estimated Rock County Available Work Force19.3.7-3Population and Growth Rates of Municipalities within Rock County19.3.7-4Resident Population Distribution, Growth Rates, and Projections for Rock County 19.3.7-5Estimated Transient Population within 5 mi. (8 km) of the SHINE Site (2010)19.3.7-6Demographic (Race and Ethnicity) Characteristics of Rock County19.3.7-7Median Household and Per Capita Income Levels within RockCounty 19.3.7-8Civilian Labor Force and Unemployment Rates within Rock County, 2002-201219.3.7-9Employment by Industry within Rock County 19.3.7-10Top 10 Employers within the ROI (Rock County), City of Janesville 19.3.7-11Percent of Individuals and Families Living Below the Census PovertyThreshold within Rock County19.3.7-12Housing Unit Characteristics within Rock County19.3.7-13Tax Rates in Rock County and State of Wisconsin 19.3.7-14Major Municipal Water Suppliers in Rock County 19.3.7-15Rock County Community Water Supply Characteristics (2010)19.3.7-16Public Wastewater Treat ment Systems in Rock County 19.3.7-17Public School Enrollment (2012) within Rock County Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-viRev. 0List of Tables(Continued) | |||
NumberTitle19.3.7-18Recreation Facilities within Rock County 19.3.8-1Distance to Nearest Agricultural and Urban Facilities19.3.8-2Chemicals Used/Stored Within Five Miles of the Site Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of FiguresSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-viiRev. 0List of Figures NumberTitle19.3.1-1Aerial View of the SHINE Site19.3.1-2Major Land Uses within the Region19.3.1-3Janesville Site Region19.3.1-4Special Land Use Classifications within the Region 19.3.1-5Prime Farmland within the Site19.3.1-6Prime Farmland within the Region19.3.1-7Other Land Use Features near the SHINE Site19.3.1-8Major Population Centers and Infrastructure19.3.1-9Site Visual Setting 19.3.2-1Principle Tracks of Winter Synoptic Cyclones that Potentially Affect Wisconsin Weather19.3.2-2Physiographic Provinces of Wisconsin19.3.2-3Mean Wisconsin Winter Month Temperatures19.3.2-4Mean Wisconsin Spring Month Temperatures 19.3.2-5Mean Wisconsin Summer Month Temperatures19.3.2-6Mean Wisconsin Autumn Month Temperatures19.3.2-7Mean Wisconsin Winter Month Precipitation 19.3.2-8Mean Wisconsin Spring Month Precipitation19.3.2-9Mean Wisconsin Summer Month Precipitation19.3.2-10Mean Wisconsin Autumn Month Precipitation 19.3.2-11NOAA COOP Network Climate Divisions of Wisconsin19.3.2-12Outline of Climate Region Representative of the Site19.3.2-13Illinois Annual Mean Water Equivalent Precipitation Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of FiguresSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-viii Rev. 0List of Figures(Continued) | |||
NumberTitle19.3.2-14Illinois Annual Mean Snowfall19.3.2-15Illinois Annual Mean Dry Bulb Temperatures19.3.2-16NOAA ASOS Stations Located within the Site Climate Region19.3.2-17NOAA COOP Stations Located within the Site Climate Region 19.3.2-18Wisconsin and Illinois Counties within Site Climate Region Selected for Investigation of Severe Weather Phenomena19.3.2-19Annual Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-20January Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-21February Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-22March Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-23April Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010) 19.3.2-24May Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-25June Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-26July Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010) 19.3.2-27August Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-28September Wind Rose Souther n Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-29October Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-30November Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-31December Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-32Winter Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010) 19.3.2-33Spring Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-34Summer Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010) | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of FiguresSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-ixRev. 0List of Figures(Continued) | |||
NumberTitle19.3.2-35Autumn Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-36Annual Wind Roses Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (Janesville, WI) and Regional Stations19.3.3-1Geotechnical Investigation Boring Locations19.3.3-2Generalized Geologic Cross Section of Rock County, West-East19.3.3-3Wisconsin Stratigraphic Column19.3.3-4Regional Structural Geology19.3.3-5Site Cross Section19.3.3-6Seismic Hazard Map19.3.3-7Capable Fault Zones19.3.4-1Project Area Watershed - Tributary to Rock River 19.3.4-2Project Area Local Drainage19.3.4-3Long-Term Annual Streamflows and Precipitation in Rock County19.3.4-4Project Water Monitoring Locations 19.3.4-5Groundwater Elevation Isopleth, Fourth Quarter, 201119.3.4-6Groundwater Elevation Isopleth, First Quarter, 201219.3.4-7Groundwater Elevation Isopleth, Second Quarter, 2012 19.3.4-8Groundwater Elevation Isopleth, Third Quarter, 201219.3.5-1Ecoregions within a 50-Mi. (80 Km) Radius of the SHINE Site19.3.5-2Ecological Resource Entities of Special Interest in Rock County 19.3.5-3Ecology Sampling Locations19.3.6-1Historic Properties Listed on the National Register of Historic Places Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of FiguresSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-xRev. 0List of Figures(Continued) | |||
NumberTitle19.3.7-1Population Centers within Rock County19.3.7-2Existing Transportation Network within Rock County19.3.7-3Existing Transportation Network in Proximity to the SHINE Site19.3.7-4Major Recreation Facilities within Rock County 19.3.8-1Janesville Features and Distances from Site Boundary (1-6Mile Range)19.3.8-2Janesville Features and Distances from Site Boundary (0-1Mile Range) | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-xiRev. 0Acronyms and AbbreviationsAcronym/Abbreviation Definition | |||
°Cdegrees Celsius | |||
°Fdegrees Fahrenheit | |||
µS/cmmicro-Siemens per centimeter/Qrelative atmospheric concentration AASHTOAmerican Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials ac.acreAFCCCAir Force Combat Climatology Center ASCEAmerican Society of Civil Engineers ASHRAEAmerican Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc.ASOS Stationautomated surface observing station AWOSautomated weather observing station BIABureau of Indian Affairs BLMBureau of Land Management BLSBureau of Labor Statistics BTOCbelow top of casing Bu.bushelCCelciusC-14carbon-14 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-xiiRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition CFRCode of Federal Regulations cfscubic feet per second CFUcolony-forming units Clim-20Climatography of the United States No. 20 cmcentimeter cm/scentimeters per second cm/hrcentimeters per hour cm/yr.centimeters per year cmscubic meters per second COOP(National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) cooperative observing station dBAA-weighted decibels DBTdry bulb temperaturedegdegreesDORDepartment of Revenue DPIDepartment of Public Instruction DWDDepartment of Workforce Development EeastE[M]expected moment magnitude E-coliEscherichia coli Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-xiii Rev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition EDSEnvironmental Data Service ENEeast-northeast EPRIElectric Power Research Institute ESEeast-southeast FFahrenheit FAAFederal Aviation Administration FEMAFederal Emergency Management Agency fpsfeet per second ft.feetgthe acceleration of an object due to the force of gravityGISgeographical information system GMGeneral Motorsgpdgallons per daygpd/ftgallons per day per foot GHGgreenhouse gases Hhighhahectarehr.hourHSGHydrologic Soil Group Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-xivRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition HUCHydrologic Unit CodeI-39Interstate Highway 39I-43Interstate Highway 43I-90Interstate Highway 90I-131iodine-131 IAEAInternational Atomic Energy Agency IDOAIllinois Department of Agriculture IHPAIllinois Historic Preservation Agency ILIllinoisin.inch(es)in. Hginches of mercury in/hrinches per hour in/yrinches per year ISMCSinternational station meteorological climate summaryJFDjoint frequency distribution K-40potassium-40 kg/m2kilograms per square meterKJVLmeteorological station identifier for Janesville, Wisconsin Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-xvRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition kmkilometer(s) | |||
KMSNmeteorological station identifier for Madison, Wisconsin KRFDmeteorological station identifier for Rockford, IllinoisKYKentuckyLlowlb/ft2pounds per square foot LCDlocal climatological dataLdnday night average sound level lpdliters per day lpmliters per minute LU/LCland use/land cover MmoderateMmoment magnitude mmeter(s)m/smeters per secondmax.maximumMCWBmean coincident wet bulb temperature Mgdmillion gallons per day mg/Lmilligrams per liter Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-xviRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition mg/m3milligrams per cubic meterMHSMercy Health SystemMIMichigan mi.mile(s) mi.2square milesminminutesmin.minimum mLmilliliters Mldmillion liters per dayMNMinnesotaMOMissouri mphmiles per hour MPNmost probable number mrem/yrmillirem per yearMSAMSA Professional Services, Inc.MSLabove mean sea level mSV/yrmillisievert per year mVmillivoltMWemegawatt electric Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-xviiRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition MWtmegawatt thermal NnorthNAICSNorth American Industry Classification System NAIPNational Agricultural Imagery Program NAVD 88North American Vertical Datum of 1988 NCDCNational Climatic Data Center NDnot detected above the detection limit NEnortheast NHINational Heritage Inventory NLCD2006National Land Cover Database 2006 NLSINational Lightning Safety Institute NNEnorth-northeast NNWnorth-northwest NOAANational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NPDESNational Pollutant Discharge Elimination SystemNPSNational Park Service NRNatural Resources NRCU.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-xviii Rev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition NRCSNatural Resources Conservation Service NRHPNational Register of Historic Properties NTUnephelometric turbidity unit NWnorthwest NWSNational Weather Service NWSFONational Weather Service Forecast Office PCBpolychlorinated biphenyl PMPprobable maximum precipitation PWRpressurized water reactor remroentgen equivalent man RMSEroot mean square error ROIregion of influence SEsoutheast secsecondsSHstate highway SHINESHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. | |||
SICStandard Industrial Classification sq. kmsquare kilometer sq. mi.square mile SSEsouth-southeast Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-xixRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition SSURGOSoil Survey Geographic Database SSWsouth-southwest Sv/yrsievert per year SWsouthwest SWRASouthern Wisconsin Regional Airport (Janesville, Wisconsin) | |||
SWWDBSouthwest Wisconsin Workforce Development BoardTBEESTeledyne Brown Engineering Environmental ServicesTMDLtotal maximum daily load TOCtop of casing USU.S. Highway USACEU.S. Army Corps of Engineers USAFU.S. Air Force USCBU.S. Census Bureau USDAU.S. Department of Agriculture USDOCU.S. Department of Commerce USDOIU.S. Department of the Interior USEPAU.S. Environmental Protection Agency USFWSU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-xxRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition USGSU.S. Geological Survey UTCUniversal Time, Coordinated UWNRUniversity of Wisconsin Nuclear Reactor vpdvehicles per day WBANWeather Bureau Army Navy WBBAWisconsin Breeding Bird Atlas WBTwet bulb temperature WDNRWisconsin Department of Natural Resources WHSWisconsin Historical Society WIWisconsin WISCLANDWisconsin Initiative for Statewide Cooperation on Landscape Analysis and Data WisDOTWisconsin Department of Transportation WNWwest-northwest WPDESWisconsin Pollutant Discharge Elimination SystemWSWwest-southwest yd.yardyryear Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-1Rev. 0CHAPTER 1919.3DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT19.3.1LAND USE AND VISUAL RESOURCESThis subsection describes the characteristics of the land use of the SHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. (SHINE) site and the region. In addition, a description of the visual resources of the site is provided. The land use for the site and region is analyzed using the National Land Cover Database 2006 (NLCD2006) (Fry, et al., 2011) land use/land cover (LU/LC) database. | |||
This provides a more recent and unified database than use of both the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) Wisconsin Initiative for Statewide Cooperation on Landscape Analysis and Data (WISCLAND) database and the Illinois Department of Agriculture (IDOA) Land Cover of Illinois database. The visual resources are rated using the U.S. Department of the Interior (USDOI) - Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Visual Resource Management System.19.3.1.1Land Use19.3.1.1.1SiteThe SHINE site consists of a 91.27-acre (ac.) (36.9hectare [ha]) parcel located south of the City of Janesville in Rock County, Wisconsin (Figure19.3.1-1). Given the undeveloped nature of the site, there are no existing structures or infrastructure located within the site boundary. The approximate limits of the proposed restricted area are located near the center of the site as shown on Figure 19.3.1-1. Due to the nature of the facility, there are no exclusion areas on either the proposed site or adjacent properties. Facilities proposed to be located on the developed SHINE site are described in Section 19.2 and illustrated in Figure19.2.1-1LU/LC as mapped by the National Land Cover Database (Fry, et al., 2011) within the property site consists almost entirely of undeveloped cultivated crop lands (Figure 19.3.1-2). Table 19.3.1-1 presents the acreage and percent coverage of the 15 mapped land uses within the site and region. LU/LC on-site consists of 99.8percent cultivated agricultural land and 0.2 percent developed/open space. U.S. Highway(US) 51 borders the western boundary of the SHINE site, and the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (SWRA) is located immediately to the west of US51 (Figure19.3.1-1). 19.3.1.1.2RegionThe "region" of the SHINE site is defined as the area within a 5-mile (mi.) (8-kilometer[km]) radius of the site centerpoint (Figure 19.3.1-3). The entire region is contained within Rock County, Wisconsin. Major land uses within the region are listed in Table 19.3.1-1 and depicted in Figure 19.3.1-2. The dominant land use in the region is agricultural/crops (50.2percent). Pasture/hay fields (11.7percent), low intensity developed lands (11.7percent), deciduous forest areas (6.6percent), and open space developed lands (6.1percent) make up the other major land uses. The remaining land uses within the region include open water, medium intensity developed lands, high intensity developed lands, barren lands, evergreen forest, mixed forest, shrub/scrub, grassland, woody wetlands, and emergent herbaceous wetlands. The City of Janesville is located directly to the north and is within the region. The northern limits of the City of Beloit are located approximately 3.7 mi. (6.0km) to the south of the site. | This provides a more recent and unified database than use of both the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) Wisconsin Initiative for Statewide Cooperation on Landscape Analysis and Data (WISCLAND) database and the Illinois Department of Agriculture (IDOA) Land Cover of Illinois database. The visual resources are rated using the U.S. Department of the Interior (USDOI) - Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Visual Resource Management System.19.3.1.1Land Use19.3.1.1.1SiteThe SHINE site consists of a 91.27-acre (ac.) (36.9hectare [ha]) parcel located south of the City of Janesville in Rock County, Wisconsin (Figure19.3.1-1). Given the undeveloped nature of the site, there are no existing structures or infrastructure located within the site boundary. The approximate limits of the proposed restricted area are located near the center of the site as shown on Figure 19.3.1-1. Due to the nature of the facility, there are no exclusion areas on either the proposed site or adjacent properties. Facilities proposed to be located on the developed SHINE site are described in Section 19.2 and illustrated in Figure19.2.1-1LU/LC as mapped by the National Land Cover Database (Fry, et al., 2011) within the property site consists almost entirely of undeveloped cultivated crop lands (Figure 19.3.1-2). Table 19.3.1-1 presents the acreage and percent coverage of the 15 mapped land uses within the site and region. LU/LC on-site consists of 99.8percent cultivated agricultural land and 0.2 percent developed/open space. U.S. Highway(US) 51 borders the western boundary of the SHINE site, and the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (SWRA) is located immediately to the west of US51 (Figure19.3.1-1). 19.3.1.1.2RegionThe "region" of the SHINE site is defined as the area within a 5-mile (mi.) (8-kilometer[km]) radius of the site centerpoint (Figure 19.3.1-3). The entire region is contained within Rock County, Wisconsin. Major land uses within the region are listed in Table 19.3.1-1 and depicted in Figure 19.3.1-2. The dominant land use in the region is agricultural/crops (50.2percent). Pasture/hay fields (11.7percent), low intensity developed lands (11.7percent), deciduous forest areas (6.6percent), and open space developed lands (6.1percent) make up the other major land uses. The remaining land uses within the region include open water, medium intensity developed lands, high intensity developed lands, barren lands, evergreen forest, mixed forest, shrub/scrub, grassland, woody wetlands, and emergent herbaceous wetlands. The City of Janesville is located directly to the north and is within the region. The northern limits of the City of Beloit are located approximately 3.7 mi. (6.0km) to the south of the site. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-2Rev. 019.3.1.1.3Special Land UsesFederal and State special land use classification areas within the region are shown in Figure 19.3.1-4. According to the USDOI-Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) (2012) there is no federal land held in trust for an American Indian tribe within the 5 mi. (8 km) region. The WDNR manages two parcels of land in the region, both located southwest of the site. Located south of the airport and 1.9 mi. (3.0 km) from the site is a 112 ac. (45.3 ha) parcel that was gifted to the WDNR, but has no designated use. Rock River Prairie is a 37 ac. (15.0 ha) State Natural Area located 3.5 mi. (5.6 km) from the SHINE site and is accessed from US 51. There are no military reservations, federal designated wild and scenic rivers, national parks, national forests or federal designated coastal zone areas within the region.19.3.1.1.4Agricultural Resources and Facilities As is illustrated in Figure 19.3.1-5, both prime farmland and farmland of statewide importance occur within the site boundaries. Warsaw silt loam is the prime farmland soil type, whereas Lorenzo loam is the soil type of state-wide importance. Prime farmland and farmland of state-wide importance located within the region are shown in Figure 19.3.1-6. Approximately 41,950ac. (16,977ha) of the area within the region are lands having soils classified as prime farmland or farmland of statewide importance. The principal agricultural products produced within the area, as estimated by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), consist of corn, oats, winter wheat, soybeans, and corn silage (USDA, 2011). The potential relative value of the 91.27 ac. (36.9ha) of farmland acquired for the site would be 13,771 bushels (Bu.) of grain corn or 3947 bushels (Bu.) of soybeans annually (Table 19.3.1-2). These values are based on the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) crop production estimates for Rock County, WI during the period from 2001-2010.Other agricultural resources in the immediate area of the SHINE site include farms that are used for dairy production, beef production, and other livestock production (Figure 19.3.1-7). There are also commercial game harvest farms in the region of the site, which are owned by MacFarlane Pheasants, Inc. MacFarlane Pheasants Inc. is the largest pheasant farm in North America and has been in operation since 1929. The company specializes in the production of a variety of game birds including pheasants and Hungarian partridge (MacFarlane Pheasants, Inc., 2012). Hormel Foods has a food processing plant located in Beloit, WI, just outside of the region (Hormel, 2013).19.3.1.1.5Mineral ResourcesAccording to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Western Ecology Division's Ecoregions of Wisconsin (USEPA, 201 2a), the SHINE site is part of the Rock River Drift Plain Level IV ecoregion, which is located within the Southeastern Wisconsin Till Plains Level III ecoregion. The Rock River Drift Plain has generally steeper topography than surrounding ecoregions, with broad glacial drift outwash plains characterized by loamy deposits over sandy and gravelly soils with moderate to very rapid permeability. The most important mineral resources in this ecoregion are sand, gravel, and crushed stone (Zaporozec, Alexander, 1982). There are no gravel or sand mining operations on-site, however two sand and gravel operations occur within the region (Find the Data, 2012). No other mineral resources are known to be present in the region. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-3Rev. 019.3.1.1.6Major Population Centers and InfrastructurePopulation centers and the major infrastructure of Rock County are shown on Figure19.3.1-8. The only major population centers (> 25,000 residents) located within Rock County are Janesville and Beloit. Subsection 19.3.7 provides a description of the demographics of these centers and their community characteristics. The major transportation corridors within Rock County include Interstate Highways 39 (I-39) and 90 (I-90), US 14 and 51, and State Highway (SH) 11. Major rail lines or rail systems within the county are owned by Chicago and Northwestern Railroad and Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul, and Pacific Railroad. The only public airport located within the county is the SWRA in Janesville, Wisconsin. No major transportation waterways occur within the region.19.3.1.1.7Land Use PlansCurrent and future land use plans for the area immediately adjacent to the SHINE site and region are represented by the comprehensive plans for the City of Janesville (Vandewalle & Associates, 2009a and 2009b.) | ||
Land uses within the City of Janesville are characterized in the City's comprehensive plan (Vandewalle & Associates, 2009a). Land use categories included in the Janesville Comprehensive Plan include the following:*Residential, Exurban - generally single-family residential development on private well and on-site waste treatment systems, generally at densities between one dwelling unit per acre (0.4 ha) and one dwelling unit per 35 ac. (14.2ha).*Residential, Single-Family Urban - publicly sewered | Land uses within the City of Janesville are characterized in the City's comprehensive plan (Vandewalle & Associates, 2009a). Land use categories included in the Janesville Comprehensive Plan include the following: | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical | *Residential, Exurban - generally single-family residential development on private well and on-site waste treatment systems, generally at densities between one dwelling unit per acre (0.4 ha) and one dwelling unit per 35 ac. (14.2ha). | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical | *Residential, Single-Family Urban - publicly sewered singl e family residential development. | ||
*Residential, Two-Family/Townhouse - attached single family, two-family, and walk-up townhouse residential development. | |||
*Residential, Multi-Family - a variety of residential units focused in particular on multiple family housing (3+ units per building). | |||
*Office - Office, institutional, research, and office-support land uses. | |||
*Commercial - indoor commercial, retail, institutional and service uses with moderate landscaping and signage. | |||
*Light Industrial - indoor industrial land uses and controlled outdoor storage areas with moderate landscaping and signage. | |||
*Heavy Industrial - carefully controlled heavy industrial, storage, and disposal land uses, with limited landscaping and signage. | |||
*Community Facilities - large-scale public buildings, hospitals, youth and elderly service facilities, and special-care facilities. Small community facilities uses may be located in lands designated as other land use categories. | |||
*Parks and Open Space - park and public open space facilities devoted to playgrounds, play fields, trails, picnic areas, and related recreational activities, and conservation areas. | |||
*Extraction - quarries, gravel pits, clay extraction, peat extraction, and extraction-related land uses. | |||
*Vacant - undeveloped land within the City limits. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-4Rev. 0*Agriculture - agricultural and related uses, including cropland, farmsteads, operations, and single family residential development with maximum development densities of one dwelling unit per 35 ac. (14.2 ha). | |||
*Surface Water - lakes, rivers, creeks, and perennial streams. | |||
*Rights-of-Way - publicly owned land for roads, highways, and railroads.The total acreage of lands within the 2007 city limits that are classified in each of the land use categories are summarized in Table 19.3.1-3. Dominant land use categories include single family residential (24percent), rights of way (17percent), vacant lands (16percent), community facilities (11percent), and parks and open space (11percent) (Vandewalle & Associates, 2009a). Subsection 19.3.7.2 provides additional information regarding major employers (including industrial and commercial) in Janesville.The lands containing the SHINE site and its immediate environs to the east and south are listed as being agricultural lands on the existing land use map (Vandewalle & Associates, 2009a). The adjacent airport and associated lands west of US 51 are identified as "community facilities," and lands immediately to the northeast of the site are listed as "vacant." These "vacant" lands correspond to the parcels included as part of a Tax Increment Financing district proposed for development. However, according to the future land use plan of the City of Janesville, the site and its environs east of US 51 are proposed for development as light industrial land uses (Vandewalle & Associates, 2009b).19.3.1.2Visual Resources The visual setting of the area affected by the construction of the new SHINE facility is represented by agricultural viewsheds to the north and east that consist of predominately flat or a slightly rolling terrain dominated by cultivated fields (Figure 19.3.1-9). The site itself is composed completely of land used for agricultural purposes and has no established structures. The viewshed to the south of the SHINE site consists of both agricultural fields with some light development. Immediately adjacent to the southern border of the site are two large warehouses that support local agricultural operations and provide storage for large farming equipment. The viewshed to the west of the site is a light industrial development landscape that consists of the SWRA and its associated facilities. Specific elements of this landscape include the airport control tower, associated runways, and several large warehouses and hangers. The SWRA supports approximately 50,000 flight operations annually, and the site is in view of the persons utilizing the airport and visitors traveling to the area (Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, 2012a). The new SHINE facility is described and illustrated in Section 19.4.1.2 and is visible to motorists traveling to and from Janesville, WI, on US 51. The new facility is also visible from Airport Park, which is located northwest of the site across US 51. Residential neighborhoods are located north and northwest of the site, but presently there are trees and other vegetation bordering these neighborhoods that obstruct the view of the site.The visual resources and scenic quality of the existing site are rated using the USDOI-BLM Visual Resource Management System (USDOI-BLM, 1984). The Scenic Quality Classification is the rating of the visual appeal of the land designated for the site and is based on an evaluation of seven key factors: landform, vegetation, water, color, adjacent scenery, scarcity, and cultural modifications. The Scenic Quality is classified as either an "A," "B," or "C," with "A" as a high quality visual classification and "C" as a low quality visual rating. The site rates as a "C" classification for low Scenic Quality due to a lack of notable features, uniform landform, low vegetation diversity, an absence of water, mute colors, cultural modifications to adjacent Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-5Rev. 0scenery, and a commonality within the physiographic province. The Sensitivity Level, a measurement of the public concern for scenic quality, was also analyzed using six different indicators of public concern: types of users, amount of use, public interest, adjacent land uses, special areas, and other factors. The Sensitivity Level of the public concern for scenic quality is rated on a High (H), Moderate (M), or Low (L) scale. The site has an L sensitivity rating, as an area with low scenic values resulting from a low sensitivity to changes in visual quality by the type of users in the area, a low amount of use by viewers, low public interest in changes to the visual quality of the site, and a lack of special natural and wilderness areas. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-6Rev. 0Table 19.3.1-1 Summary of 2006 Land Use/Land Cover within SHINE Site and Regiona) Total may add up to more or less than 100 percent due to rounding. | |||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
Fry, et al., 2011. NLCD2006 Land Cover | Fry, et al., 2011. NLCD2006 Land Cover Class SHINE Site Regionac.haPercentac.haPercentOpen Water7963221.6%Developed, Open Space0.180.070.2%304312316.1%Developed, Low Intensity5858237111.7%Developed, Medium Intensity19687963.9%Developed, High Intensity9924012.0% | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical | Barren43170.1%Deciduous Forest329813356.6%Evergreen Forest68280.1%Mixed Forest100.0%Shrub/Scrub5052041.0% | ||
Grassland10494252.1%Pasture/Hay5896238611.7%Cultivated Crops91.0936.8699.8%25,23610,21350.2% | |||
Woody Wetlands7222921.4%Emergent Herbaceous Wetland7873181.6% | |||
Total(a)91.2736.94100.0%50,26220,339100.0% | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-7Rev. 0Table 19.3.1-2 Crop Production Estimates for SHINE Site and Rock County, Wisconsin YearPlantedHarvestedProductionYieldac.haac.haBu.Bu./ac. | |||
Corn2001140,60056,901128,00051,80217,920,0001402002160,50064,954149,70060,58417,664,6001182003151,50061,312140,80056,98219,571,2001392004155,00062,729141,00057,06323,124,0001642005166,00067,180150,00060,70522,200,0001482006152,00061,514141,00057,06322,419,0001592007174,00070,418165,00066,77625,740,0001562008161,00065,157152,00061,51422,192,0001462009162,00065,561153,00061,91925,245,0001652010158,50064,145142,00057,46724,679,600173.8Ten Year Avg., Rock County, WI158,11063,987146,25059,18722,075,540150.9Site Avg.91.2736.9491.2736.9413,771150.9Soybeans2001106,30043,020104,30042,2104,484,90043200299,20040,14697,90039,6203,524,400362003101,70041,158101,40041,0372,535,00025200487,60035,45286,90035,1683,736,70043200588,60035,85687,40035,3714,020,40046200689,20036,09989,00036,0184,539,00051200771,90029,09871,70029,0173,369,90047200881,10032,82181,00032,7812,956,50036.5200980,00032,37679,90032,3363,875,15048.5201086,00034,80485,50034,6024,822,20056.4Ten Year Avg., Rock County, WI89,16036,08388,50035,8163,786,41543.2Site Avg.91.2736.9491.2736.94394743.2 | |||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
USDA, 2011 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical | USDA, 2011 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-8Rev. 0Table 19.3.1-3 City of Janesville Land UseLand Use CategoryPercentResidential-Single Family Urban24% | ||
Residential-Two-Family/Townhouse2%Residential-Multi-Family2%Office1% | Residential-Two-Family/Townhouse2%Residential-Multi-Family2%Office1% | ||
Commercial4%Office1%Light Industrial4% | Commercial4%Office1%Light Industrial4% | ||
| Line 883: | Line 1,867: | ||
Extraction2% | Extraction2% | ||
Vacant16%Agricultural0%Surface Water2% | Vacant16%Agricultural0%Surface Water2% | ||
Right of Way17%Total(a)100%a) Total may add up to more or less than 100 percent due to rounding. | Right of Way17% | ||
Total(a)100%a) Total may add up to more or less than 100 percent due to rounding. | |||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
Vandewalle & Associates, 2009a. | Vandewalle & Associates, 2009a. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-9Rev. 019.3.2 AIR QUALITY AND NOISE19.3.2.1Regional Climatology19.3.2.1.1IntroductionClimate is a statistical description of the weather conditions that occur during a long period of time, usually several decades. Weather refers to short-term variations (minutes to months) in the atmosphere.Sources of data typically used to analyze the climate at a site include weather maps (depictions of areal weather phenomena at one instant of time), atlas maps summarizing long-term climate, records of weather at specific monitoring stations at single instants of time, and long-term climatic statistics at specific monitoring stations.The purpose of analysis of regional climate is to understand the local climate at the SHINE site in the context of the climate of the surrounding area. Climate phenomena are then analyzed at progressively smaller scales and within progressively smaller areas. As the area being analyzed decreases, some monitoring stations that are considered initially in the broad analysis are excluded because these stations are found to be unrepresentative of the site climate. The end result is a documented, systematic approach that defines local climate within a context that includes a broad surrounding region.19.3.2.1.2Regional ClimateThe SHINE site is located in south-central Wisconsin. The following discussion summarizes a variety of information that describes the general region in which the SHINE site is located. Because the information is derived from a variety of sources, the geographic area implied by the term "region" is somewhat variable in this introductory discussion. Subsection 19.3.2.1.3 defines a more specific region considered to have a climate representative of the SHINE site, and the subsequent subsections present detailed climatological data for that specific region. The SHINE site is located in a region with the Kppen classification "Daf", which is a humid continental climate with warm summers, snowy winters, and humid conditions (Trewartha, 1954). The climate features a large annual temperature range and frequent short duration temperature changes (NCDC, 2011a). Although there are no pronounced dry seasons, most precipitation occurs during the warmer months. During the autumn, winter, and spring, strong synoptic-scale surface cyclones and anticyclones frequently move across the site region. During the summer, synoptic-scale cyclones are usually weaker and pass north of the site region. Most air masses that affect the site region are generally of polar origin. However, air masses occasionally originate from arctic regions, or the Gulf of Mexico. Air masses originating from the Gulf of Mexico generally do not reach the site region during winter months. There are occasional episodes of extreme heat or high humidity during the summer. The windiest months generally occur during the spring and autumn. The annual average number of days with thunderstorms varies from approximately 45 at the southwest corner of the state of Wisconsin, to approximately 35 at the northeast corner of the state (Moran, J.M. and E.J. Hopkins, 2002). Hail is most frequent in the southwestern and west-central portions of the state, and is most common during summer months, peaking in late July. Tornadoes are relatively infrequent. Winter storms that affect the region generally follow one of three tracks shown in Figure19.3.2-1: Alberta, Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-10Rev. 0Panhandle, and Gulf Coast tracks. During an average winter, the ground is covered with snow about 60 percent of the time (NCDC, 2011a). Regional land use is primarily cropland (corn and beans) and dairy (Rand McNally, 1982 and 2005). The natural vegetation includes broadleaf deciduous trees (oak and hickory), evergreen trees, and medium height prairie grass. There are also several urban areas. The soil at the SHINE site is well-drained silt loam.The landforms of Wisconsin are described by the five physiographic provinces plotted on the map in Figure 19.3.2-2. Details of vegetation, topography, and elevations for those provinces are described in Table19.3.2-1 (Moran, J.M. and E.J. Hopkins, 2002). Most of the surface water impoundments in Wisconsin are located in the Northern Highland and Eastern Ridges and Lowlands physiographic provinces. Water also flows through extensive wetlands in the form of marshes and swamps. The Northern Highland province has the highest elevations, from which water drains northward to Lake Superior; eastward to Lake Michigan via the Menominee and Wolf Rivers; and westward to the Mississippi River via the St. Croix, Chippewa, Black, and Wisconsin Rivers. The Western Uplands province, which comprises most of the western border of the state with Minnesota, escaped recent glaciation. This allowed streams and rivers to form deeply incised valleys over geologic time. Portions of the uplands are referred to as the "driftless area" due to the lack of glacial debris, or "drift".Lake breeze phenomena occur near the shorelines of large bodies of water, such as Lake Michigan, which borders Wisconsin on the east (Moran, J.M. and E.J. Hopkins, 2002). These phenomena feature a circulation system in which air rises over the land and descends over the water, flows from the water toward the land near the ground surface, and flows from land toward the lake aloft. At the surface, the lake breeze appears as a relatively cool and humid wind that sweeps inland. The leading edge of a lake breeze is a miniature cold front and is referred to as the lake breeze front. As the lake breeze front moves inland, it lifts warmer air upward, sometimes causing clouds, or showers. The inland penetration of the lake breeze front varies from a few hundred yards to as much as 25 mi. (40.2 km) (Moran, J.M. and E.J. Hopkins, 2002). Since the SHINE site is located approximately 60 mi. (96.6 km) west of Lake Michigan, it is located too far from the lake be affected by lake breezes. Inland lakes that are located in the SHINE site region are too small to be associated with lake breeze circulations. Therefore, lake breeze circulations are not expected to affect the SHINE site.The local radiation balance and winds determine temperatures across the state. Movement of air masses, synoptic-scale fronts, and synoptic-scale cyclones and anticyclones strongly influence local temperature and precipitation. Seasonal changes in the intensity and movements of air masses and synoptic-scale weather systems, plus changes in radiation exposure at the ground bring about seasonal changes in temperature and precipitation. North and northwest winds generally bring cold, dry air. South and southeast winds typically bring warm, humid air. Calm wind conditions allow pooling of colder, denser air at locations with lower elevations such as valleys. Unequal rates of diurnal heating of the ground cause some local valley and hillside | ||
airflows.Maps of monthly mean dry bulb temperatures in Wisconsin are presented in Figures19.3.2-3 through 19.3.2-6 (Moran, J.M. and E.J. Hopkins, 2002). Mean monthly temperatures for winter (Figure19.3.2-3) show cooler temperatures at the northern end of the state, warmer temperatures near Lake Michigan, and slightly warmer temperatures near Lake Superior. Figure19.3.2-4 presents mean monthly temperatures in the spring. The springtime monthly Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-11Rev. 0temperature pattern in Figure19.3.2-4 is similar to the wintertime temperature pattern in Figure19.3.2-3, with colder temperatures in the north. The counties that border the Great Lakes have cooler temperatures during spring, since the water warms at a slower rate than the land and thereby cools the air near the shorelines.Mean monthly temperatures for summer (Figure 19.3.2-5) show a pattern similar to springtime monthly mean temperatures in Figure 19.3.2-4, with warmer interior temperatures in the south. Counties adjacent to Lakes Michigan and Superior are slightly cooler because the lake surfaces are relatively cooler than the land during the summer.Mean monthly temperatures for autumn (Figure 19.3.2-6) show warmer conditions in the southern interior. The temperatures show a pattern similar to those in the winter, with warmer temperatures at counties near the lake, since the land cools more quickly than the water.Wisconsin counties that border Lakes Michigan and Superior experience somewhat cooler summers, milder winters, and longer agricultural growing seasons than those counties at greater distances from the lakes. The lakes also occasionally produce lake effect snow during late autumn through winter.Maps of monthly mean water-equivalent precipitation in Wisconsin are presented in Figures 19.3.2-7 through 19.3.2-10 (Moran, J.M. and E.J. Hopkins, 2002). Generally, the average annual precipitation is higher in southern portions of the Midwest due to the proximity of the Gulf of Mexico, which is a major source of moisture (EDS, 1968). That same general pattern is observed over the state of Wisconsin. Superimposed over that general pattern is a local pattern of periodic lake-effect precipitation. During lake-effect precipitation events, Lakes Superior and Michigan are local sources of moisture that can cause precipitation adjacent to and downwind of the lake shorelines. Those periods of precipitation enhancement tend to occur when the lake water is warmer than the air, which generally occurs during winter. For example, the winter month precipitation in Figure 19.3.2-7 shows higher monthly water equivalent precipitation totals (approximately 1.2 to 2.2 inches [in.]) (3.0 to 5.6 centimeters [cm]) near the north and east boundary counties, caused by lake-effect snow from Lakes Michigan and Superior.The Madison, Wisconsin and Rockford, Illinois National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) weather observing stations (NCDC, 201 1a, NCDC, 2011c) are th e closest first-order weather stations, and are located approximately 40 mi. (64.4 km) north-northwest and 30 mi. (48.3 km) south-southwest of the SHINE site, respectively. "First-order" stations are defined as those on a 24-hour per day, year-round observing schedule with trained, certified observers.Climatic statistics for Madison presented in Table19.3.2-2 (NCDC, 2011a) show that monthly mean wind speeds range from 6.7 miles per hour (mph) (3.0 meters per second [m/s]) during the month of August to 10.1 mph (4.5 m/s) during the month of April. Annual mean wind speed is 8.5mph (3.8 m/s). Monthly prevailing wind directions are from the s outh-southwest during all months except the winter months of December through February, when the monthly prevailing winds are all from the northwest. Annual prevailing wind is from the south-southwest.Climatic statistics for Rockford presented in Table19.3.2-3 (NCDC, 2011c) show that monthly mean wind speeds are similar to those for Madison, and range from 7.0 mph (3.1 m/s) during the month of August, to 11.3 mph (5.1 m/s) during the month of April. Annual mean wind speed is 9.3mph (4.2 m/s). Monthly prevailing wind directions are similar to Madison, and blow from the south-southwest direction during all months except the period January through March, when the Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-12Rev. 0monthly prevailing winds are all from the northwest. Annual prevailing wind is from the south-southwest.Monthly mean relative humidities for Madison range from 66 percent during April and May, to 78percent during December (Table19.3.2-2). Rockford monthly mean relative humidities presented are similar to those from Madison, ranging from 66 percent during April and May, to 80percent during December (Table19.3.2-3).Mean monthly water equivalent precipitation and snowfall for Madison and Rockford (Table19.3.2-2 and Table19.3.2-3) are similar. Water equivalent precipitation ranges from minima of 1.25 in. (3.18 cm) during January in Madison and 1.34 in. (3.40 cm) during February in Rockford, to maxima during August of 4.33 in. (11.00 cm) at Madison, and during June of 4.80in. (12.19 cm) in Rockford. Mean monthly snowfall is limited to the months October through May, and ranges from a minimum of 0.1 in. (0.25 cm) at Madison and Rockford to a maximum of 12.9in. (32.77 cm) during January at Madison. Annual snowfall is 49.9 in. (126.75 cm) at Madison and 38.7 in. (98.30 cm) at Rockford.Table19.3.2-4 presents the mean numbers of days per month and per year of rain or drizzle, freezing rain or drizzle, snow, and hail or sleet at Madison and Rockford. Those parameters have very similar values for the two stations.Annual values of rain or drizzle days are 138 and 139 days for Madison and Rockford. For both Madison and Rockford, rain and drizzle days range from a minimum of 5 or 6 days during January, to a maximum of 16 days during May.Annual values of freezing rain or drizzle days are two for both Madison and Rockford. For both Madison and Rockford, freezing rain and drizzle days are zero during the months of May through September, and are a maximum of 1 day during the months of December and January.Snow typically occurs during 75 days per year at Madison, and 68 days per year at Rockford. Hail or sleet typically occurs during 2 days per year at both Madison and Rockford. Freezing rain or drizzle typically occurs during 2 days per year at both Madison and Rockford.19.3.2.1.3Identification of Region with Climate Representative of the SHINE SiteThe process of comparison of local (site) and regional climates requires a determination of which region is considered "representative" of climate at the SHINE site. That determination is described in this subsection.The SHINE site is located in central Rock County, Wisconsin which is at the south central edge of the state. It is located near the boundary of two Wisconsin physiographic provinces as presented in Figure 19.3.2-2, the Western Uplands and the Eastern Ridges and Lowlands. It is located in NOAA Cooperative Observer Network (COOP) Climate Division 8 South Central (Figure 19.3.2-11). The finished site grade elevation is approximately 827 feet (ft.) | |||
(252meters[m]) North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88). The land use in the site area is rural. | (252meters[m]) North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88). The land use in the site area is rural. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-13Rev. 0Summarizing, the site location is defined by the followi ng characteristics: a.Located in south-central Wisconsin, on rural prairie silt-loam soil.b.Located within till plains glacial deposits on the Central Lowland Province of the Interior Plains Division of the United States. It is on the border between the state of Wisconsin Eastern Ridge/Lowland and Western Upland Terrain, and most like the ridge/lowland to the east because the local topography is relatively gently rolling.c.Located outside the zone of influence of Lake Michigan lake breeze circulation systems.d.Located within the zone of influence of Lake Michigan effects on temperature and precipitation, including the following: added local warmth during winter and autumn, cooling during summer and spring, and additional local precipitation during winter, spring, and autumn.Based on the above summary characteristics, the perimeter of a surrounding geographic region, which is characterized as having the same climate as the site, is plotted on the regional map in Figure 19.3.2-12. That perimeter is bounded as follows:a.Bounded on the east by the 25-mi. (40.2 km) distance of maximum inland penetration of lake breeze circulations from Lake Michigan.b.Bounded on the south by the approximate southward limit of Lake Michigan's effects on the local climate of north-central Illinois, as presented in the mean precipitation and snowfall patterns in Figure 19.3.2-13 and Figure 19.3.2-14 and as described by local climatological data summaries for major Illinois monitoring stations. Annual isohyets and lines of equal snowfall are oriented northwest to southeast at the northeast corner of Illinois as shown in Figure 19.3.2-13 and Figure 19.3.2-14, illustrating the effects of Lake Michigan (Figure 19.3.2-15) on northern Illinois precipitation. Increased clouds and cooling effects due to Lake Michigan are des cribed in the climatological summary for Rockford, Illinois (NCDC, 2011c), but are not des cribed in the climat ological summaries for Springfield, Illinois farther to the south (NCDC, 2011d), or Mo line, Illinois farther to the southwest (NCDC, 2011b).c.Bounded on the west by the approximate westward limit of Lake Michigan's effects on the local climate of southern Wisconsin, as presented in the mean monthly temperature and precipitation, maps in Figure 19.3.2-3 through Figure 19.3.2-10.d.Bounded on the north by the approximate northward limit of Lake Michigan's effects on the local climate of central Wisconsin, as presented in the mean temperature and precipitation maps in Figure 19.3.2-3 through Figure 19.3.2-10. e.Bounded on the north by the approximate mean southern boundary of the Wisconsin Central Plain, as presented in Figure 19.3.2-2.This site climate region is then used to identify regional weather monitoring stations and Wisconsin and Illinois counties that can be used for comparisons in the analysis of local and regional climate. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-14Rev. 019.3.2.1.4Regional Data Sources The site climate region is identified in Subsection 19.3.2.1.3. Meteorological parameters from weather stations in the site climate region are available from a number of published data sources. Those data sources are described below.*Climatography of the United States No. 20 (Clim-20) statistical summaries from the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC).Clim-20 publications are typically available for COOP daily weather monitoring stations located within the site climate region. Those publications are of particular interest to agriculture, industry, and engineering applications. The publications include a variety of climate statistics useful for regional climate analysis. Those parameters include dry bulb temperature, daily precipitation, and snow fall. Descriptive statistics of those parameters include: mean, extremes, and mean number of days exceeding threshold values.COOP stations do not generally record humidity-related parameters, such as relative humidity, dew point or wet bulb temperatures. Therefore, wet bulb temperatures that are coincident with extreme dry bulb temperatures - which are of interest in regional climate analysis - are generally not available for COOP stations. Therefore, for COOP stations, it is often necessary to estimate coincident wet bulb temperatures using wet bulb temperatures recorded at other stations.*Climatological statistics available from Local Climatological Data (LCD) summaries published by NCDC. LCD annual summaries are typically available for meteorological stations located at major airports. Those summaries include climatic normals, averages and extremes. Thirty-year monthly histories are provided for the following parameters: mean temperature, total precipitation, total snowfall, and heating/cooling degree days. The summaries also include a narrative description of the local climate.*Statistical summaries available from the International Station Meteorological Climate Summary (ISMCS) (NCDC, 1996b).Those summaries are available for many domestic and international airports and military installations. The summaries include tabulations of statistics for several parameters of interest in regional climate analysis. The summaries also include a narrative description of local climate. Particularly useful and unique statistics available in the ISMCS are joint-frequency tables of dry bulb, and wet bulb temperature depression, and single-parameter frequency distributions of dry bulb and wet bulb temperatures.*Statistical summaries published by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc. (ASHRAE) (ASHRAE, 2009).ASHRAE climatic percentile information is available for worldwide locations including many U.S. airports with hourly surface weather observing stations. Parameters include dry bulb, wet bulb and dew point temperatures. Also included are: statistical design Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-15Rev. 0values of dry bulb with mean coincident wet bulb temperature, design wet bulb temperature with mean coincident dry bulb temperature, and design dew point with mean coincident dry bulb temperature.*Statistical summaries published by the U.S. Air Force Combat Climatology Center (AFCCC) (AFCCC, 1999). The AFCCC statisti cal summaries include values for dry and wet bulb temperatures.*American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) structural design standards for the site climate region (ASCE, 2006).The ASCE standards provide minimum load requirements for the design of buildings and other structures that are subject to building code requirements. Particularly useful and unique statistics of interest for climate analysis are values of basic wind speed on a map of the U.S. The basic speed is required by standards for determination of design wind loads. Also included are various adjustments and supplementary information dependent on site and structure characteristics. ASCE also provides maps of 50-year return interval snow pack and a methodology for converting 50-year values extracted from the maps to other return intervals (ASCE, 2006).*48-hour probable maximum precipitation (PMP).The 48-hour PMP is available from a study published by the U.S. Department of Commerce (USDOC) (USDOC, 1978). USDOC contains maps of estimated maximum probable precipitation amounts for a number of time periods (USDOC, 1978).*Tornado, waterspout, and other weather event statistics for counties in the site climate region from the NCDC online Storm Events Database (NCDC, 2011g) and "Storm Data" publications.The Storm Events Database contains a chronological listing, by state, of climate statistics of interest for climate analysis. Those statistics include: tornadoes, thunderstorms, hail, lightning, high winds, snow, temperature extremes, and other weather phenomena. Also included are statistics on personal injuries and property damage estimates.The "Storm Data" publications are monthly summaries of severe weather events published by NCDC. These publications provide supplemental information about specific severe weather events.*Maps of climatological parameters from the Climate Atlas of the United States (NCDC, 2002).This digital atlas provides color maps of climatic elements for the U.S., such as: temperature, precipitation, snow, wind, and pressure. The period of record for most maps is 1961-1990. The user extracts data from the atlas by selecting a parameter (e.g., dry bulb temperature), a statistical measure (e.g., mean), and a state.*Hourly meteorological data files in digital TD3505 (NCDC, 2006; NCDC, 2011j; NCDC, 2011k) and TD3280 (NCDC, 2005a; NCDC, 2011h; NCDC, 2011i) formats. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-16Rev. 0TD3280 is an older data file format that has recently been replaced by the TD3505 format. Hourly meteorological data files are available in TD3280 format through December, 2009. Data files for 2010 and 2011 are available in TD3505 format. Digital data files are available for worldwide locations from NCDC. These data sets contain hourly values of dry bulb temperature, humidity, wind speed/direction, and cloud cover. These data sets allow analysis of coincident meteorological conditions.19.3.2.1.5Identification and Selection for Analysis of Weather Monitoring Stations Located within the Site Climate RegionFigure 19.3.2-16 and Figure 19.3.2-17 present maps of the site climate region (identified in Figure 19.3.2-12), with additional annotations of locations within that region of NOAA Automated Surface Observing Stations (ASOS stations) (Figure 19.3.2-16), and NOAA COOP stations (Figure 19.3.2-17) for which NOAA "Clim-20" summaries have been published by NCDC. Table19.3.2-5 and Table19.3.2-6 present lists of the ASOS and COOP stations that are identified in Figure 19.3.2-16 and Figure 19.3.2-17. It should be noted that the ground elevations shown in Table19.3.2-5 and Table19.3.2-6 are given in ft. MSL (above Mean Sea Level) because that is the terminology used by NOAA in describing the ASOS and COOP stations (NCDC, 2001a; NCDC, 2001b; NCDC, 2001c; NCD C, 2001d; NCDC, 2001e; NCDC, 2001f; NCDC, 2001g; NCDC, 2001h; NCDC, 2001i; NCDC, 2001j; NCDC, 2001k; NCDC, 2001l; NCDC, 2001m; NCDC, 2001n; NCDC, 2001o; NCDC, 2001p; NCDC, 2001q; NCDC, 2001r; NCDC, 2001s; NCDC, 2001t; NCDC, 2001u; NCDC, 2001v; NCDC, 2001w; NCDC, 2001x; NCDC, 2012b). However, the MSL elevations are functionally equivalent to the NAVD 88 elevations used elsewhere in this subsection.A subset of the ASOS stations presented in Figure 19.3.2-16 is selected for analysis. The following criteria were used to select that subset of stations. The two first order stations Rockford and Madison are selected because of the extra statistical summaries in the form of NOAA annual summary LCD publications available for them. They also represent the geographical center of the site climate region. Four additional stations located approximately near the four corners of the site climate region are also selected to geographically bracket that region and avoid duplicate representation of similar areas. Those four additional stations are: Baraboo (at the northwest corner of the region), Fond du Lac (at the northeast corner of the region), Freeport (at the southwest corner of the region), and DuPage County (at the southeast corner of the region).All of the COOP stations presented in Figure 19.3.2-17 and Table19.3.2-6 are analyzed. Input information for that analysis includes statistics in the NOAA Clim-20 document for each station, that summarize climatic conditions during the 30 year period 1971 through 2000, and ten annual climatological data summaries for each of the states Wisconsin and Illinois, which summarize climatic conditions for each of the 10 years 2001 through 2010. Total years summarized for each of the COOP stations is, therefore, 40 years.19.3.2.2Regional Air QualityThe SHINE site is located in Rock County, Wisconsin which is part of the Rockford-Janesville- Beloit Interstate Air Quality Control Region (WDNR, 2011a). This air quality control region combines agricultural activities with the Beloit-Janesville, Wisconsin and Rockford, Illinois urban-industrial areas. The Wisconsin portion of the air quality control region, Rock County, is mostly flat to gently rolling farmland. Industry in the region includes manufacturing, foundry operations and electrical power plants (WDNR, 2011a). Rock County is currently in attainment for all criteria Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-17Rev. 0pollutants (ozone, particulate matter, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, and lead) (WDNR, 2011a, USEPA, 2011).Maintenance areas are those geographic areas that have a history of non-attainment but are currently in compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. In April 2004, the USEPA designated the following 10 counties in eastern Wisconsin as being in non-attainment with the 8-hour ozone air quality standard: Door, Kewaunee, Manitowoc, Sheyboygan, Washington, Ozaukee, Waukesha, Milwaukee, Racine, and Kenosha. However, in 2007, eight of the ten counties (Kewuanee, Manitowoc, Washington, Ozaukee, Waukesha, Milwaukee, Racine, and Kenosha) were re-designated as being in attainment with the 8-hour ozone standard | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | |||
(WDNR, 2012a). The resulting eight-county maintenance area and the two counties currently out of attainment with the 8-hour ozone air quality standard (Door and Sheyboygan counties) are situated to the northeast of the Rockford-Janesville-Beloit Interstate Air Quality Control Region, along the western shore of Lake Michigan. These are the closest non-attainment areas to the SHINE site.USEPA guidance (USEPA, 1990) states that a Class I visibility impact analysis is necessary for a major source locating within 100 km (160.9 mi.) of a Class I area. Class I areas are national parks and wilderness areas that are potentially sensitive to visibility impairment. Table19.3.2-7 lists the nearest Federal Class I areas to the SHINE site (NPS, 2011). The table shows that the closest Federal Class I area is the Rainbow Lake Wilderness Area, which is located approximately 455 km (approximately 283 miles) northwest of the SHINE site in far northern | |||
Wisconsin.Causes of regional air quality problems are generally due to a combination of factors. Typically, major factors include the following (Korshover, J., 1967): stagnating surface high pressure systems characterized by low surface wind speeds that linger over a region for several days, concentration of heavy industries and their air pollution emissions in relatively congested areas, and atmospheric mixing depths that limit the volume of air within which pollutants dilute (Holzworth, G.C., 1972). Additional factors can be involved for specific pollutants. For example, ozone air pollution is affected by not only the factors of stagnation, low wind speed, and limited mixing, but also requires the presence of additional factors that support the photochemical reactions in the atmosphere, including: intense sunlight, high temperature, and the presence of precursor chemical pollutants (Stern, A.C., 1973).19.3.2.3Severe Weather19.3.2.3.1Extreme Wind A statistic known as the "basic" wind speed is used for design and operating bases. Basic wind speeds are 50 year recurrence interval "nominal design 3-second gust wind speeds (mph) at 33ft. (10.1 m) above ground for Exposure C category", as defined in Figures 6-1 and 6-1C of ASCE, 2006.Several sources are considered to determine the wind speeds for the SHINE site. The basic wind speed for the SHINE site is 90 mph (40.2 m/s), based on the plot of basic wind speeds in Figure6-1C of ASCE, 2006. Basic wind speeds reported in AFCCC, 1999 for hourly weather stations in the site climate region are as follows: 90 mph (40.2 m/s) for Madison, Wisconsin, and 90 mph (40.2 m/s) for DuPage County Airport, West Chicago, Illinois. Consistency of the three values is the basis for selecting a value of 90 mph (40.2 m/s) for the SHINE site. That value Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-18Rev. 0applies to a recurrence interval of 50 years. Section C6.5.5 of ASCE, 2006 provides a method to calculate wind speeds for other recurrence intervals. Based on that method, a 100-year return-period value is calculated by multiplying the 50-year return-period value by a factor of 1.07. That approach produces a 100-year return-period three second gust wind speed for the SHINE site area of 96.3 mph (43.0 m/s).19.3.2.3.2Tornadoes and Waterspouts The NCDC Storm Events Database (NCDC, 2011g) provides information on historic storm events on a county basis. To use that database, 28 regional counties that are at least partially included within the site climate region are selected and presented on the map in Figure 19.3.2-18. Those counties approximate the representative climate region defined above in Subsection 19.3.2.1.3. The 28 counties are listed in Table19.3.2-8 (USCB, 2011). The NCDC Storm Events Database (NCDC, 2011g) was accessed to extract statistics on regional tornadoes and waterspouts. Information is extracted for the 28 regional counties. Those tornado and waterspout statistics, for the 62-year period May 1950 through July 2011, are presented in Table19.3.2-8. Strongest tornadoes in the database for Rock County (in which the SHINE site is located) are reviewed and are found to be of intensity F2. Table19.3.2-9 provides additional details on the most intense Rock County tornadoes. The strongest tornadoes found in the database for the seven counties adjacent to Rock County: Dane, Jefferson, Walworth, Boone, Winnebago, Stephenson, and Green counties, were reviewed and found to be F3 and F4 storms in Boone County, Illinois, and F3 storms in Dane County and Jefferson County, Wisconsin. Table19.3.2-10 presents additional details on the strongest tornadoes in counties adjacent to Rock County. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) guidance for siting research reactors (IAEA, 1987) was reviewed. This guidance requires design tornado information to be based on the maximum historical intensity within a radius of about 100 km (62 mi.) from the SHINE site. For the SHINE site, a 100 km (62 mi.) radius partially extends outside of the representative site climate region included within the 28 county region described above. An F5 intensity tornado was recorded on 8 June 1984 in Iowa County, Wisconsin, at the town of Barneveld, which is located approximately 49.7 mi. (80 km) in a west-northwest direction from the SHINE site.Regulatory Guide 1.76 specifies design-basis tornado characteristics for nuclear power reactors. Therefore, this guidance is not specifically applicable to an isotope production facility and Regulatory Guide 1.76 is used as a technical reference only. Wisconsin is located in Region I in Regulatory Guide 1.76 Figure 1. The design-basis tornado characteristics applicable to Region I are listed below: a.Maximum wind speed: 230 mph (103 m/s) b.Translational speed: 46 mph (21 m/s) c.Maximum rotational speed: 184 mph (82 m/s)d.Radius of maximum rotational speed: 150 ft (45.7 m/s)e.Pressure drop: 1.2 psi (83 millibars) f.Rate of pressure drop: 0.5 psi/s (37 millibars) | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-19Rev. 019.3.2.3.3Water Equivalent Precipitation Extremes This subsection examines and compares water equivalent precipitation extremes within the site climate region, and locally near the SHINE site. Daily total water equivalent precipitation is measured at the local NOAA COOP monitoring station at Beloit, Wisconsin, and several regional COOP stations within the site climate region.A PMP value for the SHINE site is presented in Subsection 19.3.2.3.6.Table19.3.2-11 presents maximum recorded 24-hour and monthly water equivalent precipitation values for the local COOP station at Beloit, and for the 18 regional COOP stations located within the site climate region defined in the map in Figure 19.3.2-17.Overall historic maximum recorded 24-hour water-equivalent precipitation from records for either the local Beloit station or for regional stations is 8.09 in. (20.55 cm) at DeKalb, Illinois. That event occurred on 18 July 1996. It was due to thunderstorms in a warm, moist tropical air mass streaming north from the Gulf of Mexico and into the warm sector southeast of a synoptic low pressure center located over northern Minnesota (NCDC, 1996a). Flash flooding was widespread over north-central and northeast Illinois due to record breaking rainfall during the 17-18 July period (NCDC, 1997).Overall historic maximum monthly water-equivalent precipitation from records for either the local Beloit station or for regional stations is 16.09 in. (40.87 cm) at Portage, Wisconsin. That month was August, 1980 (NCDC, 2001s).19.3.2.3.4Hail, Snowstorms and Ice Storms The mean hail or sleet frequencies during winter, spring, summer, autumn, and annual periods for Rockford and Madison are listed in Table19.3.2-12. Mean hail frequencies are less than one day per season at both stations. Statistics are very similar at Rockford and Madison, verifying some consistency across the site climate region.Hail events that are either severe (with hail size exceeding 0.75 in. (1.91 cm) in diameter) or large (with hail exceeding one inch in diameter) are reported to have occurred in Rock County, Wisconsin on 11 occasions during the period 1961-1990, or with a frequency of approximately 0.37 occurrences per year (NCDC, 2002). The largest hailstones t hat Rock County has experienced are as follows: of diameter 3.00 in. (7.62 cm) on one occasion during June 1930, of diameter 2.50 in. (6.35 cm) on one occasion during August 2006, and of diameter 2.00 in. (5.08cm) on one occasion during June 1975 and one occasion during June 1998 (NCDC,2011g).Daily total snowfall amounts are measured at the local NOAA COOP monitoring station at Beloit, Wisconsin, as well as at several regional COOP stations within the site climate region.Maximum recorded 24-hour snowfall from records for either the local Beloit station or for regional stations is 21.0 in. (53.34 cm) at Dalton, Wisconsin. That event occurred on 2 January 1999. It was due to a major winter synoptic cyclone (the "Blizzard of 1999") that developed in Colorado, curved northeast through the Great Lakes, then entered Canada (NCDC, 1999 and NCDC,2000). On 2 January 1999 the synoptic surf ace low was centered at the south tip of Illinois. A warm maritime tropical air mass with temperatures in the 80s°F was present to the Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-20Rev. 0south, and a continental arctic air mass with temperatures primarily in the teens °F was present to the north. An area of heavy snow covered the site climate region. This blizzard paralyzed south central and southeast Wisconsin. Ten to 21 in. (25.40 to 53.34 cm) of snow were deposited and wind gusts of 45 to 63 mph (20.1 to 28.2 m/s) occurred. Nearly all cities and villages declared snow emergencies, and airports were closed. Visibility in blowing snow was typically 0.5mi. (0.8 km). Structural damage to buildings and power lines was reported.Overall historic maximum monthly snowfall from records for either the local Beloit station, or for regional stations, is 50.4 in. (128.0 cm) at Watertown, Wisconsin. That month was January, 1979 (NCDC, 2001w). Overall, extreme snowfall conditions recorded at the local station at Beloit, Wisconsin are bracketed by conditions recorded at stations within the site climate region, supporting conclusions regarding climate region representativeness. | |||
A snow pack value for the SHINE site is presented in Subsection 19.3.2.3.6. | A snow pack value for the SHINE site is presented in Subsection 19.3.2.3.6. | ||
The mean number of days with freezing rain or drizzle is 2 days per year at both Madison, Wisconsin and Rockford, Illinois (Table19.3.2-4). A summary of 14 ice storms that affected Rock County, Wisconsin during the period 1995-2011 is presented in Table19.3.2-13 (NCDC, 2011g). That summary indicates the following.a.Several ice storms, as many as two or three, can occur per year. | The mean number of days with freezing rain or drizzle is 2 days per year at both Madison, Wisconsin and Rockford, Illinois (Table19.3.2-4). A summary of 14 ice storms that affected Rock County, Wisconsin during the period 1995-2011 is presented in Table19.3.2-13 (NCDC, 2011g). That summary indicates the following.a.Several ice storms, as many as two or three, can occur per year. | ||
b.Ice can accumulate periodically or during a consecutive period of anywhere from approximately two hours to 11 hours.c.Ice accumulations typically range | |||
Weathering and erosion have reduced terrain to nearly a plain. | Weathering and erosion have reduced terrain to nearly a plain. | ||
Scattered hills of resistant bedrock remain. | Scattered hills of resistant bedrock remain. | ||
Lake and swamp terrain.Relatively flat or gently rolling topography with occasional sandstone mesas, buttes, pinnacles.Numerous glacial landforms, lowest elevations of Wisconsin. Lake Winnebago is remnant of a larger glacial lake. Niagara cuesta is a rock ridge in the northeast in Door and Waukesha Counties.Escaped recent glaciation, allowing streams and rivers to form steep valleys. | Lake and swamp | ||
Portions of the uplands are referred to as the "driftless area" due to the lack of glacial debris, or "drift" ElevationsSeveral hundred feet above elevation of the Great Lakes1,400 to 1,650 ft. | |||
NAVD 88750 to 850 ft. | terrain.Relatively flat or | ||
NAVD 88Topographic relief of 100 to 200 feet above the elevation of Lake Michigan (mean lake elevation is approximately 600 ft. NAVD 88).Approximately 1,000 to 1,200 ft. NAVD 88, including some topographic relief approaching 500 feet. Rock bluffs, mounds (highest approximately 1,716 ft. NAVD 88). | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-32Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-2 Madison, Wisconsin Climatic Means and Extremes(Sheet 1 of 2)Table extracted from NCDC, 2011a. "POR" refers to the period of record (years). Refer to that reference for explanatory notes. | gently rolling topography with occasional sandstone mesas, buttes, pinnacles.Numerous | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-33Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-2 Madison, Wisconsin Climatic Means and Extremes(Sheet 2 of 2) Table extracted from NCDC, 2011a. "POR" refers to the period of record (years). Refer to that reference for explanatory notes. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-34Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-3 Rockford, Illinois Climatic Means and Extremes(Sheet 1 of 2) Table extracted from NCDC, 2011c. "POR" refers to the period of record (years). Refer to that reference for explanatory notes. | glacial landforms, lowest elevations of Wisconsin. Lake Winnebago is remnant of a larger glacial lake. Niagara cuesta is a rock ridge in the northeast in Door and Waukesha | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-35Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-3 Rockford, Illinois Climatic Means and Extremes(Sheet 2 of 2)Table extracted from NCDC, 2011c. "POR" refers to the period of record (years). Refer to that reference for explanatory notes. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | Counties.Escaped recent glaciation, allowing streams and rivers to form steep valleys. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | Portions of the uplands are referred to as the "driftless area" due to the lack of glacial debris, or | ||
Period of Record(years)(temp precip)Arboretum Univ of WIWIDane43 289 2686541 41Arlington Univ FarmWIColumbia43 1889 20108049 49BarabooWISauk43 2889 4482358 73Beaver DamWIDodge43 2788 5184062 74 BeloitWIRock42 3089 2780121 162BrodheadWIGreen42 3789 23790115 115 Charmany FarmWIDane43 489 2991049 49DaltonWIGreen Lake43 3989 12860n/aDe KalbILDe Kalb41 5688 47873119 130 Fond du LacWIFond du Lac43 4888 27760126 126Ft AtkinsonWIJefferson42 5488 5280070 70 Hartford 2 WWIWashington43 2088 2598067 73 HoriconWIDodge43 2688 38880109 109 Lake GenevaWIWalworth42 3688 26880n/a Lake MillsWIJefferson43 588 54817119 121 Madison Dane Co APWIDane43 889 2186679 79MarengoILMcHenry42 1888 39815156 156OconomowocWIWaukesha43 688 3085673 73 PortageWIColumbia43 3289 26775119 123 Prairie du SacWISauk43 1989 44780n/a Rockford APILWinnebago42 1289 673061 61StoughtonWIDane42 3789 45840n/a WatertownWIJefferson43 1088 44825121 121 Wisconsin DellsWIColumbia43 3789 4683589 89 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | |||
There was 1 injury.F21 Nov 19713.00100250,000A small tornado moved northeast in a mostly residential area along a line from 1.5 mi. (2.4 km) NNW to about 4 mi NNE of downtown Beloit. Several homes and garages were severely damaged. There was 1 injury.F28 May 198827.00173250,000Tornado affected Rock, Dane, and Jefferson counties. Many farm buildings and two homes were damaged.F227 Mar 19917.004402.5 millionTornado affected Green, Rock, Dane, and Jefferson counties. There were 5 injuries and 1 fatality.F225 Jun 19982.50100845,000Tornado moved from 2.3 mi. (3.7 km) WNW of Leyden to 1 mi. (1.6 km) NNE of Leyden. | "drift" ElevationsSeveral hundred feet above elevation of the | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | Great Lakes1,400 to 1,650 ft. | ||
NAVD 88750 to 850 ft. | |||
NAVD 88Topographic relief of 100 to 200 feet above the elevation of | |||
Lake Michigan (mean lake elevation is approximately 600 ft. NAVD 88).Approximately 1,000 to 1,200 ft. NAVD 88, | |||
including some topographic | |||
relief approaching 500 feet. Rock bluffs, mounds (highest approximately 1,716 ft. NAVD 88). | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-32Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-2 Madison, Wisconsin Climatic Means and Extremes(Sheet 1 of 2)Table extracted from NCDC, 2011a. "POR" refers to the period of record (years). Refer to that reference for explanatory notes | |||
. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-33Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-2 Madison, Wisconsin Climatic Means and Extremes(Sheet 2 of 2) | |||
Table extracted from NCDC, 2011a. "POR" refers to the period of record (years). Refer to that reference for explanatory notes | |||
. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-34Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-3 Rockford, Illinois Climatic Means and Extremes (Sheet 1 of 2) | |||
Table extracted from NCDC, 2011c. "POR" refers to the period of record (years). Refer to that reference for explanatory notes | |||
. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-35Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-3 Rockford, Illinois Climatic Means and Extremes(Sheet 2 of 2)Table extracted from NCDC, 2011c. "POR" refers to the period of record (years). Refer to that reference for explanatory notes | |||
. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-36Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-4 Madison, Wisconsin and Rockford, Illinois Additional Climatic Means and Extremes(Sheet 1 of 2) (a)a)Based on NCDC, 1996b. Period of record for Rockford is 1951-1995 and 1948-1995 for Madison.ParameterPeriodMadison, Wisconsin Rockford, IllinoisMean number of days with rain or drizzle(NCDC, 1996b)January56February55 March1011 | |||
April1515May1616June1514July1514August1413 September1313 October1313 November1011 December78 Annual138139Mean number of days with freezing rain or drizzle(NCDC, 1996b)January11February< 0.5< 0.5 March< 0.5< 0.5 April< 0.5< 0.5 | |||
May00June00July00August00 September00 October< 0.50 November< 0.5< 0.5 December11 Annual22 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-37Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-4 Madison, Wisconsin and Rockford, Illinois Additional Climatic Means and Extremes(Sheet 2 of 2)ParameterPeriodMadison, Wisconsin Rockford, IllinoisMean number of days with snow(NCDC, 1996b)January1817February1413 March1311 April43 May< 0.5< 0.5 June00 July00 August00 September< 0.50 October11 November98 December1615 Annual7568Mean number of days with hail or sleet(NCDC, 1996b)January0< 0.5February0< 0.5 March< 0.5< 0.5 April< 0.5< 0.5 May< 0.5< 0.5 June< 0.5< 0.5 July< 0.5< 0.5 August< 0.5< 0.5 September< 0.5< 0.5 October< 0.5< 0.5 November< 0.5< 0.5 December< 0.50 Annual22 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-38Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-5 List of NOAA ASOS Stations Located within the Site Climate Region(a,b,c)a) The site climate region and station locations are defined via the map in Figure 19.3.2-16.b) Extracted from NCDC, 2012b.c) MSL elevations are functionally equivalent to the NAVD 88 elevations in this table.NameUSAFIDNo.WBANIDNo.St.County NorthLatitude(deg min sec)West Longitude (deg min sec)GroundElev.(ft. MSL)ApproximateAvailable DS 3505 Digital Database Period of Record (years)Baraboo72650354833WISauk43 31 1989 46 159781997-2011 (15)Burlington7220594866WIRacine42 41 2388 18 147791948-2011 (64)De Kalb TaylorMunicipal Airport72207504871WIDe Kalb41 55 5588 42 289151973-2011 (39)Juneau Dodge County72650904898WIDodge43 25 3388 42 109361997-2011 (15)Du Page County72530594892ILDu Page41 54 5088 14 567581973-2011 (39)Fond du Lac CountyAirport72650604840WIFond du Lac43 46 1288 29 98071997-2011 (14)Freeport Albertus Airport72208204876ILStephen-son42 14 4589 34 558592004-2011 (8) | |||
Janesville SouthernWisconsinRegional72641594854WIRock42 37 189 1 588081973-2011 (39)Madison Dane County TruaxField72641014837WIDane43 8 2789 20 418661948-2011 (64) | |||
Middleton | |||
Municipal Morey Field720656n/aWIDane43 7 189 31 589282009-2011 (3)Monroe Municipal72641404873WIGreen42 36 5489 35 2710852001-2011 (10)Rochelle Municipal | |||
AirportKoritzField72218204890IL Ogle41 53 3489 4 407812004-2011 (8)Chicago Rockford IntlAirport72543094822 ILWinne-bago42 11 3489 5 347431973-2011 (39)WatertownM unicipalAirport72646454834WIJefferson43 10 188 43 18331995-2011 (17) | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-39Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-6 List of NOAA COOP Stations in the Site Climate Region for which Clim-20 Summaries are Available(a,b)a)The site climate region and station locations are defined via the map in Figure 19.3.2-17.b)MSL elevations are functionally equivalent to the NAVD 88 elevations in this table.NameSt.County NorthLatitude (deg min)West Longitude (deg min)GroundElev.(ft. MSL) | |||
Approx. | |||
Period of Record(years)(temp precip)Arboretum Univ of WIWIDane43 289 2686541 41Arlington Univ FarmWIColumbia43 1889 20108049 49BarabooWISauk43 2889 4482358 73Beaver DamWIDodge43 2788 5184062 74 | |||
BeloitWIRock42 3089 2780121 162BrodheadWIGreen42 3789 23790115 115 Charmany FarmWIDane43 489 2991049 49DaltonWIGreen Lake43 3989 12860n/aDe KalbILDe Kalb41 5688 47873119 130 Fond du LacWIFond du Lac43 4888 27760126 126Ft AtkinsonWIJefferson42 5488 5280070 70 Hartford 2 WWIWashington43 2088 2598067 73 HoriconWIDodge43 2688 38880109 109 Lake GenevaWIWalworth42 3688 26880n/a Lake MillsWIJefferson43 588 54817119 121 | |||
Madison Dane Co APWIDane43 889 2186679 79MarengoILMcHenry42 1888 39815156 156OconomowocWIWaukesha43 688 3085673 73 PortageWIColumbia43 3289 26775119 123 Prairie du SacWISauk43 1989 44780n/a Rockford APILWinnebago42 1289 673061 61StoughtonWIDane42 3789 45840n/a WatertownWIJefferson43 1088 44825121 121 Wisconsin DellsWIColumbia43 3789 4683589 89 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-40Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-7 Nearest Federal Class I Areas to the SHINE Site (a)a) Extracted from NPS, 2011.Class I AreaDistance from SHINE Site (km)Distance from SHINE Site (mi.)Direction from SHINE SiteRainbow Lake Wilderness Area, WI455283NorthwestSeney Wilderness Area, MI475295North-northeastIsle Royale National Park , MI610379North Mammoth Cave National Park, KY630391South-southeastBoundary Waters Canoe Area, MN640398North-northwestMingo Wilderness Area, MO645401SouthVoyageurs National Park MN730454North Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-41Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-8 Regional Tornadoes and Waterspouts(a,b,c)a)Period of record is May, 1950 through July, 2011.b)Based on NCDC, 2011g.c)Additionally, an F5 tornado occurred on 8 June 1984 in Iowa County, Wisconsin, at the town of Barneveld, which is located approximately 50 mi. (80 km) west-northwest of the SHINE site.StateCountyArea (mi. | |||
2)Number of Tornadoes Number of Waterspout sILBoone28280ILCarroll 466140ILCook1635510ILDe Kalb 635110ILDu Page 337240ILKane524190ILLake1368161ILLee729220ILMcHenry611 150ILOgle763190ILStephenson565 130ILWhiteside697 190WIAdams689170WIColumbia796 340WIDane1238560WIDodge907580WIFond du Lac766 430WIGreen585180WIGreen Lake380 300WIJefferson583 330WIJuneau804230WIKenosha 75491WIMarquette456 70WIRacine792201WISauk848230WIWalworth577 230WIWashington436 170WIWaukesha580 280 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-42Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-9 Details of Strongest Tornadoes in Rock County, Wisconsin(a,b,c)a) The SHINE site is located in Rock County, Wisconsin.b) Period of record is May, 1950 through July, 2011.c) Based on NCDC, 1960; NCDC, 1961; NCDC, 1970; NCDC, 1971; NCDC, 1988; NCDC, 1991; NCDC,1998, and NCDC, 2011g.Tornado IntensityDate Path Length (mi.) | |||
Path Width (yd.)Property Damage($)Additional DescriptionF215 Nov 19603.00672,500Occurred 1.5 mi. (2.4 km) south of Union, Wisconsin. Damage occurred to farm buildings, an abandoned restaurant, and a school roof.F222 Sep 19613.6022025,000Occurred 1 mi. (1.6 km) south of Whitewater, Wisconsin. Damage occurred to at least 15 farms. There was 1 injury.F29 Oct 197011.1050250,000The tornado moved NNW from the banks of the Rock River just north of Riverside Park (NW of Janesville) and 5 mi. (8.0 km) west of Edgerton toward Stoughton. An outbuilding was damaged. | |||
There was 1 injury.F21 Nov 19713.00100250,000A small tornado moved northeast in a mostly residential area along a line from 1.5 mi. (2.4 km) NNW to about 4 mi NNE of downtown Beloit. Several homes and | |||
garages were severely damaged. There was 1 injury.F28 May 198827.00173250,000Tornado affected Rock, Dane, and Jefferson counties. Many farm buildings and two homes were damaged.F227 Mar 19917.004402.5 millionTornado affected Green, Rock, Dane, and Jefferson counties. There were 5 injuries and 1 fatality.F225 Jun 19982.50100845,000Tornado moved from 2.3 mi. (3.7 km) WNW of Leyden to 1 mi. (1.6 km) NNE of Leyden. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-43Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-10 Details of Strongest Tornadoes in Surrounding CountiesAdjacent to Rock County, Wisconsin(Sheet 1 of 2)(a,b,c,d,e,f)Tornado IntensityDateCounty Path Length (mi.)Path Width (yd.)Property Damage($)Additional DescriptionF421 Apr 1967Boone11.501200250,000Tornado moved near 50 mph (22.4 m/s) towards ENE to E, from 2 mi. (3.2 km) SE of Cherry Valley to two mi. north of Woodstock. Numerous reports of multiple funnel sightings were substantiated by damage. Almost complete destruction directly in path with major wind damage on either side. Many farm homes completely destroyed. Woods were stripped with large trees uprooted or snapped off. About 5 percent of the path was through an urban area, which was the SE corner of Belvidere, where a high school was hit. There were 450 injuries and 24 fatalities.F37 Jan 2008Boone7.001002.0 millionTornado traveled from about 1.2 mi. (1.9 km) N of Poplar Grove in Boone County, to about 3.2 mi (5.1 km) NE of Harvard in McHenry County. A large barn and farmhouse were destroyed, and other buildings severely damaged. Damage also occurred to power lines. Large trees were snapped, uprooted, and stripped of branches. There were 4 injuries.F32 Aug 1967Danen/an/a25,000Tornado moved SE on the N shore of Lake Mendota in the town of Westport, about 100 yards (0.1 km) inland. Three cottages were destroyed and several homes slightly damaged. There were 5 injuries and 2 fatalities. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-44Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-10 Details of Strongest Tornadoes in Surrounding CountiesAdjacent to Rock County, Wisconsin(Sheet 2 of 2)a) The SHINE site is located in Rock County, WI.b) Counties adjacent to Rock County include: Green (WI), Dane (WI), Jefferson (WI), Walworth (WI), Boone (IL), Winnebago (IL), and Stephenson (IL).c) Period of record is May, 1950 through July, 2011. | |||
d) "n/a" means information not available. | d) "n/a" means information not available. | ||
e) Based on data in references NCDC, 1967a; NCDC, 1967b; NCDC, 1975; NCDC, 1980; NCDC, 1992; NCDC, 2005b; NCDC, 2008; and NCDC, 2011g.f) Additionally, an F5 tornado occurred on 8 June 1984 in Iowa County, Wisconsin, at the town of Barneveld, which is located approximately 50 mi. (80 km) west-northwest of the SHINE site.Tornado IntensityDateCounty Path Length (mi.)Path Width (yd.)Property Damage($)Additional DescriptionF34 Jun 1975Dane2.303325,000Tornado touched down three miles north of Sun Prairie and moved towards the east. Two farms had extensive damage and one home was destroyed.F317 Jun 1992Dane16.0040025.0 millionTornado occurred 2 mi. | e) Based on data in references NCDC, 1967a; NCDC, 1967b; NCDC, 1975; NCDC, 1980; NCDC, 1992; NCDC, 2005b; NCDC, 2008; and NCDC, 2011g.f) Additionally, an F5 tornado occurred on 8 June 1984 in Iowa County, Wisconsin, at the town of Barneveld, which is located approximately 50 mi. (80 km) west-northwest of the SHINE site.Tornado IntensityDateCounty Path Length (mi.)Path Width (yd.)Property Damage($)Additional DescriptionF34 Jun 1975Dane2.303325,000Tornado touched down three miles north of Sun Prairie and moved towards the east. Two farms had extensive damage and one home was destroyed.F317 Jun 1992Dane16.0040025.0 millionTornado occurred 2 mi. | ||
(3.2 km) north of Belleville. | (3.2 km) north of Belleville. | ||
There were 30 injuries.F318 Aug 2005Dane17.0060034.3 millionStrong and destructive tornado started about 2.8 mi. (4.5 km) SE of Fitchburg and moved slowly ESE to the southern edge of Lake Kegonsa through residential neighborhoods including Dunn, Pleasant Springs, and Stoughton. There was extensive damage to homes, businesses, farm buildings, vehicles, power lines, and trees. There were 23 injuries and 1 fatality.F35 Jun 1980Jefferson4.00n/a25,000Tornado formed near Rock River at 0.25 mi. (0.4 km) E of Watertown, lifted and moved SE where it touched down a second time 1 mi. (1.6 km) SE of Pipersville. | There were 30 injuries.F318 Aug 2005Dane17.0060034.3 millionStrong and destructive tornado started about 2.8 mi. (4.5 km) SE of Fitchburg and moved slowly ESE to the southern edge of Lake Kegonsa through residential neighborhoods including Dunn, Pleasant Springs, and Stoughton. There was extensive damage to homes, businesses, farm buildings, vehicles, power lines, and trees. There were 23 injuries and 1 | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | |||
fatality.F35 Jun 1980Jefferson4.00n/a25,000Tornado formed near Rock River at 0.25 mi. (0.4 km) E of Watertown, lifted and moved SE where it touched down a second time 1 mi. (1.6 km) SE of | |||
Pipersville. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-45Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-11 Precipitation Extremes at Local and Regional NOAA COOP Meteorological Monitoring Stations within the Site Climate Region (a,b,c)a) The site climate region and station locations are defined in Figure 19.3.2-17.b) Based on 1971-2000 da ta in NCDC, 2001a-x.c) Madison and Rockford statistics were updated through the year 2010 from NCDC, 2011a and NCDC,2011c.Station NameStateCountyMaximum Recorded24-HourRainfall(in.)Maximum RecordedMonthlyRainfall(in.)Maximum Recorded24-HourSnowfall(in.)Maximum Recorded MonthlySnowfall(in.)Arboretum Univ of | |||
WIWIDane6.0012.0712.025.5Arlington Univ FarmWIColumbia5.1012.9214.028.0BarabooWISauk7.7814.7912.035.2Beaver DamWIDodge4.4115.0513.030.0 BeloitWIRock5.7714.3911.022.0BrodheadWIGreen6.6213.1110.031.1Charmany FarmWIDane5.8511.4713.020.5DaltonWIGreen Lake4.6913.7721.025.5DeKalbILDe Kalb8.0914.2315.634.5Fond du LacWIFond du Lac6.8312.7014.025.1 | |||
Ft AtkinsonWIJefferson4.479.0514.039.0Hartford 2 WWIWashington5.2011.2312.033.0 HoriconWIDodge5.9414.7216.040.0Lake GenevaWIWalworth3.8811.3013.238.5 Lake MillsWIJefferson4.9311.3111.031.0Madison Dane Co APWIDane5.2815.1817.340.4MarengoILMcHenry5.1511.7012.021.0OconomowocWIWaukesha5.3811.3911.528.7PortageWIColumbia6.2916.0912.534.0Prairie du SacWISauk5.7311.4111.623.5Rockford APILWinnebago6.4213.9811.430.2StoughtonWIDane5.058.8612.035.5WatertownWIJefferson6.6510.4713.050.4Wisconsin DellsWIColumbia7.6714.1314.028.4 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-46Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-12 Mean Seasonal and Annual Hail or Sleet Frequencies at Rockford, Illinois and Madison, Wisconsin (a)a) Statistics from NCDC, 2011a and NCDC, 2011c.StationWinterSpringSummerAutumnAnnualRockford<0.3<0.5<0.5<0.5<0.5Madison<0.2<0.5<0.5<0.5<0.7 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-47Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-13 Ice Storms that have Affected Rock County, Wisconsin (a)a) Based on 1995 - 2011 data in NCDC, 2011g.Date of StormDescription of Ice Storm26 Feb 1995Freezing rain and freezing drizzle. Coating of ice up to one-quarter inch.26 Nov 1995Two to six hour period of sleet and/or freezing rain glazed road surfaces.13 Dec 1995Ice accumulations of one-quarter to one-half inch on top of one to five inches of snow. A glazing of less than one-quarter inch of freezing rain or freezing drizzle.4 Feb 1997Several hours of freezing rain, accumulated to one quarter inch. Sheets of ice on roads and sidewalks, especially rural.3 Feb 2003Periodic light freezing drizzle of light freezing rain glazed roads and sidewalks.7 Apr 2003Freezing drizzle left crusty layers. | |||
16 Jan 2004Freezing rain caused road surfaces to become very slippery due to initial ice glazing of 1/16 to 1/8 inch.7 Mar 2004Freezing drizzle/rain generated a thin layer of ice on road surfaces. | 16 Jan 2004Freezing rain caused road surfaces to become very slippery due to initial ice glazing of 1/16 to 1/8 inch.7 Mar 2004Freezing drizzle/rain generated a thin layer of ice on road surfaces. | ||
18 Dec 2004Light freezing drizzle coated roads and bridges during morning hours.1 Jan 2005Pockets of freezing rain or drizzle resulted in a light glaze of ice on many road surfaces and sidewalks.17 Feb 2008Ice storm affected a 25 to 30 mile wide area stretching from Janesville to Ft. Atkinson to Delafield to Wes Bend to Port Washington, with about 11 hours of freezing rain. Ice accumulations ranged from one quarter to one half inch. Roads were icy. 8 Dec 2008Freezing rain produced ice accumulations of 1/10 to 2/10 inch near the Illinois border.28 Mar 2009Mixture of sleet, rain, freezing rain and snow caused very hazardous driving conditions. Ice accumulations were 0.10 inch.23 Dec 2009Freezing rain during afternoon hours resulted in a low-end ice storm with ice accumulations of one quarter to one half inch. Trees and power lines were coated, causing them to break. | 18 Dec 2004Light freezing drizzle coated roads and bridges during morning hours.1 Jan 2005Pockets of freezing rain or drizzle resulted in a light glaze of ice on many road surfaces and sidewalks.17 Feb 2008Ice storm affected a 25 to 30 mile wide area stretching from Janesville to Ft. Atkinson to Delafield to Wes Bend to Port Washington, with about 11 hours of freezing rain. Ice accumulations ranged from one quarter to one half inch. Roads were icy. 8 Dec 2008Freezing rain produced ice accumulations of 1/10 to 2/10 inch near the Illinois border.28 Mar 2009Mixture of sleet, rain, freezing rain and snow caused very hazardous driving conditions. Ice accumulations were 0.10 inch.23 Dec 2009Freezing rain during afternoon hours resulted in a low-end ice storm with ice accumulations of one quarter to one half inch. Trees and power lines were coated, causing them to break. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-48Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-14 Mean Seasonal Thunderstorm Frequencies at Rockford, Illinois and Madison, Wisconsin (a)a) Statistics from NCDC, 2011a and NCDC, 2011c. | ||
StationWinter(days)Spring(days)Summer(days)Autumn(days)Rockford0.34.07.42.7Madison0.23.67.12.3 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-49Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-15 Design Wet and Dry Bulb Temperatures (a)a) 0.4%, 1% and 2% temperatures from ASHRAE, 2009. 5% temperatures from NCDC, 1996bStatisticBounding Value (°F)Maximum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 0.4 percent91.5 (Rockford)Mean coincident WBT (MCWB) at the 0.4 percent DBT75.0 (Rockford) | |||
Maximum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 2.0 percent85.8 (Rockford)Mean coincident WBT (MCWB) at the 2.0 percent DBT72.0 (Rockford)Minimum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 0.4 percent-9.1 (Madison)Minimum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 1.0 percent-2.9 (Madison)Maximum WBT with annual exceedance probability of 0.4 percent78.3 (Du Page County Airport)Maximum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 5 percent81 (Rockford)Minimum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 5 percent9 (Madison) | Maximum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 2.0 percent85.8 (Rockford)Mean coincident WBT (MCWB) at the 2.0 percent DBT72.0 (Rockford)Minimum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 0.4 percent-9.1 (Madison)Minimum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 1.0 percent-2.9 (Madison)Maximum WBT with annual exceedance probability of 0.4 percent78.3 (Du Page County Airport)Maximum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 5 percent81 (Rockford)Minimum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 5 percent9 (Madison) | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-50Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-16 Estimated 100-Year Return Maximum and Minimum DBT, MCWB coincident with the 100-Year Return Maximum DBT, Historic Maximum WBT and Estimated 100-Year Annual Maximum Return WBT StationEstimated 100-yr maximum DBT (°F)MCWB coincident with 100-yr maximum DBT (°F)HistoricmaximumWBT (°F)Estimated 100-yrmaximumWBT (°F)Estimated 100-yr minimumDBT (°F)Rockford104.88083.685.9-35.1Madison104.37585.086.0-33.4Bounding value104.88085.086.0-35.1 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-51Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-17 Dry Bulb Temperature Extremes at Local and Regional NOAA COOP Meteorological Monitoring Stations within the Site Climate Region(a,b,c,d)a) The site climate region and station locations are defined in Figure 19.3.2-17.b) Based on 1971-2000 data in NCDC, 2001a-x. | ||
c) Rockford and Madison statistics were updated through the year 2010 from NCDC. 2011a and NCDC, 2011c.d) The highest and lowest dry bulb temperatures in the region are in bold font. | c) Rockford and Madison statistics were updated through the year 2010 from NCDC. 2011a and NCDC, 2011c.d) The highest and lowest dry bulb temperatures in the region are in bold font. | ||
(-35° - +55°C) 1°F RMSE over entire range with maximum error of 2°F 1° Ftime constant 2 minRelative humidity5 - 100 percent 5 percent 1 percenttime constant < 2 minWind speed2 - 85 knotsa) +/- 2 knots up to 40 knotsb) RMSE +/- 5 percent above 40 knots1 knota) distance constant < 10 mb) 2 knot | StationNameStateCounty Maximum RecordedDry BulbTemperature | ||
(°F)MinimumRecordedDry Bulb Temperature | |||
(°F)Arboretum Univ. of WIWIDane108-38Arlington Univ. FarmWIColumbia102-36 BarabooWISauk102-45Beaver DamWIDodge100-36BeloitWIRock102-26BrodheadWIGreen102-36Charmany FarmWIDane102-34DaltonWIGreen Lake103-39 De KalbILDe Kalb103-27Fond du LacWIFond du Lac103-41Ft AtkinsonWIJefferson102-39Hartford 2 WWIWashington105-35 HoriconWIDodge101-36Lake GenevaWIWalworth106-27 Lake MillsWIJefferson104-33Madison Dane Co APWIDane104-37MarengoILMcHenry109-29 OconomowocWIWaukesha101-33 PortageWIColumbia103-35 Prairie du SacWISauk103-42Rockford APILWinnebago104-27StoughtonWIDane103-35WatertownWIJefferson103-33Wisconsin DellsWIColumbia102-43 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-52Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-18 FAA Specifications for Automated Weather Observing Stations(a)a) From FAA, 2011ParameterRangeAccuracyResolutionOtherDry bulb temperature-30° - +130°F | |||
(-35° - +55°C) 1°F RMSE over entire range with maximum error of 2°F 1° Ftime constant 2 minRelative humidity5 - 100 percent 5 percent 1 percenttime constant < 2 minWind speed2 - 85 knotsa) +/- 2 knots up to 40 knotsb) RMSE +/- 5 percent above 40 knots1 knota) distance constant < 10 mb) 2 knot threshold Wind direction1°- 360° azimuth+/- 5 percent RMSE1°a) time constant < 2 secondsb) 2 knot thresholdPressure17.58 - 31.53 in. Hga) +/- 0.02 in. Hg RMSE; b) maximum error 0.02 in. Hg 0.001 in. Hg drift 0.02 in. Hg for period not less than 6 monthsVisibility< 1/4 - 10 mi.a) 1/4 1/4 mi.: +/- 1/4 mi. b) 1-1/2 3/4 mi.: + 1/4 , -1/2 mi. | |||
c) 2 1/2 mi.: +/- 1/2 mi. | c) 2 1/2 mi.: +/- 1/2 mi. | ||
d) 3 1/2 mi.: +1/2, -1 mi. | d) 3 1/2 mi.: +1/2, -1 mi. | ||
e) 4 mi.: +/- 1 mi.< 1/4, 1/4, 1/2, 3/4, 1, 1-1/4, 1-1/2, 2, 2-1/2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 10 and > 10 mi.time constant 3 minPrecipitation0.01 - 5 in/hr0.002 in/hr RMSE or 4 percent, which ever is greater0.01 in.Cloud height 0 to 12,500 ft 100 ft. or 5 percent, which ever is greatera) 0 - 5,500 ft.: 50 ft. | |||
e) 4 mi.: +/- 1 mi.< 1/4, 1/4, 1/2, 3/4, 1, 1-1/4, 1-1/2, 2, 2-1/2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 10 and > 10 | |||
mi.time constant 3 minPrecipitation0.01 - 5 in/hr0.002 in/hr RMSE or 4 percent, which ever is greater0.01 in.Cloud height 0 to 12,500 ft 100 ft. or 5 percent, which ever is greatera) 0 - 5,500 ft.: 50 ft. | |||
b) 5,501 -10,000 ft.: 250 ft. | b) 5,501 -10,000 ft.: 250 ft. | ||
c) > 10,000 ft.: 500 ft.a) sampling rate at least once every 30 seconds b) at least three cloud layers when visibility 1/4 mi.Time0000 - 2359 UTCwithin 15 seconds each month1 second Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | c) > 10,000 ft.: 500 ft.a) sampling rate at least once every 30 seconds b) at least three cloud layers when visibility 1/4 mi.Time0000 - 2359 UTCwithin 15 seconds each month1 second Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-53Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-19 Annual Data Recovery Rates (in Percent) of Dry Bulb Temperatures, Relative Humidity, Wind Speed, and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport for 2005-2010 (a)a) From NCDC, 2011lYearDry Bulb Temperature Relative HumidityWind SpeedWind Direction200595.995.894.094.0200693.092.991.191.1200787.787.687.387.3 200892.692.691.291.2200993.993.692.792.6201093.893.792.492.4 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-54Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-20 Historical Dry Bulb Temperatures, Relative Humidity, and Wind Speed from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport for 2005-2010 (a)a) From NCDC, 2011lDry Bulb Temperature (°F) | ||
Relative Humidity(percent)Wind Speed (mph)MonthMaximum Minimum AverageAverageMaximum AverageJanuary61-2022.679.2359.2February59-1724.276.0498.7 March77736.872.7338.9April841949.763.24010.4May933059.265.5318.8 June934369.071.3487.0July974671.974.7316.1August934571.973.3385.8 September953464.072.8306.5October902351.572.4388.0November771240.173.1339.2 December55-824.082.4448.6Average811848.773.1388.1 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-55Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-21 Annual Joint Data Recovery Rates of Wind Speed, Wind Direction, and Computed Pasquill Stability Class from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (a)a) From NCDC, 2011l YearJoint Data Recovery(percent)200593.6200690.5200786.0 200890.6200991.7201091.7 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-56Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-22 Pasquill Stability Class Frequency Distributions from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (Percent) 2005-2010(a)a) From NCDC, 2011lFrequency of Occurrence (Percent)Pasquill Class2005200620072008200920102005-2010 A0.780.670.860.681.181.160.89 B5.003.433.613.645.245.394.40C11.8811.3110.1511.1810.6711.9811.21D52.9056.4556.6755.4454.0050.1954.24 E8.838.248.157.417.317.087.83F10.1010.2810.359.699.5910.4810.08G10.519.6210.2111.9612.0113.7211.35Total100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-57Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-23 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class A) | |||
(a)a)From NCDC, 2011l Speed (m/s)N NNENEENEEESESESSESSSWSWWSWWWNWNWNNW TotalCalm3230.00 < WS < 1.00 00000010000000001 1.00 < WS < 2.00 00112102000020009 2.00 < WS < 3.00 623957969553955492 3.00 < WS < 4.00 00000000000000000 4.00 < WS < 5.00 00000000000000000 5.00 < WS < 6.00 00000000000000000 6.00 < WS < 8.00 000000000000000008.00 < WS < 10.00 00000000000000000> 10.00 00000000000000000Totals6241078108955311554425 Speed (m/s)Calm0.680.00 < WS < 1.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 1.00 < WS < 2.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.02 2.00 < WS < 3.00 0.010.000.010.020.010.010.020.010.020.010.010.010.020.010.010.010.19 3.00 < WS < 4.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 4.00 < WS < 5.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 5.00 < WS < 6.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 6.00 < WS < 8.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.008.00 < WS < 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00> 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00Totals0.010.000.010.020.010.020.020.020.020.010.010.010.020.010.010.010.89 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-58Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-24 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class B) | |||
(a)a) From NCDC, 2011l Speed (m/s)N NNENEENEEESESESSESSSWSWWSWWWNWNWNNW TotalCalm6970.00 < WS < 1.00 00000000000000000 1.00 < WS < 2.00 51012811115481387125134136 2.00 < WS < 3.00 31252723292321222128402735332319427 3.00 < WS < 4.00 47393429383137474556614362613137698 4.00 < WS < 5.00 359106253132185191289138 5.00 < WS < 6.00 00000000000000000 6.00 < WS < 8.00 000000000000000008.00 < WS < 10.00 00000000000000000> 10.00 00000000000000000Totals8679827084676876871181178212811175692096 Speed (m/s)Calm1.460.00 < WS < 1.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 1.00 < WS < 2.00 0.010.020.030.020.020.020.010.010.020.030.020.010.030.010.030.010.29 2.00 < WS < 3.00 0.070.050.060.050.060.050.040.050.040.060.080.060.070.070.050.040.90 3.00 < WS < 4.00 0.100.080.070.060.080.070.080.100.090.120.130.090.130.130.070.081.46 4.00 < WS < 5.00 0.010.010.020.020.010.000.010.010.030.040.020.010.040.030.020.020.29 5.00 < WS < 6.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 6.00 < WS < 8.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.008.00 < WS < 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00> 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00Totals0.180.170.170.150.180.140.140.160.180.250.250.170.270.230.160.144.40 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-59Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-25 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class C) | |||
(a)a) From NCDC, 2011l Speed (m/s)N NNENEENEEESESESSESSSWSWWSWWWNWNWNNW TotalCalm11180.00 < WS < 1.00 00000000000000000 1.00 < WS < 2.00 152571567315151661814149167 2.00 < WS < 3.00 34242734251925283738573559535830583 3.00 < WS < 4.00 523939392439245665837272105946059922 4.00 < WS < 5.00 71724957544545811111361481141591501201011513 5.00 < WS < 6.00 422931273626174581105876561915356852 6.00 < WS < 8.00 05564565121221182381021428.00 < WS < 10.00 0001300043631110032> 10.00 000011022030501015Totals2141711561711621411242203273924103134414113162575344 Speed (m/s)Calm2.350.00 < WS < 1.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 1.00 < WS < 2.00 0.030.000.010.010.030.010.010.010.030.030.030.010.040.030.030.020.35 2.00 < WS < 3.00 0.070.050.060.070.050.040.050.060.080.080.120.070.120.110.120.061.22 3.00 < WS < 4.00 0.110.080.080.080.050.080.050.120.140.170.150.150.220.200.130.121.93 4.00 < WS < 5.00 0.150.150.100.120.110.090.090.170.230.290.310.240.330.310.250.213.17 5.00 < WS < 6.00 0.090.060.070.060.080.050.040.090.170.220.180.140.130.190.110.121.79 6.00 < WS < 8.00 0.000.010.010.010.010.010.010.010.030.030.040.040.050.020.020.000.308.00 < WS < 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.010.000.000.000.010.010.010.010.020.000.000.000.07> 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.010.000.010.000.000.000.03Totals0.450.360.330.360.340.300.260.460.690.820.860.660.930.860.660.5411.21 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-60Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-26 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class D) | |||
(a)a) From NCDC, 2011l Speed (m/s)N NNENEENEEESESESSESSSWSWWSWWWNWNWNNW TotalCalm13530.00 < WS < 1.00 000000000000000001.00 < WS < 2.00 393140364532251831272430473528405282.00 < WS < 3.00 24116816515820416415413718318518014025420121215028963.00 < WS < 4.00 32320520522427122020321334228223724033123926023640314.00 < WS < 5.00 32618918620027419016120238225018220331923526724138075.00 < WS < 6.00 37422924826329720519425646847632125348634438132651216.00 < WS < 8.00 25915120129134621817422761748838133460544847137955908.00 < WS < 10.00 632861901485931531391701121122391441661151730> 10.00 2768276825142172678196120745539800Totals16521007111412891653111395611272234194515181408240117201840152625856 Speed (m/s)Calm2.840.00 < WS < 1.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.001.00 < WS < 2.00 0.080.070.080.080.090.070.050.040.070.060.050.060.100.070.060.081.112.00 < WS < 3.00 0.510.350.350.330.430.340.320.290.380.390.380.290.530.420.440.316.073.00 < WS < 4.00 0.680.430.430.470.570.460.430.450.720.590.500.500.690.500.550.508.464.00 < WS < 5.00 0.680.400.390.420.570.400.340.420.800.520.380.430.670.490.560.517.995.00 < WS < 6.00 0.780.480.520.550.620.430.410.540.981.000.670.531.020.720.800.6810.746.00 < WS < 8.00 0.540.320.420.610.730.460.370.481.291.020.800.701.270.940.990.8011.738.00 < WS < 10.00 0.130.060.130.190.310.120.070.110.290.360.230.230.500.300.350.243.63> 10.00 0.060.010.020.060.140.050.030.040.150.140.170.200.250.160.120.081.68Totals3.472.112.342.703.472.332.012.364.694.083.182.955.043.613.863.2054.24 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-61Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-27 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class E) | |||
(a)From NCDC, 2011l Speed (m/s)N NNENEENEEESESESSESSSWSWWSWWWNWNWNNW TotalCalm00.00 < WS < 1.00 00000000000000000 1.00 < WS < 2.00 00000000000000000 2.00 < WS < 3.00 593548497782767091857544755053381007 3.00 < WS < 4.00 513554529084829416711568611368173361279 4.00 < WS < 5.00 422137326431185815012773541267676541039 5.00 < WS < 6.00 239111617166306544162662232719410 6.00 < WS < 8.00 000000000000000008.00 < WS < 10.00 00000000000000000> 10.00 00000000000000000Totals1751001501492482131822524733712321853992302291473735 Speed (m/s)Calm0.000.00 < WS < 1.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 1.00 < WS < 2.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 2.00 < WS < 3.00 0.120.070.100.100.160.170.160.150.190.180.160.090.160.100.110.082.11 3.00 < WS < 4.00 0.110.070.110.110.190.180.170.200.350.240.140.130.290.170.150.082.68 4.00 < WS < 5.00 0.090.040.080.070.130.070.040.120.310.270.150.110.260.160.160.112.18 5.00 < WS < 6.00 0.050.020.020.030.040.030.010.060.140.090.030.050.130.050.060.040.86 6.00 < WS < 8.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.008.00 < WS < 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00> 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00Totals0.370.210.310.310.520.450.380.530.990.780.490.390.840.480.480.317.83 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-62Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-28 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class F) | |||
(a)a) From NCDC, 2011l Speed (m/s)N NNENEENEEESESESSESSSWSWWSWWWNWNWNNW TotalCalm9750.00 < WS < 1.00 00000000000000000 1.00 < WS < 2.00 26142118413121192832182636152319388 2.00 < WS < 3.00 11774901111581531481641961761641312651922041012444 3.00 < WS < 4.00 3726533251495082100858460109717138998 4.00 < WS < 5.00 00000000000000000 5.00 < WS < 6.00 00000000000000000 6.00 < WS < 8.00 000000000000000008.00 < WS < 10.00 00000000000000000> 10.00 00000000000000000Totals1801141641612502332192653242932662174102782981584805 Speed (m/s)Calm2.050.00 < WS < 1.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 1.00 < WS < 2.00 0.050.030.040.040.090.070.040.040.060.070.040.050.080.030.050.040.81 2.00 < WS < 3.00 0.250.160.190.230.330.320.310.340.410.370.340.270.560.400.430.215.13 3.00 < WS < 4.00 0.080.050.110.070.110.100.100.170.210.180.180.130.230.150.150.082.09 4.00 < WS < 5.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 5.00 < WS < 6.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 6.00 < WS < 8.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.008.00 < WS < 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00> 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00Totals0.380.240.340.340.520.490.460.560.680.610.560.460.860.580.630.3310.08 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-63Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-29 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class G) | |||
(a)a) From NCDC, 2011lSpeed (m/s)N NNENEENEEESESESSESSSWSWWSWWWNWNWNNW TotalCalm40530.00 < WS < 1.00 00000000000000000 1.00 < WS < 2.00 77353862113106956110174557218312692671357 2.00 < WS < 3.00 00000000000000000 3.00 < WS < 4.00 00000000000000000 4.00 < WS < 5.00 00000000000000000 5.00 < WS < 6.00 00000000000000000 6.00 < WS < 8.00 000000000000000008.00 < WS < 10.00 00000000000000000> 10.00 00000000000000000Totals77353862113106956110174557218312692675410 Speed (m/s)Calm8.500.00 < WS < 1.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 1.00 < WS < 2.00 0.160.070.080.130.240.220.200.130.210.160.120.150.380.260.190.142.85 2.00 < WS < 3.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 3.00 < WS < 4.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 4.00 < WS < 5.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 5.00 < WS < 6.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 6.00 < WS < 8.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.008.00 < WS < 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00> 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00Totals0.160.070.080.130.240.220.200.130.210.160.120.150.380.260.190.1411.35 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-64Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-30 Representative Environmental Noise Levels (a)a) | |||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
California Department of Transportation, 1998Common Outdoor ActivitiesNoise Level (dBA)Common Indoor Activities--110--Rock BandJet Fly-over at 1000 feet--100--Gas Lawnmower at 3 feet--90--Food Blender at 3 feetDiesel Truck going 50 mph at 50feet--80--Garbage Disposal at 3 feetNoisy Urban Area during DaytimeGas Lawnmower at 100 feet--70--Vacuum Cleaner at 10 feetCommercial AreaNormal Speech at 3 feetHeavy Traffic at 300 feet--60--Large Business OfficeQuiet Urban Area during Daytime--50--Dishwater in Next RoomQuiet Urban Area during Nighttime--40--Theater, Large Conference Room (background)Quiet Suburban Area duringNighttime--30--LibraryQuiet Rural Area during NighttimeBedroom at Night, Concert Hall (background)--20--Broadcast/ Recording Studio--10--Lowest Threshold of HumanHearing--0--Lowest Threshold of Human Hearing Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewGeologic EnvironmentSHINE Medical | California Department of Transportation, 1998Common Outdoor ActivitiesNoise Level (dBA)Common Indoor Activities--110--Rock BandJet Fly-over at 1000 feet--100--Gas Lawnmower at 3 feet | ||
--90--Food Blender at 3 feetDiesel Truck going 50 mph at 50feet--80--Garbage Disposal at 3 feetNoisy Urban Area during DaytimeGas Lawnmower at 100 feet--70--Vacuum Cleaner at 10 feetCommercial AreaNormal Speech at 3 feetHeavy Traffic at 300 feet--60--Large Business OfficeQuiet Urban Area during Daytime--50--Dishwater in Next RoomQuiet Urban Area during Nighttime--40--Theater, Large Conference Room (background)Quiet Suburban Area duringNighttime--30--LibraryQuiet Rural Area during NighttimeBedroom at Night, Concert Hall (background) | |||
--20--Broadcast/ Recording Studio | |||
--10--Lowest Threshold of HumanHearing--0--Lowest Threshold of Human Hearing Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewGeologic EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-65Rev. 019.3.3GEOLOGIC ENVIRONMENTThis subsection provides a description of the geology, soils, and seismology of the site and region.19.3.3.1Summary of On-Site Geotechnical InvestigationsSHINE conducted a geotechnical investigation at the Janesville site during the fourth quarter of 2011. The investigation included the installation of 15 soil borings, with four of the borings converted to groundwater monitoring wells and one boring used solely for seismic profile testing (Figure 19.3.3-1). The geotechnical investigation methods and results are detailed in three reports:*Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report, Janesville, Wisconsin: August 3, 2012.*Preliminary Hydrological Analyses, Janesville, Wisconsin: August 3, 2012.*Seismic Hazard Assessment Report, Janesville, Wisconsin: August 3, 2012.The geotechnical report includes descriptions of soils encountered to a maximum boring depth of 221 ft. (67m) below ground surface, the results of vertical seismic profiling, depth to groundwater, engineering properties of the soils encountered at the site, an assessment of geologic hazards at the site or nearby, and the suitability of materials at the site for the construction of the proposed facility.The hydrological analyses report utilizes data gathered during the geotechnical investigation to assess the hydrologic regime at the site, including the flood risks from nearby surface waters, stormwater and runoff management risks, and groundwater flow and transport. The seismic hazard report summarizes the geologic history of the region and makes an assessment of hazards associated with seismic events based on the vertical seismic profiling and a review of published and on-line data. Results from each of these reports are used in the following subsections to further characterize the geological environment at the SHINE site. 19.3.3.2Bedrock Formations The SHINE site lies within the Central Lowlands physiographic province of the United States (Fenneman, Nevin Melancthon, 1946) in an area where thick sections of sedimentary rock overlie crystalline rock of Precambrian age (Olcott, Perry G., 1968). The sedimentary rock consists of Cambrian and Ordovician sandstone, dolomite, and shale (Figure 19.3.3-2). The sedimentary rock formations include the Mount Simon and Eau Claire s andstones and the Prairie du Chien group of Cambrian age, and the St. Peter sandstone, and Platteville, Decorah, and Galena formations of Ordovician age (Figure 19.3.3-3). According to Zaporozec (Zaporozec, Alexander, 1982), the "most significant feature of the bedrock surface (in Rock County) is the ancestral Rock River valley more than 300ft. (91m) deep, subsequently filled with outwash and other fluvial deposits."The Central Lowlands province is located within the middle of the relatively stable North American craton. The North American craton is the portion of the North American continental Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewGeologic EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-66Rev. 0plate that has been least affected by collisions with other plates or tectonic activity. The regional geologic structures within the basement rock that have been mapped include the Sandwich and Plum River fault zones (inactive); the La Salle anticlinorium, and the Wisconsin and Kankakee Arches (Figure19.3.3-4).Between 1.0 and 1.2 billion years ago, a rift zone identified as the Mid-Continent Rift was active from Wisconsin through Mississippi. After the Mid-Continent Rift had ceased being an active rift zone, subsequent cooling of the crust and regional subsidence associated with the Appalachian Orogeny to the east are the probable causes of the regional geologic structures.Overlying the sedimentary bedrock units are unconsolidated quaternary deposits of glacial till and outwash, consisting of well-sorted sand and gravel. The till and outwash deposits were deposited as the continental ice sheets advanced and retreated during the latter portion of the Pleistocene Epoch, between approximately 10,000 and 30,000 years ago. These outwash deposits are good sources of water, with single well yields of over 5000 gallons per minute (gpm) (1.89x104 liters per minute [lpm]) (Olcott, Perry G., 1968). The stratigraphy of the bedrock units that underlie the site (see Figure 19.3.3-3) from youngest to oldest is:*Galena Formation | |||
*Decorah Formation | *Decorah Formation | ||
*Platteville Formation*St. Peter sandstone*Prairie du Chien Group | *Platteville Formation*St. Peter sandstone*Prairie du Chien Group | ||
*Trempealeau Group*Tunnel City Group*Wonewoc Formation | *Trempealeau Group*Tunnel City Group*Wonewoc Formation | ||
*Eau Claire Formation*Mount Simon Formation*Precambrian basement rockThe bedrock units within Rock County are described in greater detail based on Zaporozec, Alexander, 1982.The Cambrian-Ordovician sedimentary rocks were deposited in shallow seas on an uneven and arched surface of igneous and metamorphic (basement) rocks of Precambrian age. Both the Precambrian surface and the sedimentary rocks dip gently to the south and southeast. The sedimentary units thicken in the direction of dip from about 1000ft. (305 m) in the northwestern corner of Rock County to over 1500ft. (457m) in the southeastern corner of the county. The oldest formations of Cambrian age in Rock County are, in ascending order, the Mt.Simon sandstone, Eau Claire sandstone, Wonewoc (also known as the Galesville Formation) sandstone, Tunnel City Group (formerly Franconia sandstone), and Trempealeau Formation, consisting of the Jordan sandstone and St. Lawrence dolomite. In the Rock River valley, these rocks of Cambrian age are overlain primarily by unconsolidated Quaternary deposits, with much of the younger Ordovician sequence having been removed by erosion. | *Eau Claire Formation*Mount Simon Formation*Precambrian basement rockThe bedrock units within Rock County are described in greater detail based on Zaporozec, Alexander, 1982.The Cambrian-Ordovician sedimentary rocks were deposited in shallow seas on an uneven and arched surface of igneous and metamorphic (basement) rocks of Precambrian age. Both the Precambrian surface and the sedimentary rocks dip gently to the south and southeast. The sedimentary units thicken in the direction of dip from about 1000ft. (305 m) in the northwestern corner of Rock County to over 1500ft. (457m) in the southeastern corner of the county. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewGeologic EnvironmentSHINE Medical | The oldest formations of Cambrian age in Rock County are, in ascending order, the Mt.Simon sandstone, Eau Claire sandstone, Wonewoc (also known as the Galesville Formation) sandstone, Tunnel City Group (formerly Franconia sandstone), and Trempealeau Formation, consisting of the Jordan sandstone and St. Lawrence dolomite. In the Rock River valley, these rocks of Cambrian age are overlain primarily by unconsolidated Quaternary deposits, with much of the younger Ordovician sequence having been removed by erosion. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewGeologic EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-67Rev. 0Rock formations of Ordovician age include, in ascending order, the Prairie du Chien Group (dolomite), the St. Peter Formation (sandstone), and the Platteville-Galena Formation - also called the Sinnipee Group - consisting of carbonate rocks (limestone and dolomite). The Prairie du Chien Group was greatly thinned by erosion or completely eroded before deposition of the St.Peter sandstone when the land was elevated above sea level. In many areas of Rock County, the Prairie du Chien group is absent, and the St. Peter Formation rests directly on sandstones of Cambrian age. Because it was laid down on an uneven erosional surface, the St.Peter Formation varies considerably in thickness. The bedrock surface in the western part of the county is formed primarily by the St. Peter sandstone. Bedrock east of the Rock River valley and the ridge tops west of the valley are formed by the Platteville-Galena unit.After the deposition of the sedimentary rocks, erosion over a long period of time produced a bedrock surface having a maximum relief of 1000ft. (305m) in Rock County. The most significant feature of the bedrock surface is the ancestral Rock River valley, which reaches depths of greater than 300 ft (91m) (see Figure 19.3.3-2) and was subsequently filled with outwash and other fluvial deposits. East of the buried valley the bedrock has a flat, relatively undissected surface. West of the valley the bedrock surface is rugged and dissected.19.3.3.3Bedrock OverburdenThe site has been influenced strongly by Pleistocene glacial erosion and deposition, and subsequent post-glacial erosional and depositional processes. The site is covered by a mantle of well-drained loamy soils underlain by stratified sand and gravel. These sands and gravels represent late Wisconsin to possibly Holocene age glaciofluvial outwash deposits, transported from the Wisconsin-age glacial moraines related to the Green Bay Ice lobe of the Laurentide Ice Sheet to the north. Depth to bedrock at the SHINE site may be as deep as 300 ft. (91m), supported by geotechnical boreholes for this investigation completed to 221-ft. (67m) depths without encountering bedrock (Figure 19.3.3-5).Lab testing showed the soils to be primarily clean sandy soils with occasional gravel layers, with the density of the sand increasing with depth. A hard clayey silt layer was observed at approximately 180 ft. (55m) below ground surface, and groundwater was observed at a depth of 50 to 65 ft. (15.3 to 19.8m) below ground surface.19.3.3.4Soils On-Site Soil TypesThe soils were formed primarily from glacial processes which occurred in the region. Glacial till and outwash are the primary parent materials for the soil, in addition to reworked loess, decomposed vegetation, and deposits from the dolomite and sandstone bedrock in the area. Most of the glacial outwash in the area consists of stratified sand and gravel, deposited by water flowing from the glacier as it melted and receded. A layer of finer-grained material, which overlies the outwash, eventually weathered to form the silt loam and loam present at the site (USDA-SCS, 1974).The soils at the site are classified by the USDA Soil Conservation Service Soil Survey of Rock County, Wisconsin as two types, the Warsaw silt loam and the Lorenzo loam (USDA-SCS, 1974) (see Figure 19.3.1-5). The Warsaw silt loam, the primary soil at the site, is characteristic of outwash plains and terraces, with the surface layer either a silt loam or loam. The Warsaw silt Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewGeologic EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-68Rev. 0loam typically has slow runoff and is well-suited for farm and crop production. Soils in the Warsaw series consist of level to sloping loamy soils which are underlain by stratified sand and gravel. Permeability is typically moderate in the subsoil, with underlying sand and gravel typically found at depths ranging from 24 to 40 in. (61 to 102cm) (USDA-SCS, 1974).A secondary soil found at the site is the Lorenzo loam. The Lorenzo loam is also typically found on outwash plains and terraces. The surface layer of the Lorenzo loam is a black loam. The Lorenzo loam is well-drained and is moderately susceptible to erosion. The soils of the Lorenzo series are moderately suited to agriculture, with slow runoff. Permeability is typically moderate in the subsoil, with the underlying stratified sand and gravel found at a depth ranging from 12 to 20in. (30 to 51cm) (USDA-SCS, 1974).Prime FarmlandThe Warsaw silt loam with less than 2percent slope is classified as a prime farmland soil by the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, indicating that the soil has the best combination of physical and chemical characteristics for producing crops suitable for the area. Additional factors in the prime farmland designation include favorable climate, adequate and dependable water supply, acceptable soil pH, acceptable salt/sodium content, and the soil is not excessively eroded or saturated with water. Criteria for defining and delineating these lands are determined by the appropriate state or local agencies in cooperation with USDA. The significant difference between farmland of statewide importance and USDA designated prime farmland is that although the criteria used to designate both types of soils are not appropriate outside the state or local area, these lands which are designated as farmland of statewide importance approach the productivity of lands in their area that meet criteria for prime farmland and unique farmland.The Lorenzo silt loam present on the site is classified as farmland of statewide importance. Farmland of statewide importance approaches the productivity of prime farmland, but the soil does not meet the criteria for designation as prime farmland. The prime farmland on the site is shown on Figure 19.3.1-5. Approximately 41,950 ac. (16,977ha) of the area within the region are lands having soils classified as prime farmland or farmland of statewide importance. | |||
Soil ErodibilityThe Warsaw and Lorenzo soils, when found on slopes greater than 2percent, are described by the USDA SCS (USDA-SCS, 1974) as slightly-to-moderately-erodible soil units. The soils found on slopes less than 2percent are not considered erodible. The erodibility of the soil units is a factor of the soil type, the amount of rainfall and runoff, wind speed, and the length and steepness of the ground slope. No soils present on the site or within the area of the site are listed as highly erodible land by the USDA NRCS (USDA NRCS, 2012a). Current erosion control practices observed at the site include the use of conservation or minimum tillage measures, the use of vegetated swales, and contoured cultivation. Conservation tillage is minimally disturbing the stubble from the preceding crop prior to planting of the next crop so that the root system serves to anchor the topsoil. Vegetated swales slow the rate of runoff, reducing the amount of sediment carried in the water, and sediment is trapped in place. Contoured cultivation parallels the contours of the land surface, allowing stormwater to be detained within the furrows, leading to increased infiltration. | Soil ErodibilityThe Warsaw and Lorenzo soils, when found on slopes greater than 2percent, are described by the USDA SCS (USDA-SCS, 1974) as slightly-to-moderately-erodible soil units. The soils found on slopes less than 2percent are not considered erodible. The erodibility of the soil units is a factor of the soil type, the amount of rainfall and runoff, wind speed, and the length and steepness of the ground slope. No soils present on the site or within the area of the site are listed as highly erodible land by the USDA NRCS (USDA NRCS, 2012a). Current erosion control practices observed at the site include the use of conservation or minimum tillage measures, the use of vegetated swales, and contoured cultivation. Conservation tillage is minimally disturbing the stubble from the preceding crop prior to planting of the next crop so that the root system serves to anchor the topsoil. Vegetated swales slow the rate of runoff, reducing the amount of sediment carried in the water, and sediment is trapped in place. Contoured cultivation parallels the contours of the land surface, allowing stormwater to be detained within the furrows, leading to increased infiltration. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewGeologic EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-69Rev. 0Soil Shrink/Swell PotentialThe shrink/ | |||
Water conservation programs will also be developed for other water use sectors. | Water conservation programs will also be developed for other water use sectors. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-79Rev. 0The City is currently planning to install a new water distribution line along the northern boundary of the project property. This distribution line would serve the properties in the vicinity of the SHINE site as well as the facility. Water uses in the vicinity of the project include agricultural irrigation and potable water supply. | ||
Near the site, the SWRA uses the public water supply system. These uses are both supplied by groundwater resources. There are no apparent, or known, surface water uses near the SHINE site.19.3.4.2.2Groundwater All public water supplies in Rock County are from groundwater. Table 19.3.7-14 lists the nine major municipal water suppliers that each serve communities in Rock County. Six of the nine municipal water systems in Rock County have a wellhead protection plan including Clinton, Evansville, Footville, Janesville, Milton, and Orfordville. Wellhead protection ordinances are in place for only Evansville and Janesville (USGS, 2012c). Janesville and Evansville have both a wellhead protection plan and a wellhead protection ordinance.The water systems serving the largest populations are those in Beloit and Janesville. In addition to the public water systems, numerous private wells provide drinking water to residents not connected to municipal water supplies. The Janesville Water Utility provides water supply for both public drinking water and for fire protection utilizing eight wells. The water supply system for the city of Janesville includes three booster stations, two water storage reservoirs, and a water tower. According to the city of Janesville, the total pumping capacity of its eight groundwater wells is 29 Mgd (109.8 Mld). | |||
Average water usage is about 11 Mgd (41.6 Mld). Accordingly, the excess capacity of the Janesville water supply system is approximately 18 Mgd (68.1 Mld).Public water supplies within Wisconsin are monitored to ensure public health protection, whereas individual well owners are responsible for monitoring and testing private wells. The public water use index for Rock County is 80 (Table 19.3.7-15), which estimates how many people are served by public water supplies. A number greater than 50 means more people are served by public water versus private wells.The Janesville water supply is disinfected with chlorine treatment and fluoride added at each pumping station and pumped directly into the distribution system. There are two earth-covered reservoirs for storage as well as a 500,000-gallon (1,892,706-liter) water tower completed in 2007. The wells include four deep wells, approximately 1150 ft. (350m) deep, and four sand and gravel wells that are 100 to 200 ft. (30.5 to 61m) deep. The shallow wells have nitrate concentrations that are controlled by blending with water from the deep wells.In addition to the municipal water utility, groundwater is also withdrawn for agricultural irrigation. The USGS estimates that agricultural crop irrigation is the largest user of groundwater in Rock County, with an estimated usage of 16.2 Mgd (61.3Mld) (Buchwald, Cheryl A., 2011). | Average water usage is about 11 Mgd (41.6 Mld). Accordingly, the excess capacity of the Janesville water supply system is approximately 18 Mgd (68.1 Mld).Public water supplies within Wisconsin are monitored to ensure public health protection, whereas individual well owners are responsible for monitoring and testing private wells. The public water use index for Rock County is 80 (Table 19.3.7-15), which estimates how many people are served by public water supplies. A number greater than 50 means more people are served by public water versus private wells.The Janesville water supply is disinfected with chlorine treatment and fluoride added at each pumping station and pumped directly into the distribution system. There are two earth-covered reservoirs for storage as well as a 500,000-gallon (1,892,706-liter) water tower completed in 2007. The wells include four deep wells, approximately 1150 ft. (350m) deep, and four sand and gravel wells that are 100 to 200 ft. (30.5 to 61m) deep. The shallow wells have nitrate concentrations that are controlled by blending with water from the deep wells.In addition to the municipal water utility, groundwater is also withdrawn for agricultural irrigation. The USGS estimates that agricultural crop irrigation is the largest user of groundwater in Rock County, with an estimated usage of 16.2 Mgd (61.3Mld) (Buchwald, Cheryl A., 2011). | ||
19.3.4.2.3Facility Water Use Water use by the SHINE facility is described in Subsection 19.2.3 and is entirely supplied by groundwater from the City of Janesville water supply wells. | 19.3.4.2.3Facility Water Use Water use by the SHINE facility is described in Subsection 19.2.3 and is entirely supplied by groundwater from the City of Janesville water supply wells. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-80Rev. 019.3.4.3Water Quality19.3.4.3.1Surface WaterStream water quality generally reflects groundwater characteristics as a result of the groundwater discharge conditions that exist in much of Rock County (Olcott, Perry G., 1968). Surface water management activities conducted in accordance with Section 305(b) of the Clean Water Act and the Total Daily Maximum Load (TMDL) program provide water quality characterization and are described below. 19.3.4.3.1.1Water Quality19.3.4.3.1.1.1Impaired Waters and Total Maximum Daily LoadThe SHINE site is located in the watershed of an unnamed stream located within the Lower Rock River Basin. The unnamed tributary flows into the most downstream segment of the Rock River identified by WDNR for purposes of water quality monitoring and reporting. The Rock River segment extends from the Illinois state boundary upstream approximately 12.4 river mi. (20riverkm) to the Janesville wastewater treatment plant. This segment of the Rock River is considered to be impaired due to total suspended solids and total phosphorous (The CADMUS Group, 2011). This segment of the Rock River (Illinois state line to the Janesville wastewater treatment plant) has previously been impaired as a result of mercury and polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) pollutants; however, those have since been removed. The specific impairments listed for this reach of the Rock River are low dissolved oxygen and degraded habitat. The SHINE site drains into the Rock River through the project area watershed at a point approximately 8.3mi. (13.4km) upstream from the Illinois state line.On a regional and state-wide basis, Wisconsin has identified phosphorus and suspended solids as parameters of concern due to the ability of particulates to adsorb and transport phosphorus. State regulations include specific numerical criteria directed at the control of discharge of phosphorus and suspended solids from development sites. The State's 303d list of impaired streams developed and updated as required by the Clean Water Act has identified only the Rock River in the vicinity of the SHINE site as an impaired water body. The TMDL states that industrial facilities operating under a general WPDES permit will be screened to determine if additional requirements might be needed to ensure that the permitted activity is consistent with TMDL goals. Individual permits, if issued, will include limits consistent with approved TMDL wasteload allocations (The CADMUS Group, 2011).19.3.4.3.1.1.2Other Water Body Designations The Lower Rock River is a state-designated Area of Special Natural Resource Interest as a result of it being Natural Heritage Inventory (NHI) water. The NHI program was created by the Wisconsin legislature in 1985.Bass Creek and Turtle Creek, two tributaries to the Rock River in the vicinity of the site, are designated as Exceptional Resource Waters (Rock County Planning, Economic & Community Development Agency, 2009). An Exceptional Resource Water is defined as a stream or lake that has excellent water quality, high recreational and aesthetic value, high quality fishing, but that Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-81Rev. 0does not rise to the designation of outstanding resource water because it may be impacted by point source pollution or that it may have the potential for future discharge from a small community sewer system. (NR102.11 (1)(d)28).19.3.4.3.1.2Project Surface Water MonitoringSurface water quality monitoring was completed monthly from October 2011 through September 2012. The later part of this period occurred during a widely-recognized severe drought condition in south-central Wisconsin. As a result of these conditions, surface water samples were only collectable at location SW-02 on the unnamed tributary south of the SHINE site. The other two locations were established as opportunistic sampling locations and were observed to be dry on all twelve sampling events during the monitoring period. Laboratory results for samples collected at monitoring location SW-02 (Figure 19.3.4-4) are presented in Table 19.3.4-7 and field-measured parameters are provided in Table 19.3.4-8. Water was consistently present in the unnamed stream at location SW-02, although it was shallow and slow-flowing. It is believed that the flow was dominated in each sample by base flow contributed from groundwater seepage.Total phosphorus is a constituent of primary regional concern in surface waters. The phosphorus concentration at SW-02 was generally less than the detection limit (<0.2 mg/L). Field-measured parameters are summarized in Table 19.3.4-8. No remarkable measurements were documented. As noted above, physical conditions for sampling were less than ideal due to shallow water depth.19.3.4.3.2Groundwater19.3.4.3.2.1Groundwater Quality Groundwater quality monitoring was completed in four groundwater wells on a monthly basis from October 2011 through September 2012. The later part of this period occurred during a widely recognized severe drought condition in south-central Wisconsin. Laboratory results for samples collected at m onitoring location SM-GW1A, SM-GW2A, SM-GW3A, and SM-GW4A (Figure 19.3.4-4) are presented in Table 19.3.4-9 and field measured parameters are provided in Table 19.3.4-10. The groundwater elevations were also measured during the sampling events and are summarized in Table 19.3.4-6. Figures 19.3.4-5 through 19.3.4-8 provide groundwater isopleths for the first month of each quarterly monitoring period.Nitrate impact is a concern in agricultural areas due to the use of fertilizers and the presence of livestock. The nitrate concentrations were consistently above the drinking water standard of 10mg/l, with all samples found to contain nitrates. The minimum nitrate concentration detected was 13.5 mg/l and the maximum detection of 19.3 mg/l. Fecal coliform and Escherichia coli (E-coli) are common bacterial contaminants, often found in groundwater under the influence of surface water which has come into contact with human or animal waste. The groundwater samples were not found to contain E. coli above the detection limit. Fecal coliform was present in 3 of the 53 samples analyzed, with a maximum detection of 7 colony-forming units per 100 mL (CFU/100mL). Salinity and specific conductance are field parameters used to determine the stability of the groundwater prior to collection of the samples. During the May field effort, these Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-82Rev. 0parameters were elevated over previous months, but returned to earlier levels during the June field event.19.3.4.3.3Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Actions Subsection 19.4.13 provides an analysis of the cumulative effects of the SHINE project in consideration of other past, present and reasonably foreseeable future actions. On-going agricultural uses will place continuing demand on the groundwater supply in the vicinity of the SHINE site. With respect to other potential uses of water resources, SHINE identified one key off-site activity representing a potential additional demand on water supplies, wastewater treatment, and pollutant loading. Specifically, the lands immediately to the northeast of the SHINE site are zoned for future light industrial development. While designs and devel opment plans have not been prepared for this development area, it is expected that such uses will place additional demands on the City's water supply and water treatment system. Additionally, construction of these areas will represent a potential additional source of pollutant loading associated with runoff from construction sites.There are no other identified domestic, municipal, industrial, mining, recreation, navigation, or hydroelectric power uses of any bodies of water or aquifers at distances close enough to affect or be adversely affected by the facilities. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewWater ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-83Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-1 Rockford, Illinois Climatic Means and Extremes(Sheet 1 of 2) | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewWater ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-83Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-1 Rockford, Illinois Climatic Means and Extremes(Sheet 1 of 2) | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewWater ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-84Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-1 Rockford, Illinois Climatic Means and Extremes(Sheet 2 of 2)Table extracted from NCDC, 2011c. "POR" refers to the period of record (years). Refer to that source for explanatory notes. | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewWater ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-84Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-1 Rockford, Illinois Climatic Means and Extremes(Sheet 2 of 2)Table extracted from NCDC, 2011c. "POR" refers to the period of record (years). Refer to that source for explanatory notes. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-85Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-2 Rainfall Depth-Duration-Frequency Data for Janesville Vicinity DurationRainfall (inches) for Given Recurrence Interval (years)0.51251025501005-min0.220.270.330.420.500.620.730.8510-min0.380.470.580.740.881.091.271.48 15-min0.490.610.750.951.131.401.641.9130-min0.670.831.031.311.551.922.242.611-hour0.861.061.311.661.972.432.853.32 2-hour1.051.301.612.052.443.003.514.093-hour1.171.441.782.262.693.323.884.526-hour1.171.692.092.653.153.884.555.30 12-hour1.371.962.423.073.654.515.276.1424-hour1.822.252.783.534.25.186.067.0648-hour1.972.463.073.964.685.796.757.8272-hour2.162.703.384.345.166.347.348.4710-day2.973.714.725.936.868.219.3310.6 | ||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
Huff, Floyd A. and James R. Angel, 1992 Chapter 19 - Environmental | Huff, Floyd A. and James R. Angel, 1992 Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-86Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-3 USGS Streamflow Monitoring Stations in Rock County, WisconsinStation Name Station NumberDrainage Area(sq. mi.)Period of RecordRock River at Newville, WI54275302560October 2009-presentRock River at Indianford, WI54275702630May 1975-2011Yahara River near Edgerton, WI5430000430October 1916-Nov 1917Badfish Creek near Cooksville, WI543015082.6July 1977-present Yahara River near Fulton, WI5430175518 (481.4) | ||
(a)July 1977-presentFischer Creek Tributary at Janesville, WI54304031.42August 1980-November 1984Markham Creek at O Leary Road near Janesville, WI54304469.32June 2004-November 2005Rock River at Afton, WI54305003340January 1914-presentStevens Creek near Footville, WI543054013.9May 2004-November 2005Turtle Creek at Carvers Rock Road near Clinton, WI5431486199 (196.67) (a)September 1939-presentTurtle Creek near Clinton, WI5431500202September 1939-December 1979a) Contributing drainage area. | |||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
USGS, 2012b Chapter 19 - Environmental | USGS, 2012b Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-87Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-4 Flood Discharge Frequency Data - Rock River at Afton, WisconsinRecordPeriodDischarge (cfs) for Indicated Recurrence Interval2-yrs.5-yrs.10-yrs.25-yrs.50-yrs.100-yrs.500-yrs.1914 - 20006,3508,73010,20011,90013,00014,100NA1914 - 20116,4606,01010,61012,53013,90015,22018,150 | ||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
Flynn et al., 2006 Chapter 19 - Environmental | Flynn et al., 2006 Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-88Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-5 Annual Minimum Low Flows - Rock River at Afton | ||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
USGS, 2012b30-Day Average Low Flow7-Day Average Low FlowYearFlowRankYearFlowRank(cfs)(cfs) | USGS, 2012b30-Day Average Low Flow7-Day Average Low FlowYearFlowRankYearFlowRank (cfs)(cfs)1934174119341151193619321964149219641953193215231939202419361704195820351958171519322186195917961949252719391887193725781949204819592579194822591948275101946237 101963282111937238 111931288121953242 121946297131931243 131941308141963258 141953320151940260 151971328161941278 161957333171962278 171940342181957285 181955356191955288 191988361201971288 20 Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-89Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-6 Groundwater Monitoring Well Water Table Elevations(Sheet 1 of 2)Well IDDateTOC Elevation (ft) (a)Depth to Watera (ft - BTOC)Water Table Elevation(a)SM-1A10/26/2011828.0462.32765.72SM-2A10/26/2011821.4056.98764.42 SM-3A10/26/2011829.9664.52765.44SM-4A10/26/2011814.1549.51764.64SM-1A11/16/2011828.0462.44765.60 SM-2A11/16/2011821.4057.09764.31SM-3A11/16/2011829.9664.65765.31SM-4A11/16/2011814.1549.61764.54 SM-1A12/13/2011828.0462.58765.46SM-2A12/13/2011821.4057.18764.22SM-3A12/13/2011829.9664.77765.19 SM-4A12/13/2011814.1549.75764.40SM-1A1/9/2012828.0462.66765.38SM-2A1/9/2012821.4057.27764.13 SM-3A1/9/2012829.9664.86765.10SM-4A1/9/2012814.1549.85764.30SM-1A2/13/2012828.0462.86765.18 SM-2A2/13/2012821.4057.44763.96SM-3A2/13/2012829.9664.04765.92SM-4A2/13/2012814.1550.03764.12 SM-1A3/12/2012828.0462.97765.07SM-2A3/12/2012821.4057.55763.85SM-3A3/12/2012829.9665.15764.81 SM-4A3/12/2012814.1550.13764.02 SM-1A4/16/2012828.0463.11764.93SM-2A4/16/2012821.4057.67763.73SM-3A4/16/2012829.9665.32764.64 SM-4A4/16/2012814.1550.27763.88SM-1A5/22/2012828.0463.39764.65SM-2A5/22/2012821.4057.90763.50 SM-3A5/22/2012829.9665.62764.34SM-4A5/22/2012814.1550.42763.73SM-1A6/13/2012828.0463.62764.42 SM-2A6/13/2012821.4058.16763.24 Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-90Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-6 Groundwater Monitoring Well Water Table Elevations(Sheet 2 of 2)Well IDDateTOC Elevation (ft) (a)Depth to Water (ft - BTOC)Water Table Elevation(a)SM-3A6/13/2012829.9665.90764.06SM-4A6/13/2012814.1550.68763.47 SM-1A7/16/2012828.0464.30763.74SM-2A7/16/2012821.4058.93762.47SM-3A7/16/2012829.9666.77763.19 SM-4A7/16/2012814.1551.29762.86SM-1A8/15/2012828.0464.52763.52SM-2A8/15/2012821.4059.18762.22 SM-3A8/15/2012829.9666.84763.12SM-4A8/15/2012814.1551.62762.53SM-1A9/18/2012828.0464.81763.23 SM-2A9/18/2012821.4059.44761.96SM-3A9/18/2012829.9667.12762.84SM-4A9/18/2012814.1551.89762.26a) TOC: top of casing; BTOC: below top of casing; all vertical elevations are NAVD 88 Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-91Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-7 Surface Water Analytical Results ParameterUnitsMethod Detection LimitsNumberSamplesCollectedNumberDetectsMin.MaxAlkalinity, Bicarbonate (CaCO3)mg/L2.31717272301Alkalinity, Total As CaCO3mg/L101717278327Biochemical Oxygen Demand, 5 daymg/L2.0175ND10.4Carbon Dioxide mg/L5.015159.821Carbon Dioxide (Not Preserved - NP)mg/L5.0442022 Chemical Oxygen Demandmg/L11.3179ND43.8Chlorophyll A mg/m30.0841714ND27Coliform, FecalCFU/100mL11714ND1300 Coliform, TotalMPN/100mL1171765027200Escherichia ColiMPN/100mL117171649Kjeldahl Nitrogen, Totalmg/L0.351710ND2.6 Nitrate As Nitrogenmg/L1.017176.410.4Nitrite As Nitrogenmg/L0.1174ND0.26Nitrogen As Ammoniamg/L0.25170NDNDOrthophosphorusmg/L0.00317170.0160.062Pheophytin A mg/m30.0591710ND16Phosphorusmg/L0.088174ND0.42 Silicamg/L0.134171711.922.9 Total Dissolved Solids (TDS)mg/L8.71717378500Total Hardnessmg/L0.151717351414 Total Organic Nitrogenmg/L0.351710ND2.6 Total Suspended Solids (TSS)mg/L0.03117170.8238Calciummg/L6.6171779.294.6Chloridemg/L2.0171724.548.2 Cyanide, Totalmg/L0.0043173ND0.0071Ironmg/L0.004817170.03966.52Leadmg/L0.0013179ND0.0236 Magnesiummg/L0.0231171737.343.2Mercurymg/L0.0001170NDNDPotassiummg/L0.047317172.123.96 Sodiummg/L0.028517175.5716Sulfatemg/L2.0171725.434.6Zincmg/L0.0016177ND0.0322 mg/L - milligrams per literND - not detected above the detection limit mg/m3 - milligrams per cubic meterMPN/100ml - most probable number per 100 milliliters Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewWater ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-92Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-8 SHINE Medical Surface Water Field Data - JanesvilleSample IDDateTemp. (°C) pH(SU)Specific Conductivity(µS/cm)Dissolved Oxygen(mg/L)Turbidity(NTU)Salinity(%)ColorOdorWaterLevel(inches)CommentsSM-SW0110/27/2011 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSStream Dry SM-SW0210/27/2011 8.197.1860015.141.60.00ClearNo Odor6.0SM-SW0310/27/2011 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW0111/16/2011 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSStream Dry SM-SW0211/16/2011 10.896.5960010.780.00.00ClearNo Odor7.0SM-SW0311/16/2011 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW0112/13/2011 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSStream Dry SM-SW0212/13/2011 6.847.467547.723.40.37ClearNo Odor8.0SM-SW0312/13/2011 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW011/9/2012NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSStream Dry SM-SW021/9/20125.847.447707.80-1.60.38ClearNo Odor7.0SM-SW031/9/2012NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW012/13/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSStream Dry SM-SW022/13/2012 5.927.476007.932.60.29ClearNo Odor3 - 11SM-SW032/13/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW013/13/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSStream Dry SM-SW023/13/2012 8.877.417647.985.00.38ClearNo Odor4.0SM-SW033/13/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW014/16/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSStream Dry SM-SW024/16/2012 10.427.546457.141.30.32ClearNo Odor8.0SM-SW034/16/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW015/22/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSStream Dry SM-SW025/22/2012 11.557.4314968.0534.70.76*ClearNo Odor6.0SM-SW035/22/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW016/12/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSStream Dry SM-SW026/12/2012 15.677.537288.0221.90.36ClearNo Odor5.0SM-SW036/12/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW017/16/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSStream Dry SM-SW027/16/2012 21.696.797576.186.00.37ClearNo Odor6.0SM-SW037/16/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW018/15/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSStream Dry SM-SW028/15/2012 17.337.447484.7316.00.37ClearNo Odor7.0SM-SW038/15/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW019/18/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW029/18/2012 13.836.997977.312.00.39ClearNo Odor6.0SM-SW039/18/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewWater ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-93Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-9 Groundwater Analytical Results for Monitoring Wells Parameter UnitsMethod Detection LimitsNumberSamplesCollectedNumberDetectsMinimumMaximumAlkalinity, Bicarbonate (CaCO3)mg/L2.35353231302Alkalinity, Total As CaCO3mg/L105353248612Biochemical Oxygen Demand, 5 daymg/L2530NDNDCarbon Dioxide mg/L548481831Carbon Dioxide (Not Preserved - NP)mg/L510102030Chemical Oxygen Demandmg/L11.35315ND89.1Chlorophyll Amg/m30.084537ND1.6Coliform, FecalCFU/100mL 1533ND7Coliform, TotalMPN/100mL 15337ND2419Escherichia ColiMPN/100mL 1530NDNDKjeldahl Nitrogen, Totalmg/L0.35538ND0.46Nitrate As Nitrogenmg/L1535313.522.2Nitrite As Nitrogenmg/L0.1530NDNDNitrogen As Ammoniamg/L0.25531ND0.52Orthophosphorusmg/L0.0035338ND0.086Pheophytin Amg/m30.059537ND2.2Phosphorusmg/L0.088531ND0.26Silicamg/L134535313.918.8Total Dissolved Solids (TDS)mg/L8.75353340462Total Hardnessmg/L1505353330565Total Organic Nitrogenmg/L0.35536ND0.46Total Suspended Solids (TSS)mg/L0.03153531389Calciummg/L6.6535374.6126Chloridemg/L2535316.629.2Cyanide, Totalmg/L0.0061538ND0.018Ironmg/L4.853530.0443.04Leadmg/L1.35336ND0.0042Magnesiummg/L23.1535333.660.8Mercurymg/L0.0001530NDNDPotassiummg/L47.353530.4492.96Sodiummg/L28.553532.269.15Sulfatemg/L2535310.120.3Zincmg/L0.00165328ND0.0302 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewWater ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-94Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-10 SHINE Medical Groundwater Field Data - Janesville(Sheet 1 of 2)Sample IDDateWaterLevel(ft BTOC)Temp.(°C)pH(standard units)SpecificConductivity(µS/cm)DissolvedOxygen(mg/L)ORP(mV)Turbidity(NTU)Salinity(%)Color/Odor SM-GW1A10/26/201162.3810.707.3070510.70125.227.00.35Clear/No Odor SM-GW2A10/26/201157.0210.647.3067310.94134.75.70.33Clear/No Odor SM-GW3A10/27/201164.5911.607.2370310.14104.96.00.35Clear/No Odor SM-GW4A10/27/201149.5510.397.2172411.19107.98.90.36Clear/No Odor SM-GW1A11/16/201162.4510.117.2271110.44133.73.70.35Clear/No Odor SM-GW2A11/16/201157.0911.237.2067810.74116.48.90.33Clear/No Odor SM-GW3A11/17/201164.679.357.2470110.03122.5-0.80.34Clear/No Odor SM-GW4A11/17/201149.659.037.1574511.06135.6-0.80.37Clear/No Odor SM-GW1A12/13/201162.5910.437.2170010.44150.332.70.35Clear/No Odor SM-GW2A12/13/201157.2210.337.236989.78123.35.60.34Clear/No Odor SM-GW3A12/19/201164.8111.147.2273311.08120.65.00.36Clear/No Odor SM-GW4A12/19/201149.7810.177.1876311.73113.318.30.37Clear/No Odor SM-GW1A1/10/201262.698.197.2869311.60113.616.60.34Clear/No Odor SM-GW2A1/10/201257.298.507.3067411.72120.90.20.33Clear/No Odor SM-GW3A1/10/201264.929.667.2671911.25120.63.70.35Clear/No Odor SM-GW4A1/10/201249.857.697.1973711.45133.86.00.36Clear/No Odor SM-GW1A2/14/201262.888.417.2271111.70141.035.50.35Slightly Turbid/No Odor SM-GW2A2/14/201257.488.637.3067311.95112.80.70.33Clear/No Odor SM-GW3A2/14/201264.048.237.2472310.98144.44.60.35Clear/No Odor SM-GW4A2/14/201250.047.797.1772911.85180.26.50.36Clear/No Odor SM-GW1A3/12/201262.9611.547.1371410.02122.928.90.35Clear/No Odor SM-GW2A3/12/201257.5411.917.1968010.4399.71.50.33Clear/No Odor SM-GW3A3/12/201265.1612.257.117269.72107.50.30.36Clear/No Odor SM-GW4A3/12/201250.1311.807.0255610.16169.89.10.36Light Tan/No Odor SM-GW1A4/16/201263.1410.877.3558610.10121.532.60.29Light Brown/No Odor SM-GW2A4/16/201257.6810.547.4058010.62131.04.10.28Clear/No Odor SM-GW3A4/17/201263.3513.467.0672910.13155.4-2.30.36Clear/No Odor SM-GW4A4/17/201250.3114.487.017449.85198.5-4.10.37Clear/No Odor SM-GW1A5/23/201263.4415.976.62132010.03332.40.50.67(a)Clear/No Odor SM-GW2A5/23/201257.9018.006.66128210.09414.43.10.64(a)Clear/No Odor SM-GW3A5/22/201265.6614.776.20136910.07416.42.00.69(a)Clear/No Odor SM-GW4A5/22/201250.4413.916.73137010.47319.61.30.69(a)Clear/No Odor Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewWater ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-95Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-10 SHINE Medical Groundwater Field Data - Janesville(Sheet 2 of 2)Sample IDDateWaterLevel(ft BTOC)Temp.(°C)pH(standard units)SpecificConductivity(µS/cm)DissolvedOxygen(mg/L)ORP(mV)Turbidity(NTU)Salinity(%)Color/Odor SM-GW1A6/13/2012 63.6613.047.2164611.68202.66.60.32Clear/No Odor SM-GW2A6/12/2012 58.2214.147.2464711.68194.10.40.32Clear/No Odor SM-GW3A6/13/2012 65.9412.447.1768711.72200.00.00.34Clear/No Odor SM-GW4A6/12/2012 50.6713.007.1770011.55217.124.10.34Clear/No Odor SM-GW1A7/16/2012 64.3617.855.4265211.44618.5103.70.32Light Brown/No Odor SM-GW2A7/17/2012 58.9719.116.3177911.68549.5131.20.38Light Brown/No Odor SM-GW3A7/17/2012 66.7713.494.5274712.47574.410.70.37Light Brown/No Odor SM-GW4A7/16/2012 51.3020.336.0077113.39549.181.60.38Light Brown/No Odor SM-GW1A8/15/2012 64.5515.567.2963510.01122.33.90.31Clear/No Odor SM-GW2A8/16/2012 59.2014.797.3464510.48147.16.50.32Clear/No Odor SM-GW3A8/16/2012 66.8713.447.3370410.25147.13.70.35Clear/No Odor SM-GW4A8/15/2012 51.6514.007.2767210.35122.20.90.33Clear/No Odor SM-GW1A9/19/2012 64.8112.817.4071010.52201.07.70.35Clear/No Odor SM-GW2A9/18/2012 59.4614.115.7872111.01339.30.30.35Clear/No Odor SM-GW3A9/18/2012 67.1413.096.7180910.59212.30.30.40Clear/No Odor SM-GW4A9/19/2012 51.913.897.1678110.43260.17.40.38Clear/No Odora) meter malfunctioningµS/cm - micro Siemens per centimetermV - millivoltNTU - nephelometric turbidity unit Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-96Rev. 019.3.5ECOLOGICAL RESOURCESThis subsection provides a description and characterization of the terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems potentially affected by the construction and operation of the SHINE facility. | ||
Consultations with the WDNR (WDNR, 2012c) and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) (USFWS, 2012) were initiated for information regarding ecological resources near the SHINE site. This consultation process was used to obtain agency input regarding threatened and endangered species, sensitive habitats, commercial and recreational species, and other ecological characteristics for the site and near-site areas. Ecological resources described herein are based on recorded information provided by resource agencies and supplemental quarterly field surveys conducted in 2011 and 2012. 19.3.5.1Off-Site Areas Ecoregions are geographical areas within which the biotic and abiotic components of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems exhibit relatively homogenous patterns in comparison to that of other areas. Ecoregions serve as a spatial framework for the research, assessment, monitoring, and management of ecosystems and ecosystem components. Wisconsin contains 27 Level IV ecoregions nested within six larger Level III regions that also occupy portions of Illinois and other adjoining states (Omernik et al., 2008). Three Level III ecoregions have been identified and are further divided into several other Level IV ecoregions in southern Wisconsin and northern Illinois as depicted in Figure 19.3.5-1. The Rock River Drift Plain and the Southeastern Wisconsin Savannah and Till Plain are the only two ecoregions mapped within Rock County. The only ecoregion near the site (5-mi. [8-km] radius) is the Rock River Drift Plain as part of the larger Southeastern Wisconsin Till Plains ecoregion. Ecoregions are mapped by the USEPA (USEPA, 2012d) and are described in Wisconsin and Illinois by Omernik et al. (Omernik et al., 2008) and Woods et al. (Woods et al., 2006), respectively.The SHINE site is located within the Rock River Drift Plain as depicted in Figure 19.3.5-1. The Rock River Drift Plain is located in both southern Wisconsin and northern Illinois. This Level IV ecoregion is characterized by a landscape containing numerous small creeks, a greater stream density, and fewer lakes than in ecoregions to the north and east. Steeper topography and broad outwash plains with loamy and sandy soils characterize this ecoregion (Omernik et al., 2008). The soils of the Rock River Drift Plain have developed primarily from glacial till, outwash deposits, loess, or alluvium. Oak savanna, prairie, and to a lesser extent, forest (primarily on fire-protected dissected uplands and along water courses) were the predominant vegetative communities prior to European settlement. Today, more than half of the Rock River Drift Plain is cropland. Although forage crops and feed grains harvested to support dairy operations and livestock are most common, cash-grain farming is also important (Woods et al., 2006).19.3.5.2Site and Near Site Areas The SHINE site consists of a 91.27-ac. (36.94 ha) parcel located south of Janesville, Wisconsin, as depicted in Figure 19.3.1-1. Within the site boundary, 91.09 ac. (36.86 ha), or 99.8percent of the site, consists of agriculture/cultivated crops (see Table 19.3.1-1). The remaining 0.18ac. (0.07 ha) consists of developed open space as described in Subsection19.3.1. Because of continuous land disturbance associated with agricultural practices, the site is devoid of natural landscapes such as forest, | Consultations with the WDNR (WDNR, 2012c) and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) (USFWS, 2012) were initiated for information regarding ecological resources near the SHINE site. This consultation process was used to obtain agency input regarding threatened and endangered species, sensitive habitats, commercial and recreational species, and other ecological characteristics for the site and near-site areas. Ecological resources described herein are based on recorded information provided by resource agencies and supplemental quarterly field surveys conducted in 2011 and 2012. 19.3.5.1Off-Site Areas Ecoregions are geographical areas within which the biotic and abiotic components of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems exhibit relatively homogenous patterns in comparison to that of other areas. Ecoregions serve as a spatial framework for the research, assessment, monitoring, and management of ecosystems and ecosystem components. Wisconsin contains 27 Level IV ecoregions nested within six larger Level III regions that also occupy portions of Illinois and other adjoining states (Omernik et al., 2008). Three Level III ecoregions have been identified and are further divided into several other Level IV ecoregions in southern Wisconsin and northern Illinois as depicted in Figure 19.3.5-1. The Rock River Drift Plain and the Southeastern Wisconsin Savannah and Till Plain are the only two ecoregions mapped within Rock County. The only ecoregion near the site (5-mi. [8-km] radius) is the Rock River Drift Plain as part of the larger Southeastern Wisconsin Till Plains ecoregion. Ecoregions are mapped by the USEPA (USEPA, 2012d) and are described in Wisconsin and Illinois by Omernik et al. (Omernik et al., 2008) and Woods et al. (Woods et al., 2006), respectively.The SHINE site is located within the Rock River Drift Plain as depicted in Figure 19.3.5-1. The Rock River Drift Plain is located in both southern Wisconsin and northern Illinois. This Level IV ecoregion is characterized by a landscape containing numerous small creeks, a greater stream density, and fewer lakes than in ecoregions to the north and east. Steeper topography and broad outwash plains with loamy and sandy soils characterize this ecoregion (Omernik et al., 2008). The soils of the Rock River Drift Plain have developed primarily from glacial till, outwash deposits, loess, or alluvium. Oak savanna, prairie, and to a lesser extent, forest (primarily on fire-protected dissected uplands and along water courses) were the predominant vegetative communities prior to European settlement. Today, more than half of the Rock River Drift Plain is cropland. Although forage crops and feed grains harvested to support dairy operations and livestock are most common, cash-grain farming is also important (Woods et al., 2006).19.3.5.2Site and Near Site Areas The SHINE site consists of a 91.27-ac. (36.94 ha) parcel located south of Janesville, Wisconsin, as depicted in Figure 19.3.1-1. Within the site boundary, 91.09 ac. (36.86 ha), or 99.8percent of the site, consists of agriculture/cultivated crops (see Table 19.3.1-1). The remaining 0.18ac. (0.07 ha) consists of developed open space as described in Subsection19.3.1. Because of continuous land disturbance associated with agricultural practices, the site is devoid of natural landscapes such as forest, we tlands, grasslands, prairie, old field, and other natural plant communities. In addition, there are no ephemeral, intermittent, or perennial streams and associated riparian zones located within the boundaries of the SHINE site. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-97Rev. 0The entire 5-mi. (8-km) radius of the site center point is contained within the Rock River Drift Plain Level IV ecoregion as depicted in Figure 19.3.5-1. The Rock River Drift Plain LevelIV ecoregion is described in Subsection 19.3.5.1. Land cover near the site (5-mi. [8-km] radius) is illustrated in Figure 19.3.1-2 and summarized in Table 19.3.1-1. The vast majority of the area near the site is used for agricultural production (see Table19.3.1-1). Cultivated crops make up 25,236 ac. (10,213ha), or more than 50percent of the area near the site. Corn, soybeans, and winter wheat are commonly grown. An additional 5896 ac. (2386 ha), or approximately 12percent near the site, is used for pasture or hay production. Altogether, agricultural activities make up 61.9percent of the area near the site. Developed lands account for 11,861 ac. (4800 ha), or nearly 24percent near the site (see Table19.3.1-1). This includes developed lands mapped as open space, low intensity, medium intensity, and high intensity. Developed lands are further described in Subsection 19.3.1. Forested resources account for 3367 ac. (1363 ha), or less than 7percent, near the site (see Table 19.3.1-1). Forested resources primarily consist of deciduous forest but also include minor amounts of evergreen and mixed forest. Because most of the natural communities near the site have been converted to agriculture, forested resources are concentrated in riparian corridors along the Rock River and its associated tributary streams. Mapped wetland land cover is sparse near the SHINE site as indicated in Table 19.3.1-1. Wetlands mapped near the site include 722 ac. (292 ha) of woody wetlands and 787 ac. (318ha) of emergent herbaceous wetlands. Together, wetland cover types account for 3percent of the land cover near the site. A total of 796 ac. (322 ha), or close to 2percent, near the site is mapped as open water. Grassland resources account for 1049 ac. (425 ha), or just over 2percent, near the site. Shrub/scrub and barren lands each account for 1percent or less near the site (see Table19.3.1-1). | ||
19.3.5.3HistoryThe SHINE site is located within the Southeastern Wisconsin Till Plains where, at the time of European settlement, forests were common on moraines and along watercourses whereas prairie occurred on level to rolling uplands (Woods et al., 2006). According to Will-Wolf and Montague (Will-Wolf, S, and T.C. Montague, 1994), prairie covered approximately 50percent of southern Wisconsin prior to European settlement. However, given the intensity of agricultural land uses, a very small fraction of the original tallgrass prairie remains in Wisconsin (Higgins et al., 2001; Smith, Daryl D., 1990).Conversion of native plant communities to agriculture in the Midwest took place primarily in the 19th Century and was accelerated in 1837 by John Deere's invention of the self-scouring steel plow (Robertson, Ken, 2008). Conversion to agriculture not only changed the composition of plant communities, but also resulted in the draining of wetlands and the channelization of small streams to accommodate row crop production. Lands of the SHINE site have been in continuous agricultural production for several decades. | 19.3.5.3HistoryThe SHINE site is located within the Southeastern Wisconsin Till Plains where, at the time of European settlement, forests were common on moraines and along watercourses whereas prairie occurred on level to rolling uplands (Woods et al., 2006). According to Will-Wolf and Montague (Will-Wolf, S, and T.C. Montague, 1994), prairie covered approximately 50percent of southern Wisconsin prior to European settlement. However, given the intensity of agricultural land uses, a very small fraction of the original tallgrass prairie remains in Wisconsin (Higgins et al., 2001; Smith, Daryl D., 1990).Conversion of native plant communities to agriculture in the Midwest took place primarily in the 19th Century and was accelerated in 1837 by John Deere's invention of the self-scouring steel plow (Robertson, Ken, 2008). Conversion to agriculture not only changed the composition of plant communities, but also resulted in the draining of wetlands and the channelization of small streams to accommodate row crop production. Lands of the SHINE site have been in continuous agricultural production for several decades. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-98Rev. 019.3.5.4Places and Entities of Special InterestThis subsection provides information relative to the ecological resources of special interest near the SHINE site. The occurrence and characteristics of these features is developed as a result of quarterly field studies on and immediately surrounding the site, general field reconnaissance, and from agency correspondence.19.3.5.4.1Communities and Habitats of Special InterestEcological communities of special interest near the SHINE site include wetlands and terrestrial communities of special interest identified by WDNR. As described in Subsection 19.3.5.6, mapped wetland land cover is sparse near the SHINE site as indicated in Table 19.3.1-1. | ||
Wetlands mapped near the site include 722 ac. (292 ha) of woody wetlands and 787 ac. (318 ha) of emergent herbaceous wetlands. Together, wetland cover types account for 3percent of the land cover within the 5-mi. (8 km) radius. There are no wetlands on-site.As part of a WDNR endangered resources review letter, six communities of special interest were identified near the SHINE site (WDNR, 2012c): *Dry prairie, *Dry-mesic prairie, *Mesic prairie, *Southern dry-mesic forest, | Wetlands mapped near the site include 722 ac. (292 ha) of woody wetlands and 787 ac. (318 ha) of emergent herbaceous wetlands. Together, wetland cover types account for 3percent of the land cover within the 5-mi. (8 km) radius. There are no wetlands on-site.As part of a WDNR endangered resources review letter, six communities of special interest were identified near the SHINE site (WDNR, 2012c): *Dry prairie, *Dry-mesic prairie, *Mesic prairie, *Southern dry-mesic forest, | ||
*Southern mesic forest, and *Wet prairie. | |||
Dry Prairie. This dry grassland community usually occurs on steep south or west facing slopes or at the summits of river bluffs with sandstone or dolomite bedrock near the surface. Short to medium-sized prairie grasses such as little bluestem (Schizachyrium scoparium), side-oats grama (Bouteloua curtipendula), hairy grama (Bouteloua hirsuta), and prairie dropseed (Sporobolus heterolepis) are the dominants in this community. Common shrubs and forbs include lead | |||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
American Society of Mammologists, 2012 Chapter 19 - Environmental | American Society of Mammologists, 2012 Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-115Rev. 0Table 19.3.5-5 Avifaunal Species Potentially Occurring on or near the SHINE Site(Sheet 1 of 3)Scientific NameCommon Name FieldSurveysAbundance(a)Wisconsin Breeding Bird Atlas(b)Breeding Bird Survey(c)Actitis macularia Spotted sandpiper XAgelaius phoeniceus Red-winged blackbird A(d)XXAmmodramus savannarum Grasshopper sparrow RXAnas platyrhynchos MallardRXXAccipiter cooperii Cooper's hawk RArchilochus colubris Ruby-throated hummingbird XArdea herodiasGreat blue heron XXBaeolophus bicolorTufted titmouse OBombycilla cedrorum Cedar waxwing UXXBranta canadensis Canada goose O(d)XXBubo virginianusGreat horned owl XButeo jamaicensis Red-tailed hawk U(d)XXButorides virescens Green heron XCardinalis cardinalis Northern cardinal CXXCarduelis tristis American goldfinch CXXCarpodacus mexicanus House finch CXXCeryle alcyonBelted kingfisher XXChaetura pelagica Chimney swift XCharadrius vociferus KilldeerO(d)XXChordeiles minorCommon nighthawk RXCistothorus platensis Sedge wren XCoccyzus americanusYellow-billed cuckoo XCoccyzus erythropthalmusBlack-billed cuckoo XColaptes auratusNorthern flicker RXXColinus virginianus Northern bobwhite XColumba livia Rock dove UXXContopus virens Eastern wood pewee UXXCorvus brachyrhynchos American crow C(d)XXCyanocitta cristataBlue jayOXXDendroica petechiaYellow warbler RXXDolichonyx oryzivorusBobolinkXDumetella carolinensis Gray catbird UXXEmpidonax alnorumAlder flycatcher XEmpidonax minimus Least flycatcher RXEmpidonax spp.Willow/alder flycatcher XEmpidonax traillii Willow flycatcher XEremophila alpestris Horned lark C(d)XEuphagus cyanocephalus Brewer's blackbird UXFalco sparverius American kestrel XX Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-116Rev. 0Table 19.3.5-5 Avifaunal Species Potentially Occurring on or near the SHINE Site(Sheet 2 of 3)Scientific NameCommon Name Field Surveys Abundance(a)Wisconsin Breeding Bird Atlas(b)Breeding Bird Survey(c)Geothlypis triachasCommon yellowthroat RXXGrus canadensis Sandhill crane XXHirundo rustica Barn swallow UXXHylocichla mustelina Wood thrush XXIcterus galbula Baltimore oriole RXXIcterus spurius Orchard oriole RXJunco hyemalisDark-eyed junco OLarus delawarensis Ring-billed gull RXMelanerpes carolinus Red-bellied woodpecker OXXMelanerpes erythrocephalusRed-headed woodpecker XMeleagris gallopavo Wild turkey OXMelospiza melodia Song sparrow OXXMimus polyglottos Northern mockingbird OMolothrus ater Brown-headed cowbird OXXMyiarchus crinitus Great crested flycatcher RXXPasser domesticus House sparrow CXXPasserculus sandwichensis Savannah sparrow XPasserina cyanea Indigo bunting RXXPetrochelidon pyrrhonotaCliff swallow XXPhasianus colchicus Ring-necked pheasant XPheucticus ludovicianus Rose-breasted grosbeak XPicoides pubescensDowny woodpecker OXXPicoides villosus Hairy woodpecker XPipilo erythrophthalmus Eastern towhee UPoecile atricapillusBlack-capped chickadee OXXPolioptila caeruleaBlue-gray gnatcatcher RXXPooecetes gramineus Vesper sparrow XXProgne subisPurple martin RXQuiscalus quiscula Common grackle CXXRiparia riparia Bank swallow XSayornis phoebe Eastern phoebe OXXSialia sialis Eastern bluebird OXXSitta carolinensisWhite-breasted nuthatch OXXSpiza americanaDickcissel XSpizella arboreaAmerican tree sparrow RSpizella passerina Chipping sparrow OXXSpizella pusilla Field sparrow U(d)XXStelgidopteryx serripennis Northern rough-winged swallowRXX Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-117Rev. 0Table 19.3.5-5 Avifaunal Species Potentially Occurring on or near the SHINE Site(Sheet 3 of 3) | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Scientific Name Common Name FieldSurveysAbundance (a)Wisconsin Breeding Bird Atlas (b)Breeding Bird Survey(c)Sturnella magna Eastern meadowlark OXXSturnella neglecta Western meadowlark XSturnus vulgaris European starling AXXTachycineta bicolorTree swallow RXXToxostoma rufumBrown thrasher UXXTroglodytes aedon House wren XXTurdus migratoriusAmerican robin AXXTyrannus tyrannusEastern kingbird UXXVireo gilvus Warbling vireo XXVireo olivaceus Red-eyed vireo XXWilsonia catrina Hooded warbler XZenaida macrouraMourning dove UXXZonotrichia albicollis White-throated sparrow USpecies Richness 586174a)A=abundant; C=common; O=occasional; U=uncommon; R=rareb)WBBA, 2012c)USGS, 2012d d)Indicates species observed on-site. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-118Rev. 0Table 19.3.5-6 Reptiles and Amphibians Potentially Occurring on or near the SHINE SiteScientific NameCommon NameObserved during Field SurveyTurtlesApolone spinifera Spiny softshell turtleChrysemes pictaPainted turtleChelydra serpentinaCommon snapping turtle XEmydoidea blandingii Blanding's turtleGraptemys geographicaCommon map turtleGraptemys ouachitensisOuachita map turtleGraptemys pseudogeographica False map turtleSternotherus odoratus Common musk turtleSalamandersNecturus maculosaMudpuppyFrogs and ToadsBufo americanusAmerican toad XHyla chrysoscelis Copes gray treefrogHyla versicolorEastern gray treefrogPseudacris cruciferSpring peeper XPseudacris triseritataWestern chorus frogRana catesbianaBullfrogXRana clanitansGreen frog XRana pipiensNorthern leopard frog XRana sylvaticaWood frogSnakesColuber constictorBlue racerElaphe vulpina Fox snakeHeterodon platyrhinosEastern hog-nosed snakeLampropeltis triangulum Milk snakeNerodia sipedonNorthern water snakeOpheodrys vernalisSmooth green snakeSistrurus catenatusEastern massasaugaStoreria dekayiNorthern brown snakeStoreria occipitomaculataRed-bellied snakeThamnophis sirtalisEastern garter snake XLizardsCnemidophorus sexlineatusSix-lined racerunnerEumeces fasciatusFive-lined skink | |||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
WDNR, 2012f Chapter 19 - Environmental | WDNR, 2012f Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-119Rev. 0Table 19.3.5-7 Protected Species near the SHINE Site(a)Scientific NameCommon Name Status(a)FishAnguilla rostrataAmerican eelSpecies of special concern (S)Erimystax x-punctatusGravel chubEndangered (S)Lythrurus umbratilisRedfin ShinerThreatened (S)Moxostoma valenciennesiGreater redhorseThreatened (S)Notropis nubilusOzark MinnowThreatened (S)Mussels Alasmidonta marginataElktoeSpecies of special concern (S)Cyclonaias tuberculataPurple wartybackEndangered (S) | ||
Quadrula metanevra MonkeyfaceThreatened (S)Venustaconcha ellipsiformisEllipseThreatened (S)Villosa irisRainbow shellEndangered (S)Turtles Emydoidea blandingiiBlanding's turtleThreatened (S) | |||
PlantsAgastache nepetoides Yellow giant hyssopThreatened (S)Artemisa dracunculusDragon wormwoodSpecies of special concern (S)Asclepias lanuginosaWoolly milkweedThreatened (S)Asclepias purpurascensPurple milkweedEndangered (S)Besseya bulliiKitten tailsThreatened (S) | |||
Cacalia tuberosaPrairie Indian-plantainThreatened (S)Calylophus serrulatusYellow evening primroseSpecies of special concern (S)Camassia scilloidesWild hyancinthEndangered (S)Cirsium hilliiHill's thistleThreatened (S)Echinacea pallidaPale purple coneflowerThreatened (S)Euphorbia commutataWood spurgeSpecies of special concern (S)Lespedeza leptostachyaPrairie bush-cloverEndangered (S)Threatened (F)Melica nitensThree-flowered melic grassSpecies of special concern (S)Nothocalais cuspidataPrairie false-dandelionSpecies of special concern (S)Penstemon hirsutusHairy beardtongueSpecies of special concern (S)Polytaenia nuttalliiPrairie parsleyThreatened (S)Prenanthes asperaRough rattlesnake-rootEndangered (S)Ruellia humilisHairy wild-petuniaEndangered (S)Scutellaria parvulaSmall skullcapEndangered (S)Silene niveaSnowy campion Threatened (S)Thaspium trifoliatumPurple meadow-parsnipSpecies of special concern (S)Cypripedium candidumSmall white lady's-slipperThreatened (S)Hypericum sphaerocarpumRound-fruited St. John's-wortThreatened (S)Myosotis laxaSmall forget-me-notSpecies of special concern (S)Nuphar advenaYellow water lilySpecies of special concern (S)Plantanus occidentalisSycamoreSpecies of special concern (S)Polygala incarnata Pink milkwortEndangered (S)a) Protected species information was provided by USFWS and WDNR within a 6-mi (9.7 km) radius of the site b) State listed (S), Federally listed (F). | |||
==References:== | ==References:== | ||
USFWS, 2012 and WDNR, 2012c Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-120Rev. 019.3.6HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCESCultural resource studies were performed for the SHINE site that consisted of a geographical information system (GIS) analysis, a records level review of properties listed on the National Register of Historic Properties (NRHP), and | USFWS, 2012 and WDNR, 2012c Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-120Rev. 019.3.6HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCESCultural resource studies were performed for the SHINE site that consisted of a geographical information system (GIS) analysis, a records level review of properties listed on the National Register of Historic Properties (NRHP), and fi eld surveys. GIS analyses and records reviews were performed on an area within a 10-mi. (16-km) radius of the SHINE site. While this radius is not specified in the Final ISG Augmenting NUREG-15 37, the use of 10 mi. (16 km) is consistent with guidance of NUREG-1555 (Subsection 2.5.3) regarding the radius appropriate for the collection of sufficient data to describe historic properties within the area surrounding a proposed project. Field surveys and reviews consisted of a Phase I archaeological survey of the entirety of the SHINE site. This survey was conducted to ensure compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and other Federal and state cultural resources management regulations.19.3.6.1Cultural SettingGeneral information regarding the cultural setting in the vicinity of the SHINE site is summarized by Knopf and Krause (Knopf, Chad and Kari Krause, 2012) and is presented in this section. | ||
The prehistory of southern Wisconsin is divided into four broad periods describing Native American habitation and development: the Paleoindian, Archaic, Woodland, and Mississippian periods. Approximately 10,000 years ago, Paleoindians pushed northward into Wisconsin as the glaciers retreated. These hunter-gatherers exploited the new resource-rich environments and hunted woolly mammoth, mastodon, and bison. Small, mobile groups utilized fluted and unfluted projectile points/knives designed for hunting and butchering animals. Clovis and Folsom points have been recovered in southeastern Wisconsin.Along with the change in the climate to warmer and drier conditions that occurred around 8000years ago, came the shift from hunting Ice Age mammals to smaller modern animals such as deer and elk. This shift coincided with the Archaic Tradition, which is subdivided into the Early, Middle, and Late Archaic periods. The social organization during the Early and Middle Archaic periods continued with mobile groups of hunter-gatherers with an increasingly sedentary lifestyle during the Late Archaic period.Cultural changes that occurred during the Woodland period (approximately 3000 years ago) included the use of pottery and bow and arrow, construction of conical and effigy mounds, and the existence of large villages. The Early Woodland period is characterized by the appearance of flat bottomed vessels tempered with grit, Kramer and Waubesa projectile points, and conical mounds. Subsistence practices during the Middle Woodland period included hunting, gathering of nuts and wild rice, and cultivation of squash. The Late Woodland period is characterized by more intensive cultivation of corn and the use of pottery consisting of globular jars with cord or fabric impressed decorations. The Mississippian period began about 1000 years ago; Native American occupants of Rock County were the Koshkonong Oneota. These people lived in large villages, grew corn, beans, and squash, and maintained a large trade network that crossed the continent. The Oneota are considered the ancestors of the modern-day Ho Chunk (Winnebago) tribe. The Indian tribes present in the state when it was first visited by Jean Nicolet in 1634 included the Ho Chunk, Potawatomi, Menominee, and Chippewa Indians. With the influx of European fur traders, loggers and early settlers in the late 1600s, and the succeeding Native American and European wars, Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-121Rev. 0many tribes of southeastern Wisconsin either migrated (or were removed) west of the Mississippi River.Euro-American settlers moved into Wisconsin during the 1830s and 1840s to take control of the territory ceded by Native American groups. Throughout the | The prehistory of southern Wisconsin is divided into four broad periods describing Native American habitation and development: the Paleoindian, Archaic, Woodland, and Mississippian periods. Approximately 10,000 years ago, Paleoindians pushed northward into Wisconsin as the glaciers retreated. These hunter-gatherers exploited the new resource-rich environments and hunted woolly mammoth, mastodon, and bison. Small, mobile groups utilized fluted and unfluted projectile points/knives designed for hunting and butchering animals. Clovis and Folsom points have been recovered in southeastern Wisconsin.Along with the change in the climate to warmer and drier conditions that occurred around 8000years ago, came the shift from hunting Ice Age mammals to smaller modern animals such as deer and elk. This shift coincided with the Archaic Tradition, which is subdivided into the Early, Middle, and Late Archaic periods. The social organization during the Early and Middle Archaic periods continued with mobile groups of hunter-gatherers with an increasingly sedentary lifestyle during the Late Archaic period.Cultural changes that occurred during the Woodland period (approximately 3000 years ago) included the use of pottery and bow and arrow, construction of conical and effigy mounds, and the existence of large villages. The Early Woodland period is characterized by the appearance of flat bottomed vessels tempered with grit, Kramer and Waubesa projectile points, and conical mounds. Subsistence practices during the Middle Woodland period included hunting, gathering of nuts and wild rice, and cultivation of squash. The Late Woodland period is characterized by more intensive cultivation of corn and the use of pottery consisting of globular jars with cord or fabric impressed decorations. The Mississippian period began about 1000 years ago; Native American occupants of Rock County were the Koshkonong Oneota. These people lived in large villages, grew corn, beans, and squash, and maintained a large trade network that crossed the continent. The Oneota are considered the ancestors of the modern-day Ho Chunk (Winnebago) tribe. The Indian tribes present in the state when it was first visited by Jean Nicolet in 1634 included the Ho Chunk, Potawatomi, Menominee, and Chippewa Indians. With the influx of European fur traders, loggers and early settlers in the late 1600s, and the succeeding Native American and European wars, Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-121Rev. 0many tribes of southeastern Wisconsin either migrated (or were removed) west of the Mississippi River.Euro-American settlers moved into Wisconsin during the 1830s and 1840s to take control of the territory ceded by Native American groups. Throughout the 19 th and 20th centuries, Rock County was primarily an agricultural economy that utilized the power of the Rock River for mills and transportation of trade commodities. Despite burgeoning industrial development and population growth after the Civil War, the farming industry expanded as railroads and urban markets developed in veins along the rail lines throughout the state. Urban growth and the advancements in transportation spurred along the shift in Wisconsin agriculture to focus on commercial dairy production, which helped to extend the viability of traditional agriculture in the region. Manufacturing boomed in Rock County in the 20th century, as General Motors (GM) and other firms began producing tractors, machinery, paper, pens, and refined farm products such as snack foods. Though manufacturing gained a large market share, agriculture has remained an important factor in the regional economy.19.3.6.2Previous InvestigationsTo ensure that all potential impacts to known historic properties were addressed prior to construction, SHINE completed the background records review for the project at the Historic Preservation Office, Wisconsin Historical Society (WHS) in Madison, Wisconsin and at the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency (IHPA) in Springfield, Illinois; NRHP-listed properties were identified using the online NRHP database. This investigation covered a 10-mi. (16-km) radius surrounding the SHINE site. This radius encompasses all of Rock County, Wisconsin and portions of Winnebago and Boone counties, Illinois (Knopf, Chad and Kari Krause, 2012).19.3.6.2.1Previously Conducted Cultural Resources SurveysA total of 126 cultural resource surveys in Wisconsin and 17 surveys in Illinois were completed and recorded at the WHS and IHPA within a 10-mi. (16-km) radius surrounding the project area. These included 38 records reviews, 102 Phase I investigations, and two archaeological site excavations. Only seven surveys were conducted within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the SHINE site (Knopf and Krause, 2012) (Table 19.3.6-1). None of these investigations were located within the project boundary. Two reports could not be examined because they were either missing or never received by the WHS. The remaining five surveys were documented and the reports were on file at the WHS. The five documented surveys were associated with the construction along US 51, I-90, the installation of a sewer line, and upgrades at the SWRA. Two surveys were conducted at the SWRA. The SWRA is located immediately to the west of US 51. No archaeological sites were identified for any of these five projects, and no additional fieldwork was recommended.19.3.6.2.2Previously Recorded Archaeological SitesEligible or listed archaeological sites located within a 10-mi. (16-km) radius of the SHINE site were identified through a information request with the WHS and by a database search of Illinois Historic Preservation Agency (IHPA) records. There are 223 archaeological sites identified in Wisconsin, five sites identified in Illinois, and onesite that is bisected by the Wisconsin-Illinois state line (WHS, 2012a; IHPA, 2013). As is presented in Table 19.3.6-2, only one prehistoric site is listed on the NRHP, whereas a total of 87 sites are eligible for listing on the NRHP in Wisconsin; there are no eligible or listed sites in Illinois. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-122Rev. 0The majority of the 87 eligible sites consist of prehistoric burials or mounds (n=44), while one mound site is a listed NRHP property (the Strong Partridge Mound Group). The Strong Partridge Mound Group was listed on the NRHP on March1, 1994 and is located in Beloit, Wisconsin. It is a prehistoric effigy mound group from the Late Woodland period. The remaining eligible sites consist of 39 historic/modern period cemeteries and four archaeological sites. All cemeteries or burials/prehistoric mounds are protected under Wisconsin Statute 157.70. The Happy Hallow Cemetery is closest, located approximately 1.2 mi. (2.0 km) south of the SHINE site (Figure19.3.1-4).19.3.6.2.3Previously Recorded Historic Structures and Districts Table 19.3.6-3 lists historic structures and districts listed on the NRHP and located within a 10mi. (16-km) radius of the SHINE site. A total of 85NRHP-listed | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-122Rev. 0The majority of the 87 eligible sites consist of prehistoric burials or mounds (n=44), while one mound site is a listed NRHP property (the Strong Partridge Mound Group). The Strong Partridge Mound Group was listed on the NRHP on March1, 1994 and is located in Beloit, Wisconsin. It is a prehistoric effigy mound group from the Late Woodland period. The remaining eligible sites consist of 39 historic/modern period cemeteries and four archaeological sites. All cemeteries or burials/prehistoric mounds are protected under Wisconsin Statute 157.70. The Happy Hallow Cemetery is closest, located approximately 1.2 mi. (2.0 km) south of the SHINE site (Figure19.3.1-4).19.3.6.2.3Previously Recorded Historic Structures and Districts Table 19.3.6-3 lists historic structures and districts listed on the NRHP and located within a 10mi. (16-km) radius of the SHINE site. A total of 85NRHP-listed distri cts or properties are identified in Wisconsin as illustrated in Figure 19.3.6-1. However, no NRHP-listed properties are located in Illinois (IHPA, 2013).Recorded sites within Wisconsin summarized in Table 19.3.6-3 include districts and numerous individual properties located in Janesville and Be loit. Individually listed properties have also been identified in the communities of Bradford, Clinton, Footville, Turtle, and La Prairie. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-124Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-1 Previously Recorded Cultural Resources Surveys within 1-mi. (1.6-km) of the | Janesville contains 14 historic districts and 20 historic properties. The Benton Avenue, Bostwick Avenue, Columbus Circle, Conrad Cottages and the Look West Avenue Historic Districts contain domestic architecture of such styles as Colonial Revival, Tudor Revival, Mission Revival, Greek Revival, Italianate, Queen Anne, Late Victorian, and bungalow/craftsman. The remaining historic districts, including Courthouse Hill, East and West Milwaukee, Jefferson Avenue, North Main and South Main Historic Districts, are associated with the city's residences, commerce, industry, and government. The Old Fourth Ward and Prospect Hill Historic Districts are of Italianate or Queen Anne construction and contain residential dwellings, as well as educational and religious facilities. The remaining individual historic properties are primarily houses distributed throughout Janesville; additional properties include a business, educational facilities, an armory, and churches. The nearest listed NRHP property, the John and Martha Hugunin House, is located 1.1mi. (1.7 km) northeast of the SHINE site. The Hugunin House is Italianate in style, and is significant for its architectural design and relation to historic farming in the region. It was listed on the NRHP on June1, 2005.Three historic districts are located in the City of Beloit, located 3.7 mi. (6.0 km) south of the SHINE site. The Bluff Street Historic District contains domestic dwellings dating from 1847 to 1915 and is significant for its association with European exploration and settlement. The Merrill Avenue Historic District contains domestic dwellings dating from 1891 to 1942 and is composed of 19th to 20th century revival architectural styles. The Near East Side Historic District is composed of a mix of architectural styles dating from 1850 to 1932 and contains two prehistoric archaeological mound groups as contributing elements to the district. While the remaining 27individual historic properties are primarily houses distributed throughout the area, additional properties include an apartment complex, municipal facilities, a museum, college buildings, and churches. Constructed in 1917, Fairbanks Flats were built exclusively for African-American workers after World War I and played a prominent role in community planning during the twentieth century. The apartments are located 6.9 mi. (11.1 km) south of the SHINE site. Another 21 NRHP-listed historic properties are scattered within the 10-mi. (16-km) radius around the SHINE site (Figure 19.3.6-1). The community of Clinton, located 8.2 mi. (13.2 km) southeast Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-123Rev. 0of the SHINE site, contains examples of governmental and commerce architecture with the Clinton Village Hall, water tower, Citizens Bank, and the Crosby Block. The remaining NRHP-listed properties are residential dwellings dating from the late 19 th century constructed in Italianate, Queen Anne, and Greek Revival architectural styles. Two farmsteads in Bradford Township; two dwellings in Plymouth and LaPrairie Townships; a house, church, and an iron bridge in Turtle Township; and two stores, one bank, and one house in the Town of Footville comprise the last of the NRHP-listed properties within the 10-mi. (16-km) radius of the SHINE | ||
West00-0787Phase I archaeological survey at the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2000No sites identified; no additional fieldwork recommended0.6-mi. (1-km) West 93-2029Records review for proposed sewer and water main route 1993No sites identified; no additional fieldwork recommended0.3-mi. (0.5-km) West84-1001Phase I archaeological survey of Route 11 - pedestrian survey1985No sites identified; no additional fieldwork recommended0.8-mi. (1.3-km) | |||
North05-0607Phase I archaeological survey at Rock County Airport - shovel testing2005No sites identified; no additional fieldwork recommended0.6-mi. (1-km) West 97-1131Phase I archaeological survey of proposed Janesville bypass1997Not available0.8-mi. (1.3-km) North89-5527Records review1989Not available0.8-mi. (1.3-km) North | site.19.3.6.3Results of Phase I Cultural Resource Investigation A Phase I archeological survey was conducted on lands within the project boundary. The survey was supervised in the field by Mr. Chad Knopf while Ms. Kari Krause served as the Principal Investigator. Mr. Knopf has a Bachelor's degree in Anthropology and has over 2years of experience in historic and prehistoric archaeology. Kari Krause is a Registered Professional Archaeologist with a Master of Arts degree in Anthropology. Ms. Krause has over 17 years of experience conducting archaeological projects throughout the Midwestern United States. Fieldwork was performed following methodologies established by the WHS. The survey was completed utilizing a pedestrian survey at closely spaced transect intervals (less than 49 ft.[15m] between transects) that allowed crews to systematically inspect the ground surface of the tilled agricultural field. Three shovel test pits were judgmentally placed and excavated across the project area to provide an understanding of the soil stratigraphy. No archaeological sites or evidence of cultural resources were identified within the survey area, and no further archaeological investigations are recommended (Knopf, Chad and Kari Krause, 2012). The report was submitted to the WHS for review and comment. In a letter dated February 16, 2012 (WHS, 2012), the WHS indicated that they had reviewed the report and found it complete and concluded that consultation regarding the SHINE project was complete.19.3.6.4Native American and State Agency ConsultationSHINE initiated consultation with 13 tribes that are federally recognized in Wisconsin. A single response letter was received from the Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska who indicated that they have cultural properties of interest in the project area, but had no concerns regarding the project. However, they did indicate the desire to be contacted in the event burial sites or other cultural materials were discovered during construction. Follow-up calls were made to representatives of the remaining 12 tribes; however, no return calls to SHINE were received. Illinois currently does not have a federally recognized Nati ve American tribe. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-124Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-1 Previously Recorded Cultural Resources Surveys within 1-mi. (1.6-km) of the Site Report No.Survey TypeDateResultsDistance from Site (centerpoint)88-2033Interviews for planned project associated with US Highway 511988No sites identified; no additional fieldwork recommended0.2-mi. (0.3-km) | |||
West00-0787Phase I archaeological survey at the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2000No sites identified; no additional fieldwork recommended0.6-mi. (1-km) | |||
West 93-2029Records review for proposed sewer and water main route 1993No sites identified; no additional fieldwork recommended0.3-mi. (0.5-km) | |||
West84-1001Phase I archaeological survey of Route 11 - pedestrian survey1985No sites identified; no additional fieldwork recommended0.8-mi. (1.3-km) | |||
North05-0607Phase I archaeological survey at Rock County Airport - shovel testing2005No sites identified; no additional fieldwork recommended0.6-mi. (1-km) | |||
West 97-1131Phase I archaeological survey of proposed Janesville bypass1997Not available0.8-mi. (1.3-km) | |||
North89-5527Records review1989Not available0.8-mi. (1.3-km) | |||
North | |||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
Knopf, Chad and Kari Krause, 2012 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-125Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-2 Eligible or Listed Archaeological Sites within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site, Rock County, Wisconsin(Sheet 1 of 4)State NumberBurial NumberSite NameAgeNRHP StatusRO-0130BRO-0179Spring Brook Burial SiteUnknownEligibleRO-0286BRO-0127Morgan School EnclosureUnknownEligibleRO-0036BRO-0126McLenegan Group SouthUnknownEligible RO-0141BRO-0085McLenegan Group NorthUnknownEligibleRO-0138BRO-0111Pierce GroupUnknownEligibleRO-0136BRO-0110Baarz MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0097BRO-0147Chrispinsen MoundUnknownEligibleRO-0007BRO-0181Crystal and Hiawatha SpringsUnknownEligible RO-032490J-WUnknownEligibleRO-0009Riverside Park VillageUnknownEligibleRO-0076BRO-0176Riverbank Quarry BurialsUnknownEligible RO-032590J-XUnknownEligibleRO-0080BRO-0140McElroy TrioUnknownEligibleRO-0082BRO-0142Sutherland GravesUnknownEligible RO-0103BRO-0150Bailey MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0104BRO-0151Spring Brook MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0107BRO-0152Several Small TumuliUnknownEligible RO-0117BRO-0153Woodstock Mound GroupUnknownEligibleRO-0290BRO-0102Rockport Park MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0307 JonesUnknownEligibleRO-0126BRO-0107Afton Mound GroupUnknownEligibleRO-0122BRO-?InmanUnknownEligibleRO-0291BRO-0099Six House MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0125BRO-0155Reynolds GroupUnknownEligibleRO-0119BRO-0154Afton MillUnknownEligibleRO-0127BRO-0108Henbest MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0021BRO-0116Roth Mound GroupUnknownEligibleRO-0023BRO-0117Yost MoundUnknownEligibleRO-0030BRO-0122Weirick Mound GroupUnknownEligible Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-126Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-2 Eligible or Listed Archaeological Sites within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site, Rock County, Wisconsin(Sheet 2 of 4)State NumberBurial NumberSite NameAgeNRHP StatusRO-0027BRO-0119Henderson MoundUnknownEligibleRO-0031BRO-0123Adams - DuquyUnknownEligibleRO-0143BRO-0087Strong Partridge Mound GroupUnknownNRHPRO-0142BRO-0086Joint Switch GroupUnknownEligibleRO-0034BRO-0125Poe MoundUnknownEligibleRO-0144BRO-0088Whitfield CampsiteUnknownEligibleRO-0019BRO-0115Water Tower MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0038BRO-0128JonesUnknownEligible RO-0015BRO-0114Beloit College Mound Group300-600 A.D. (un-calibrated); Date most likely between 500-900 A.D.EligibleRO-0039/ WO-0460(a)BRO-0129State Line Mound Group800-1300 A.D.EligibleRO-0390BRO-?Henbest MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0083BRO-0141Duplicate of RO-0104 Spring Brook MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0028BRO-0120Baldwin MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0396BRO-0174Buells BearUnknownEligibleRO-0407BRO-0172Oakwood Cemetery MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0041BRO-0131HillcrestUnknownEligibleRO-0219BRO-0173Ho-Chunk Council HouseUnknownEligibleRO-0140BRO-0082Murphy GroupUnknownEligibleRO-0425BRO-0171Nyman-Inman BurialsUnknownEligibleRO-0426BRO-0050Dillenback CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0076Turtle Cemetery (aka Turtleville Cemetery)Currently activeEligible BRO-0078Shopiere Cemetery (aka Bethel Cemetery)Currently activeEligible BRO-0077Clinton Corners CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0167Jack Family CemeteryUnknownEligible Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-127Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-2 Eligible or Listed Archaeological Sites within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site, Rock County, Wisconsin(Sheet 3 of 4)State NumberBurial NumberSite NameAgeNRHP Status BRO-0168Murray Settlement CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0066Newark CemeteryCurrently activeEligible BRO-0067Unnamed CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0064Luther valley east CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0069Unnamed CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0070Plymouth Cemetery (aka Hanover Cemetery)Presently activeEligible BRO-0068Naugle Cemetery (aka Norwegian Cemetery; Baptist Church Cemetery)UnknownEligible BRO-0044Mount Zion Cemetery (Clarke)UnknownEligible BRO-0043Emerald Grove Cemetery1850-presentEligible BRO-0042Milton Lawn Memorial Park1932-presentEligible BRO-0053Mt. Pleasant CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0051Rock County Institution CemeteryUnknownEligibleBRO-0049Unnamed CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0048Mt. Olivet Cemetery1852Eligible BRO-0047Oak Hill Cemetery1851Eligible BRO-0046Unnamed CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0165Trinity Episcopal Church CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0045Unnamed cemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0081Indian CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0040Grove Cemetery1848Eligible BRO-0041Bethel Cemetery (aka Disciples Cemetery; Center Cemetery)1869-presentEligible BRO-0018Carver's Rock Burial1843Eligible BRO-0019Clinton Cemetery1860-presentEligibleBRO-0088Polander Mound GroupUnknownEligibleBRO-0122Haggerty Mound GroupUnknownEligible Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-128Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-2 Eligible or Listed Archaeological Sites within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site, Rock County, Wisconsin(Sheet 4 of 4)State NumberBurial NumberSite NameAgeNRHP Status BRO-0007Oakwood Cemetery (aka Beloit Cemetery)1840-presentEligible BRO-0006Calvary Catholic Cemetery1850sEligible BRO-0008East Lawn Cemetery1919-presentEligible BRO-0009Isolated GraveUnknownEligible BRO-0010Mt. Thabor Cemetery (aka Tabor Cemetery or Thabor Cemetery)1952Eligible BRO-0011Baldwin CemeteryPresently activeEligibleBRO-0129Nine Mile SwallowUnknownEligible BRO-0005Afton Cemetery (aka Town of Rock Cemetery)UnknownEligible BRO-0012Happy Hollow Cemetery (aka Gower or Rock Vale Cemetery)1850sEligibleBRO-0133Langford MoundUnknownEligiblea) Rock County, WI/Winnebago County, IL | Knopf, Chad and Kari Krause, 2012 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-125Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-2 Eligible or Listed Archaeological Sites within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site, Rock County, Wisconsin(Sheet 1 of 4) | ||
State NumberBurial NumberSite NameAgeNRHP StatusRO-0130BRO-0179Spring Brook Burial SiteUnknownEligibleRO-0286BRO-0127Morgan School EnclosureUnknownEligibleRO-0036BRO-0126McLenegan Group SouthUnknownEligible RO-0141BRO-0085McLenegan Group NorthUnknownEligibleRO-0138BRO-0111Pierce GroupUnknownEligibleRO-0136BRO-0110Baarz MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0097BRO-0147Chrispinsen MoundUnknownEligibleRO-0007BRO-0181Crystal and Hiawatha SpringsUnknownEligible RO-032490J-WUnknownEligibleRO-0009Riverside Park VillageUnknownEligibleRO-0076BRO-0176Riverbank Quarry BurialsUnknownEligible RO-032590J-XUnknownEligibleRO-0080BRO-0140McElroy TrioUnknownEligibleRO-0082BRO-0142Sutherland GravesUnknownEligible RO-0103BRO-0150Bailey MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0104BRO-0151Spring Brook MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0107BRO-0152Several Small TumuliUnknownEligible RO-0117BRO-0153Woodstock Mound GroupUnknownEligibleRO-0290BRO-0102Rockport Park MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0307 JonesUnknownEligibleRO-0126BRO-0107Afton Mound GroupUnknownEligibleRO-0122BRO-?InmanUnknownEligibleRO-0291BRO-0099Six House MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0125BRO-0155Reynolds GroupUnknownEligibleRO-0119BRO-0154Afton MillUnknownEligibleRO-0127BRO-0108Henbest MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0021BRO-0116Roth Mound GroupUnknownEligibleRO-0023BRO-0117Yost MoundUnknownEligibleRO-0030BRO-0122Weirick Mound GroupUnknownEligible Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-126Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-2 Eligible or Listed Archaeological Sites within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site, Rock County, Wisconsin(Sheet 2 of 4) | |||
State NumberBurial NumberSite NameAgeNRHP StatusRO-0027BRO-0119Henderson MoundUnknownEligibleRO-0031BRO-0123Adams - DuquyUnknownEligibleRO-0143BRO-0087Strong Partridge Mound GroupUnknownNRHPRO-0142BRO-0086Joint Switch GroupUnknownEligibleRO-0034BRO-0125Poe MoundUnknownEligibleRO-0144BRO-0088Whitfield CampsiteUnknownEligibleRO-0019BRO-0115Water Tower MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0038BRO-0128JonesUnknownEligible RO-0015BRO-0114Beloit College Mound Group300-600 A.D. (un-calibrated); Date most likely between 500-900 A.D.EligibleRO-0039/ | |||
WO-0460(a)BRO-0129State Line Mound Group800-1300 A.D.EligibleRO-0390BRO-?Henbest MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0083BRO-0141Duplicate of RO-0104 Spring Brook MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0028BRO-0120Baldwin MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0396BRO-0174Buells BearUnknownEligibleRO-0407BRO-0172Oakwood Cemetery MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0041BRO-0131HillcrestUnknownEligibleRO-0219BRO-0173Ho-Chunk Council HouseUnknownEligibleRO-0140BRO-0082Murphy GroupUnknownEligibleRO-0425BRO-0171Nyman-Inman BurialsUnknownEligibleRO-0426BRO-0050Dillenback CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0076Turtle Cemetery (aka Turtleville Cemetery)Currently activeEligible BRO-0078Shopiere Cemetery (aka Bethel Cemetery)Currently activeEligible BRO-0077Clinton Corners CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0167Jack Family CemeteryUnknownEligible Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-127Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-2 Eligible or Listed Archaeological Sites within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site, Rock County, Wisconsin(Sheet 3 of 4) | |||
State NumberBurial NumberSite NameAgeNRHP Status BRO-0168Murray Settlement CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0066Newark CemeteryCurrently activeEligible BRO-0067Unnamed CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0064Luther valley east CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0069Unnamed CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0070Plymouth Cemetery (aka Hanover Cemetery)Presently activeEligible BRO-0068Naugle Cemetery (aka Norwegian Cemetery; Baptist Church Cemetery)UnknownEligible BRO-0044Mount Zion Cemetery (Clarke)UnknownEligible BRO-0043Emerald Grove Cemetery1850-presentEligible BRO-0042Milton Lawn Memorial Park1932-presentEligible BRO-0053Mt. Pleasant CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0051Rock County Institution CemeteryUnknownEligibleBRO-0049Unnamed CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0048Mt. Olivet Cemetery1852Eligible BRO-0047Oak Hill Cemetery1851Eligible BRO-0046Unnamed CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0165Trinity Episcopal Church CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0045Unnamed cemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0081Indian CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0040Grove Cemetery1848Eligible BRO-0041Bethel Cemetery (aka Disciples Cemetery; Center Cemetery)1869-presentEligible BRO-0018Carver's Rock Burial1843Eligible BRO-0019Clinton Cemetery1860-presentEligibleBRO-0088Polander Mound GroupUnknownEligibleBRO-0122Haggerty Mound GroupUnknownEligible Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-128Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-2 Eligible or Listed Archaeological Sites within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site, Rock County, Wisconsin(Sheet 4 of 4) | |||
State NumberBurial NumberSite NameAgeNRHP Status BRO-0007Oakwood Cemetery (aka Beloit Cemetery)1840-presentEligible BRO-0006Calvary Catholic Cemetery1850sEligible BRO-0008East Lawn Cemetery1919-presentEligible BRO-0009Isolated GraveUnknownEligible BRO-0010Mt. Thabor Cemetery (aka Tabor Cemetery or Thabor Cemetery)1952Eligible BRO-0011Baldwin CemeteryPresently activeEligibleBRO-0129Nine Mile SwallowUnknownEligible BRO-0005Afton Cemetery (aka Town of Rock Cemetery)UnknownEligible BRO-0012Happy Hollow Cemetery (aka Gower or Rock Vale Cemetery)1850sEligibleBRO-0133Langford MoundUnknownEligiblea) Rock County, WI/Winnebago County, IL | |||
==References:== | ==References:== | ||
WHS, 2012a; IHPA, 2013 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-129Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-3 Historic Structures and Districts Listed on the NRHP within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site(Sheet 1 of 5)Historic NameCityDate State ListedNRHP Date ListedDistrict DescriptionArmory, TheJanesville1/1/198911/21/1978Bartlett Memorial Historical MuseumBeloit1/1/19894/11/1977Beloit Water TowerBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983Benton Avenue Historic DistrictJanesville4/25/19959/7/199684 contributing buildingsBlodgett, Selvy, HouseBeloit1/1/19895/23/1980Bluff Street Historic DistrictBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983109 contributing and 5 non-contributing buildings, 5 non-contributing archeological sitesBostwick Avenue Historic DistrictJanesville1/20/20064/24/20067 contributing buildings, 1contributing archeological siteBrasstown CottageBeloit1/1/19893/4/1983Church of St. Thomas the ApostleBeloit1/1/19891/7/ | WHS, 2012a; IHPA, 2013 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-129Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-3 Historic Structures and Districts Listed on the NRHP within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site(Sheet 1 of 5)Historic NameCityDate State ListedNRHP Date ListedDistrict DescriptionArmory, TheJanesville1/1/198911/21/1978Bartlett Memorial Historical MuseumBeloit1/1/19894/11/1977Beloit Water TowerBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983Benton Avenue Historic | ||
DistrictJanesville4/25/19959/7/199684 contributing buildingsBlodgett, Selvy, HouseBeloit1/1/19895/23/1980Bluff Street Historic DistrictBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983109 contributing and 5 non-contributing buildings, 5 non-contributing archeological sitesBostwick Avenue Historic | |||
DistrictJanesville1/20/20064/24/20067 contributing buildings, 1contributing archeological siteBrasstown CottageBeloit1/1/19893/4/1983Church of St. Thomas the | |||
ApostleBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983 Citizens BankClinton1/1/19898/1/1985City of Beloit Waterworks and Pump StationBeloit7/20/19909/13/1990 Clark-Brown HouseBeloit1/1/19899/13/1985Clinton Village HallClinton1/1/19898/1/1985Clinton Water TowerClinton1/1/19893/7/1985 Columbus Circle Historic | |||
DistrictJanesville10/15/20045/19/200564 contributing and 8 non-contributing buildingsConrad Cottages Historic | |||
DistrictJanesville2/3/19933/11/19937 contributing buildingsCourt Street Methodist ChurchJanesville1/1/198911/17/1977Courthouse Hill Historic DistrictJanesville1/1/19891/17/1986274 contributing and 72 non-contributing buildingsCrist, J. W., HouseBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-130Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-3 Historic Structures and Districts Listed on the NRHP within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site(Sheet 2 of 5)Historic NameCityDate State ListedNRHP Date ListedDistrict Description Crosby BlockClinton1/1/19898/1/19851 contributing buildingCrosby, James B., HouseJanesville4/25/199512/14/199810 contributing buildingsDean, Erastus, FarmsteadBradford (township)1/1/198912/4/1978DeLong, Homer B., HouseClinton1/1/19898/1/1985Dougan Round BarnBeloit1/1/19896/4/1979Dow, J.B., House and Carpenter Douglas BarnBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983East Milwaukee Street Historic | |||
DistrictJanesville1/1/19892/8/19807 contributing buildingsEmerson HallBeloit1/1/19899/20/1979Fairbanks FlatsBeloit1/1/19891/7/19834 contributing buildingsFirst Congregational ChurchBeloit1/1/19891/23/1975Footville CondenseryFootville1/1/19895/7/1982Footville State BankFootville1/1/19895/7/1982Fredendall BlockJanesville1/1/19893/25/1982 Hanchett BlockBeloit1/1/19893/20/1980 Hilton House HotelBeloit7/18/200311/7/2003Hugunin, John and Martha, | |||
HouseJanesville1/21/20056/1/2005Janesville Cotton MillJanesville1/1/19897/16/19802 contributing buildingsJanesville High SchoolJanesville1/15/19996/25/1999Janesville Public LibraryJanesville1/1/19897/1/1981Janesville Pumping StationJanesville1/1/19893/7/1985Jefferson Avenue Historic | |||
DistrictJanesville1/20/20064/19/200677 contributing and 7 non-contributing buildingsJones, John W., HouseJanesville7/20/20073/14/2008Lappin-Hayes BlockJanesville1/1/198911/7/1976 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-131Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-3 Historic Structures and Districts Listed on the NRHP within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site(Sheet 3 of 5)Historic NameCityDate State ListedNRHP Date ListedDistrict DescriptionLaPrairie Grange Hall No. 79LaPrairie (township)1/1/19894/11/1977Lathrop-Munn Cobblestone HouseBeloit1/1/19898/22/1977Look West Historic DistrictJanesville1/1/19893/26/1987547 contributing and 92 non-contributing buildings, 1contributing archeological | |||
siteLook West Historic District | |||
ExtensionJanesville12/11/199312/10/199371 contributing and 4 non-contributing buildingsLovejoy and Merrill-Nowlan | |||
HousesJanesville1/1/19891/21/19802 contributing buildingsMerrill Avenue Historic DistrictBeloit1/1/19892/19/19934 contributing buildingsMoran's SaloonBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983Murray-George HouseTurtle (township)1/1/19899/13/1985Myers-Newhoff HouseJanesville1/1/19895/18/1979Myers, Peter, Pork Packing Plant and Willard Coleman | |||
BuildingJanesville1/1/19897/7/19833 contributing buildingsNear East Side Historic | |||
DistrictBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983166 contributing and 14 non-contributing buildings, 2 contributing archeological sites, 1 contributing objectNeese, Elbert, HouseBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983North Main Street Historic DistrictJanesville1/1/19897/22/19834 contributing buildings Nye, Clark, HouseBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983Old Fourth Ward Historic DistrictJanesville2/7/19905/30/19901100 contributing and 443 non-contributing buildings, 1contributing and 1 non-contributing archeological | |||
siteOwen, William J., StoreFootville1/1/19895/7/1982 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-132Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-3 Historic Structures and Districts Listed on the NRHP within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site(Sheet 4 of 5)Historic NameCityDate State ListedNRHP Date ListedDistrict DescriptionPangborn, J. L., HouseClinton1/1/19898/1/1985Payne-Craig HouseJanesville1/1/19897/2/1987Pearsons Hall of ScienceBeloit1/1/19896/30/1980Prospect Hill Historic DistrictJanesville7/22/199211/5/1992115 contributing and 12 non-contributing buildingsRandall, Brewster, HouseJanesville1/1/19893/1/1984Rasey HouseBeloit1/1/198912/27/1974Rau, Charles, HouseBeloit1/1/19898/13/1976Richardson-Brinkman Cobblestone HouseClinton1/1/19897/28/1977Richardson, Hamilton, HouseJanesville1/1/19897/17/1978Rindfleisch BuildingBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983Shopiere Congregational | |||
ChurchTurtle (township)1/1/19898/13/1976Slaymaker, Stephen, HouseBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983Smiley, Samuel, HousePlymouth (township)1/1/198910/21/1982Smith, John, HouseClinton1/1/19898/1/1985South Main Street Historic DistrictJanesville4/19/19906/1/199014 contributing buildingsSt. Paul's Episcopal ChurchBeloit1/1/19894/4/1978Stark-Clint House1/1/19899/13/1985Strang, Soloman J., HouseFootville1/1/19895/7/1982Strong BuildingBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983Strunk, John and Eleanor, HouseJanesville7/20/20073/11/2008Tallman HouseJanesville1/1/198910/15/1970Taylor, A. E., HouseClinton1/1/19898/1/1985 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-133Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-3 Historic Structures and Districts Listed on the NRHP within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site(Sheet 5 of 5) | |||
==References:== | ==References:== | ||
WHS, 2012a; WHS, 2013Historic NameCityDate State ListedNRHP Date ListedDistrict DescriptionTurtleville Iron BridgeTurtle (township)1/1/19899/15/1977West Milwaukee Street Historic DistrictJanesville2/19/19905/17/199054 contributing and 10 non-contributing buildingsWillard, Frances, SchoolhouseJanesville1/1/198910/5/1977Wyman-Rye FarmsteadBradford (township)1/1/198911/7/1977; 11/21/19772 contributing and 3 non-contributing buildingsYates, Florence, HouseBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-134Rev. 019.3.7SOCIOECONOMICSThis subsection characterizes the current socioeconomic conditions within the region of influence (ROI) surrounding the SHINE site. It provides the basis for assessing potential socioeconomic impacts as a result of the construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Janesville site. The socioeconomic characterization addresses demographics (resident and transient population growth rates, race and ethnicity), community characteristics (the economy, housing availability, public services, local transportation), and tax payment information. The socioeconomic characterization is presented on a spatial and temporal (demography) basis. The appropriate nature and extent of socioeconomic characterization is described in the Final ISG Augmenting NUREG-1537, Part 1, Section 19.3.7, that requires the applicant or licensee to briefly describe socioeconomic conditions in the region (affected counties) around the proposed site, including sufficient detail to permit the assessment and evaluation of impacts from the proposed action. Geographic Area of AnalysisFor this assessment, the ROI has been established as the appropriate geographic area of analysis to support the characterization of socioeconomic baselines. The ROI corresponds to the area that incurs the greatest stresses to community services resulting from the SHINE project's demand for construction/operations workers.For purposes of demographic and community characteristics analysis, the ROI is considered to correspond to the residential distribution of the majority of the construction and operational workforces for the SHINE facility. As shown in Table 19.3.7-1, approximately 83percent of the total labor force of Rock County, Wisconsin resides within Rock County. Approximately 15 percent out of the remaining 17percent of the Rock County labor force commutes from counties adjacent to Rock County, or very nearly adjacent, including Winnebago County in Illinois (6.0percent); and Dane County (2.9percent), Walworth County (2.1percent), Green County (1.9percent), and Jefferson County (1.6percent) in Wisconsin. This suggests that the Rock County resident population contains a large workforce that is capable of supporting both construction and operation of the SHINE facility. Table 19.3.7-2 provides a summary of the workforce of Rock County by labor type specific to the occupation categories which are projected to require 20 or more employees at peak times in the construction schedule and subsequent operational phase. This table demonstrates that the workforce of the county is substantial in most categories of projected need for construction labor force and is likely to support the SHINE project. Also demonstrated is the fact that Rock County has a substantial labor force in the areas of industrial process operations, technical support and production management. Available data support the assumption that the local resident labor force of Rock County is capable to meet much of the demand of the SHINE project. Therefore, Rock County, WI is determined to represent the socioeconomic ROI and serves as the basis for assessment of potential project effects from construction and operation.19.3.7.1DemographyThe demography statistics within the ROI are characterized in the following subsections. Within the ROI, there are two municipalities of greater than 25,000 population: Janesville and Beloit. Therefore, demographic analysis includes statistics for these municipalities in addition to Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-135Rev. 0statistics for the overall ROI. This characterization provides a description of the resident population and includes resident population from the 2000 U.S. Census Bureau (USCB), resident population from the 2010 USCB, and population projection through 2055.Population projections at the county level are provided through 2055 to support the assessment of potential effects during the period of the facility's operational license (30 years) and decommissioning. The initial date of operation is anticipated to be 2016. Population projections presented in this subsection are based on published county population projections through the year 2035 and are extended through the year 2055. 19.3.7.1.1Resident Population19.3.7.1.1.1Resident Population of Communities in ROI The resident population of the ROI and its 29 municipalities is 160,331. Between 2000 and 2010, the county experienced a 5.3percent increase in population. During the same period, the city of Janesville, which is the municipality having the largest population in Rock County, grew 6.9percent from a population of 59,498 in 2000 to 63,575 in 2010. The city of Beloit has the second greatest population within Rock County with a population of 36,966 (USCB, 2010c). Other municipalities having a population exceeding 5,000 include the town of Beloit, Edgerton, Evansville, and Milton. All other municipalities have population levels less than 5,000 with the majority being less than 2,000 (Table19.3.7-3). The municipalities in Rock County are shown on Figure 19.3.7-1.19.3.7.1.1.2ROI Resident Population Growth ProjectionThe SHINE Operating License is expected to extend to year 2046. Population projections beyond 2035 are based on extrapolation of the county-specific growth rate of 5 percent that is the resulting equivalent rate of growth projected between 2025 and 2035 based on published projections. The resulting projections for 2045 and 2055 are shown in Table 19.3.7-4. Population projections published by Rock County (Rock County, 2009) anticipate that the county's population will increase by 22,313 persons between 2010 and 2035. As shown in Table19.3.7-4, the projected population for the year 2025 is 174,018 and the projected population for the year 2035 is 182,644. The projected growth rate for this 10-year time period equates to 4.96 percent. Extrapolation of this growth rate for two additional 10-year periods yields population projections of 191,703 for the year 2045 and 201,212 for the year 2055. 19.3.7.1.1.3Transient Population within 5 mi. (8 km)Transient population within the 5-mi. (8-km) area around the SHINE site has been estimated. This subsection establishes an estimate of transient population within 5mi. (8km) from the SHINE site.Significant sources of transient population in the 5-mi. (8-km) area around the SHINE site include major employers, schools (including elementary, middle, and high schools, colleges and universities), recreation areas, medical facilities, lodging facilities, and the SWRA. Estimation of transient populations within a given area may vary according to the time spent in the area Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-136Rev. 0(duration). This estimate is based on raw transient population estimates weighted according to the length of time each transient population group is expected to be in the area as follows:*Employer and school estimates x 0.27, which assumes that each employee or student is present at the facility 9 hours per day and 5 days per week.*Recreation area estimates x 0.33, which assumes that each daily visitor is present at the recreation area 8 hours per day.*SWRA estimates (passengers and crew) x 0.0833, which assumes that each person is present for 2 hours for each takeoff or landing.*Medical facilities and lodging facilities were not multiplied by a weighting factor; the assumption is that each bed at a medical facility and each room in a lodging facility is occupied 24 hours per day and 7 days per week.The 2010 weighted transient population estimate is provided in Table 19.3.7-5. Schools and major employers account for the majority of the transients within the 5-mi. (8-km) area.19.3.7.1.1.4Race and Ethnicity of the Resident Population in the ROIRace and ethnicity information is described for Rock County and for major population centers having a resident population exceeding 25,000. Rock County's population is predominantly white (87.6percent). The county population in 2010 is slightly more diverse overall when compared to 2000 USCB data. In 2000, the county's white population was 91.0percent, and the percentages of Black or African American population (4.6percent) and population classified by the USCB as "Some Other Race" (1.8percent) were slightly less than 2010 USCB numbers (5.0percent and 3.7percent, respectively). Comparative data for persons of Hispanic origin indicate a growth rate that is higher than the statewide rate of growth but is consistent with the national trend. In 2000, the percentage of Rock County's total population that was classified as Hispanic or Latino was 3.9percent and in 2010, the percentage increased to 7.6percent (Table 19.3.7-6). The trends in the city of Janesville are similar to countywide trends, with a slightly more diverse population in 2010 than in 2000 due in part to increases of the Hispanic or Latino population (2.6percent of the total population in 2000, compared to 5.4 percent in 2010). In addition, the percentage of Janesville's population that is Black or African American doubled from 2000 to 2010 (1.3 percent to 2.6 percent), and the population classified as "Some Other Race" also grew, from 1.0 percent to 2.0 percent of the overall population. While there is increased diversity, approximately 92 percent of the Janesville population is white (see Table 19.3.7-6). The city of Beloit is more diverse in comparison with Janesville and Rock County's overall population. Beloit's population is approximately 69percent white, a reduction from 75.6percent in 2000. The City's gains in Hispanic or Latino population and population classified as "Some Other Race" are much more significant than in Janesville, Rock County, the state, and the nation. The percentage of "Some Other Race" and Hispanic populations increased in the city of Beloit from 4.6 percent to 10.0 percent and from 9.1 percent to 17.1percent, respectively (seeTable19.3.7-6).Total minority population percentage for a defined population reflects minority racial status in conjunction with Hispanic or Latino ethnicity. The total minority population percentage is highest Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-137Rev. 0in Beloit, and has increased from 28.1 percent in 2000 to 36.5 percent in 2010. This rate of increase is over twice the statewide rate of increase, and significantly greater than the national rate of increase. Janesville saw total minority population grow at approximately the same rate as the national rate of increase, reaching 11.2 percent in 2010, up from 6.1 percent in 2000. Rock County's total minority population increase, from 10.8 percent in 2000 to 15.5 percent in 2010, was less than the national rate of increase, but greater than that for the State of Wisconsin (seeTable 19.3.7-6).19.3.7.2Community CharacteristicsThe term "community characteristics" is used to describe those socioeconomic attributes that pertain to the local economy, local housing statistics, public services, infrastructure including major transportation facilities, and tax payment information. The data presented are at the level of the ROI with the exception of descriptions of some transportation infrastructure such as highways and railroads that are regional and trans-regional in nature. 19.3.7.2.1EconomyThe economy of the ROI has experienced notable change in recent years. Economic data presented in this subsection include key economic indicators and address the following economic characteristics within the ROI:*Income | WHS, 2012a; WHS, 2013Historic NameCityDate State ListedNRHP Date ListedDistrict DescriptionTurtleville Iron BridgeTurtle (township)1/1/19899/15/1977West Milwaukee Street Historic DistrictJanesville2/19/19905/17/199054 contributing and 10 non-contributing buildingsWillard, Frances, SchoolhouseJanesville1/1/198910/5/1977Wyman-Rye FarmsteadBradford (township)1/1/198911/7/1977; 11/21/19772 contributing and 3 non- | ||
contributing buildingsYates, Florence, HouseBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-134Rev. 019.3.7SOCIOECONOMICSThis subsection characterizes the current socioeconomic conditions within the region of influence (ROI) surrounding the SHINE site. It provides the basis for assessing potential socioeconomic impacts as a result of the construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Janesville site. The socioeconomic characterization addresses demographics (resident and transient population growth rates, race and ethnicity), community characteristics (the economy, housing availability, public services, local transportation), and tax payment information. The socioeconomic characterization is presented on a spatial and temporal (demography) basis. The appropriate nature and extent of socioeconomic characterization is described in the Final ISG Augmenting NUREG-1537, Part 1, Section 19.3.7, that requires the applicant or licensee to briefly describe socioeconomic conditions in the region (affected counties) around the proposed site, including sufficient detail to permit the assessment and evaluation of impacts from the proposed action. Geographic Area of AnalysisFor this assessment, the ROI has been established as the appropriate geographic area of analysis to support the characterization of socioeconomic baselines. The ROI corresponds to the area that incurs the greatest stresses to community services resulting from the SHINE project's demand for construction/operations workers.For purposes of demographic and community characteristics analysis, the ROI is considered to correspond to the residential distribution of the majority of the construction and operational workforces for the SHINE facility. As shown in Table 19.3.7-1, approximately 83percent of the total labor force of Rock County, Wisconsin resides within Rock County. Approximately 15 percent out of the remaining 17percent of the Rock County labor force commutes from counties adjacent to Rock County, or very nearly adjacent, including Winnebago County in Illinois (6.0percent); and Dane County (2.9percent), Walworth County (2.1percent), Green County (1.9percent), and Jefferson County (1.6percent) in Wisconsin. This suggests that the Rock County resident population contains a large workforce that is capable of supporting both construction and operation of the SHINE facility. Table 19.3.7-2 provides a summary of the workforce of Rock County by labor type specific to the occupation categories which are projected to require 20 or more employees at peak times in the construction schedule and subsequent operational phase. This table demonstrates that the workforce of the county is substantial in most categories of projected need for construction labor force and is likely to support the SHINE project. Also demonstrated is the fact that Rock County has a substantial labor force in the areas of industrial process operations, technical support and production management. Available data support the assumption that the local resident labor force of Rock County is capable to meet much of the demand of the SHINE project. Therefore, Rock County, WI is determined to represent the socioeconomic ROI and serves as the basis for assessment of potential project effects from construction and operation.19.3.7.1DemographyThe demography statistics within the ROI are characterized in the following subsections. Within the ROI, there are two municipalities of greater than 25,000 population: Janesville and Beloit. Therefore, demographic analysis includes statistics for these municipalities in addition to Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-135Rev. 0statistics for the overall ROI. This characterization provides a description of the resident population and includes resident population from the 2000 U.S. Census Bureau (USCB), resident population from the 2010 USCB, and population projection through 2055.Population projections at the county level are provided through 2055 to support the assessment of potential effects during the period of the facility's operational license (30 years) and decommissioning. The initial date of operation is anticipated to be 2016. Population projections presented in this subsection are based on published county population projections through the year 2035 and are extended through the year 2055. 19.3.7.1.1Resident Population19.3.7.1.1.1Resident Population of Communities in ROI The resident population of the ROI and its 29 municipalities is 160,331. Between 2000 and 2010, the county experienced a 5.3percent increase in population. During the same period, the city of Janesville, which is the municipality having the largest population in Rock County, grew 6.9percent from a population of 59,498 in 2000 to 63,575 in 2010. The city of Beloit has the second greatest population within Rock County with a population of 36,966 (USCB, 2010c). Other municipalities having a population exceeding 5,000 include the town of Beloit, Edgerton, Evansville, and Milton. All other municipalities have population levels less than 5,000 with the majority being less than 2,000 (Table19.3.7-3). The municipalities in Rock County are shown on Figure 19.3.7-1.19.3.7.1.1.2ROI Resident Population Growth ProjectionThe SHINE Operating License is expected to extend to year 2046. Population projections beyond 2035 are based on extrapolation of the county-specific growth rate of 5 percent that is the resulting equivalent rate of growth projected between 2025 and 2035 based on published projections. The resulting projections for 2045 and 2055 are shown in Table 19.3.7-4. Population projections published by Rock County (Rock County, 2009) anticipate that the county's population will increase by 22,313 persons between 2010 and 2035. As shown in Table19.3.7-4, the projected population for the year 2025 is 174,018 and the projected population for the year 2035 is 182,644. The projected growth rate for this 10-year time period equates to 4.96 percent. Extrapolation of this growth rate for two additional 10-year periods yields population projections of 191,703 for the year 2045 and 201,212 for the year 2055. 19.3.7.1.1.3Transient Population within 5 mi. (8 km)Transient population within the 5-mi. (8-km) area around the SHINE site has been estimated. This subsection establishes an estimate of transient population within 5mi. (8km) from the SHINE site.Significant sources of transient population in the 5-mi. (8-km) area around the SHINE site include major employers, schools (including elementary, middle, and high schools, colleges and universities), recreation areas, medical facilities, lodging facilities, and the SWRA. Estimation of transient populations within a given area may vary according to the time spent in the area Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-136Rev. 0(duration). This estimate is based on raw transient population estimates weighted according to the length of time each transient population group is expected to be in the area as follows:*Employer and school estimates x 0.27, which assumes that each employee or student is present at the facility 9 hours per day and 5 days per week.*Recreation area estimates x 0.33, which assumes that each daily visitor is present at the recreation area 8 hours per day.*SWRA estimates (passengers and crew) x 0.0833, which assumes that each person is present for 2 hours for each takeoff or landing.*Medical facilities and lodging facilities were not multiplied by a weighting factor; the assumption is that each bed at a medical facility and each room in a lodging facility is occupied 24 hours per day and 7 days per week.The 2010 weighted transient population estimate is provided in Table 19.3.7-5. Schools and major employers account for the majority of the transients within the 5-mi. (8-km) area.19.3.7.1.1.4Race and Ethnicity of the Resident Population in the ROIRace and ethnicity information is described for Rock County and for major population centers having a resident population exceeding 25,000. Rock County's population is predominantly white (87.6percent). The county population in 2010 is slightly more diverse overall when compared to 2000 USCB data. In 2000, the county's white population was 91.0percent, and the percentages of Black or African American population (4.6percent) and population classified by the USCB as "Some Other Race" (1.8percent) were slightly less than 2010 USCB numbers (5.0percent and 3.7percent, respectively). Comparative data for persons of Hispanic origin indicate a growth rate that is higher than the statewide rate of growth but is consistent with the national trend. In 2000, the percentage of Rock County's total population that was classified as Hispanic or Latino was 3.9percent and in 2010, the percentage increased to 7.6percent (Table 19.3.7-6). The trends in the city of Janesville are similar to countywide trends, with a slightly more diverse population in 2010 than in 2000 due in part to increases of the Hispanic or Latino population (2.6percent of the total population in 2000, compared to 5.4 percent in 2010). In addition, the percentage of Janesville's population that is Black or African American doubled from 2000 to 2010 (1.3 percent to 2.6 percent), and the population classified as "Some Other Race" also grew, from 1.0 percent to 2.0 percent of the overall population. While there is increased diversity, approximately 92 percent of the Janesville population is white (see Table 19.3.7-6). The city of Beloit is more diverse in comparison with Janesville and Rock County's overall population. Beloit's population is approximately 69percent white, a reduction from 75.6percent in 2000. The City's gains in Hispanic or Latino population and population classified as "Some Other Race" are much more significant than in Janesville, Rock County, the state, and the nation. The percentage of "Some Other Race" and Hispanic populations increased in the city of Beloit from 4.6 percent to 10.0 percent and from 9.1 percent to 17.1percent, respectively (seeTable19.3.7-6).Total minority population percentage for a defined population reflects minority racial status in conjunction with Hispanic or Latino ethnicity. The total minority population percentage is highest Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-137Rev. 0in Beloit, and has increased from 28.1 percent in 2000 to 36.5 percent in 2010. This rate of increase is over twice the statewide rate of increase, and significantly greater than the national rate of increase. Janesville saw total minority population grow at approximately the same rate as the national rate of increase, reaching 11.2 percent in 2010, up from 6.1 percent in 2000. Rock County's total minority population increase, from 10.8 percent in 2000 to 15.5 percent in 2010, was less than the national rate of increase, but greater than that for the State of Wisconsin (seeTable 19.3.7-6).19.3.7.2Community CharacteristicsThe term "community characteristics" is used to describe those socioeconomic attributes that pertain to the local economy, local housing statistics, public services, infrastructure including major transportation facilities, and tax payment information. The data presented are at the level of the ROI with the exception of descriptions of some transportation infrastructure such as highways and railroads that are regional and trans-regional in nature. 19.3.7.2.1EconomyThe economy of the ROI has experienced notable change in recent years. Economic data presented in this subsection include key economic indicators and address the following economic characteristics within the ROI:*Income | |||
*Labor force*Unemployment*Poverty rates19.3.7.2.1.1Income (Population and Household)The per capita income for the ROI is $23,209, which is almost equal to that for the city of Janesville ($23,300) but less than both the statewide ($26,279) and national ($26,942) averages. The per capita income for the city of Beloit ($17,180) is markedly lower. Compared to the 2000 to 2010 rates of change for the state and the nation, the ROI, Janesville, and Beloit experienced much more notable decreases in per capita income from 2000 levels when adjusted for inflation (decreases of 12.3 percent, 17.2percent, and 19.8 percent, respectively). Comparative state and national numbers reflect a more moderate decrease in per capita income (decreases of 2.4percent and 1.4percent, respectively) (Table19.3.7-7). Median household income in the ROI is $49,144, which represents a 14.8percent decline from 2000 when adjusted for inflation. The 2010 median household income for Janesville ($48,257) is slightly less than the ROI, although the city's rate of change from 2000 to 2010 is greater, a 17.1percent decline. The city of Beloit's median household income is comparatively lower at $37,430, which is an 18.8percent decline from 2000 when adjusted for inflation. The 2000 ROI median household income was greater than state and national levels. The 2010 USCB data show that the ROI's median household income ($49,144) is less than the state ($50,814) and the nation ($51,222), although the difference is not as great as that for per capita income levels (seeTable 19.3.7-7). | *Labor force*Unemployment*Poverty rates19.3.7.2.1.1Income (Population and Household)The per capita income for the ROI is $23,209, which is almost equal to that for the city of Janesville ($23,300) but less than both the statewide ($26,279) and national ($26,942) averages. The per capita income for the city of Beloit ($17,180) is markedly lower. Compared to the 2000 to 2010 rates of change for the state and the nation, the ROI, Janesville, and Beloit experienced much more notable decreases in per capita income from 2000 levels when adjusted for inflation (decreases of 12.3 percent, 17.2percent, and 19.8 percent, respectively). Comparative state and national numbers reflect a more moderate decrease in per capita income (decreases of 2.4percent and 1.4percent, respectively) (Table19.3.7-7). Median household income in the ROI is $49,144, which represents a 14.8percent decline from 2000 when adjusted for inflation. The 2010 median household income for Janesville ($48,257) is slightly less than the ROI, although the city's rate of change from 2000 to 2010 is greater, a 17.1percent decline. The city of Beloit's median household income is comparatively lower at $37,430, which is an 18.8percent decline from 2000 when adjusted for inflation. The 2000 ROI median household income was greater than state and national levels. The 2010 USCB data show that the ROI's median household income ($49,144) is less than the state ($50,814) and the nation ($51,222), although the difference is not as great as that for per capita income levels (seeTable 19.3.7-7). | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-138Rev. 019.3.7.2.1.2Labor Force and UnemploymentThe 2012 civilian labor force in Rock County is 78,132, which represents a 5.2percent decrease from the total labor force in 2002. In contrast, the state of Wisconsin and national labor force have increased over this same time period, at 1percent and 6.8percent, respectively. Although the ROI labor force has been decreasing since 2006, unemployment rates are consistently higher than the statewide total number and national unemployment rates (Table19.3.7-8). This can be attributed mostly to layoffs by GM at its Janesville plant beginning in 2006, followed by the plant's closure in 2008. Overall, the GM plant closure resulted in the elimination of approximately 4,700 jobs, and subsequent closures of local automotive suppliers resulted in additional job losses (SWWDB, 2009). At the ROI, state, and national levels, the number of unemployed workers has increased significantly over a 10-year period (change of 43.3percent for county, 43.5percent for the state, and 51.3 percent for the nation); however, the unemployment rates are much higher for the ROI, peaking at 12.8 percent in 2009 compared to 8.7 percent for the state and 9.3 percent for the nation. The most current 2012 data available show a 9.2 percent unemployment rate for the ROI, a decrease compared with the previous 3 years, but higher than both the state (7.5percent) and the national unemployment rate (8.2percent) (seeTable19.3.7-8).As evidenced by the 2008 GM plant closure, a contributing factor to the higher unemployment rate in the ROI is the decline of its manufacturing base. In 2000, manufacturing was the largest employment category in the ROI (29.7 percent of total jobs in the ROI), followed by education and health services (18.6 percent) and retail trade (12.1 percent). These industry rankings are consistent with state data for 2000 (22.2 percent, 20 percent, and 11.6percent, respectively), although in the ROI a larger percentage of employment was manufacturing-based. Since 2000, the number of manufacturing employees in the ROI has decreased by 62.9percent, and the largest employer is now the education and health services industry. Manufacturing is estimated to currently comprise 13.9percent of the ROI's total jobs, compared to 16.3 percent of total jobs at the state level. Statewide there has been a significant decrease in manufacturing employment (declined by 27.1percent); however, the manufacturing industry remains the largest employer in the state. Other industries (retail trade, transportation/warehousing/utilities, information, finance/ | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-138Rev. 019.3.7.2.1.2Labor Force and UnemploymentThe 2012 civilian labor force in Rock County is 78,132, which represents a 5.2percent decrease from the total labor force in 2002. In contrast, the state of Wisconsin and national labor force have increased over this same time period, at 1percent and 6.8percent, respectively. Although the ROI labor force has been decreasing since 2006, unemployment rates are consistently higher than the statewide total number and national unemployment rates (Table19.3.7-8). This can be attributed mostly to layoffs by GM at its Janesville plant beginning in 2006, followed by the plant's closure in 2008. Overall, the GM plant closure resulted in the elimination of approximately 4,700 jobs, and subsequent closures of local automotive suppliers resulted in additional job losses (SWWDB, 2009). At the ROI, state, and national levels, the number of unemployed workers has increased significantly over a 10-year period (change of 43.3percent for county, 43.5percent for the state, and 51.3 percent for the nation); however, the unemployment rates are much higher for the ROI, peaking at 12.8 percent in 2009 compared to 8.7 percent for the state and 9.3 percent for the nation. The most current 2012 data available show a 9.2 percent unemployment rate for the ROI, a decrease compared with the previous 3 years, but higher than both the state (7.5percent) and the national unemployment rate (8.2percent) (seeTable19.3.7-8).As evidenced by the 2008 GM plant closure, a contributing factor to the higher unemployment rate in the ROI is the decline of its manufacturing base. In 2000, manufacturing was the largest employment category in the ROI (29.7 percent of total jobs in the ROI), followed by education and health services (18.6 percent) and retail trade (12.1 percent). These industry rankings are consistent with state data for 2000 (22.2 percent, 20 percent, and 11.6percent, respectively), although in the ROI a larger percentage of employment was manufacturing-based. Since 2000, the number of manufacturing employees in the ROI has decreased by 62.9percent, and the largest employer is now the education and health services industry. Manufacturing is estimated to currently comprise 13.9percent of the ROI's total jobs, compared to 16.3 percent of total jobs at the state level. Statewide there has been a significant decrease in manufacturing employment (declined by 27.1percent); however, the manufacturing industry remains the largest employer in the state. Other industries (retail trade, transportation/warehousing/utilities, information, finance/ | ||
| Line 1,032: | Line 2,256: | ||
Additionally, Rock County is served by Interstate Highway 43 (I-43), which begins in Beloit and extends northeasterly toward Milwaukee and then north to Green Bay. In relation to the site,I-39/90 is located 2.2 mi. (3.5 km) to the east and I-43 is located approximately 6.9mi. (11.1km) to the southeast.The U.S. highways include US 14 and US 51. US 14 generally extends from east to west, whereas US 51 is oriented north to south. Both highways pass through Janesville in central Rock County.From the site, I-39/90 is accessible via US 51 and SH 11. Major highways/roadways and their pavement condition are listed below.*US 51, a minor arterial that is oriented north-south along the west side of the site is in good condition.*SH 11, a major collector that extends east-west just north of the site is in good condition. *I-39/90, a principal arterial that is oriented north-south about 2.2 mi. (3.5 km) east of the site, is in fair condition.*Town Line Road, a major collector that runs east-west about 2.7 mi. (4.3 km) south of the site, is in good condition.Traffic volumes, obtained from the Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WisDOT), are for 2010 and are listed below (WisDOT, 2010):*I-39/90 - 45,700 vehicles per day (vpd), south of SH 11 | Additionally, Rock County is served by Interstate Highway 43 (I-43), which begins in Beloit and extends northeasterly toward Milwaukee and then north to Green Bay. In relation to the site,I-39/90 is located 2.2 mi. (3.5 km) to the east and I-43 is located approximately 6.9mi. (11.1km) to the southeast.The U.S. highways include US 14 and US 51. US 14 generally extends from east to west, whereas US 51 is oriented north to south. Both highways pass through Janesville in central Rock County.From the site, I-39/90 is accessible via US 51 and SH 11. Major highways/roadways and their pavement condition are listed below.*US 51, a minor arterial that is oriented north-south along the west side of the site is in good condition.*SH 11, a major collector that extends east-west just north of the site is in good condition. *I-39/90, a principal arterial that is oriented north-south about 2.2 mi. (3.5 km) east of the site, is in fair condition.*Town Line Road, a major collector that runs east-west about 2.7 mi. (4.3 km) south of the site, is in good condition.Traffic volumes, obtained from the Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WisDOT), are for 2010 and are listed below (WisDOT, 2010):*I-39/90 - 45,700 vehicles per day (vpd), south of SH 11 | ||
*I-39/90 - 50,400 vpd, north of SH 11 | *I-39/90 - 50,400 vpd, north of SH 11 | ||
*US 51 - 9,000 vpd, south of SH 11*SH 11 - 8,400 vpd, east of US 51*SH 11 - 12,400 vpd, west of I-39/90 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-141Rev. 0*Town Line Road - 3,400 vpd, east of US 5119.3.7.2.3. | *US 51 - 9,000 vpd, south of SH 11*SH 11 - 8,400 vpd, east of US 51*SH 11 - 12,400 vpd, west of I-39/90 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-141Rev. 0*Town Line Road - 3,400 vpd, east of US 5119.3.7.2.3.2Transit Public transportation in the city of Janesville is provided by the Janesville Transit System, which operates a regular bus service Monday through Saturday on six routes inside Janesville (City of Janesville, 2012b). Additionally, the Beloit-Janesville Express operates on weekdays between the two cities. The route of the Beloit-Janesville Express passes directly to the west of the SHINE site on US 51. The nearest stops along this route are at Kellogg Avenue to the north and at Sunny Lane to the south (City of Janesville, 2012b). The Kellogg Avenue Route extends south from the Janesville Transfer Center to Kellogg Avenue, which is approximately 2.3 mi. (3.7 km) north of the SHINE site (City of Janesville, 2012c).19.3.7.2.3.3RailThe nearest railroad to the SHINE site is the Union Pacific Railroad, which is approximately 1.6mi. (2.6km) northeast of the site and is oriented in a northwest-to-southeast direction. The Union Pacific Railroad manages a rail yard just north of SH 11 and west of I-39/90 (see Figure19.3.7-3). No passenger rail service is currently available in Janesville (Vandewalle & Associates, 2009a). There is no direct access to rail from the site.19.3.7.2.3.4AirSWRA is a general aviation airport immediately west of the SHINE site off of US 51. The airport has three paved runways. The runways have a length of 7300 ft. (2225 m), 6701 ft. (2042 m), and 5,000 ft. (1524 m) long. The airport has more than 50,000 operations per year (landings and take-offs) and there are 94 aircraft based at the airport (Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, 2012b). The airport recently began a project to modernize, enlarge and increase the functionality of the 50-year old terminal building. Phase one of this four-phase project began in May 2012 at a cost of $1.46 million. This last phase of construction is expected to be complete by 2014/2015 (Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, 2012c).19.3.7.2.4Tax Payment InformationThe construction and operation of the SHINE facility results in the payment of taxes to political jurisdictions (Table 19.3.7-13). It is probable, over the course of construction and operation, that tax payments are directly or indirectly made by SHINE to many different jurisdictions, including multiple states, due to the likelihood that some materials used for construction and operational purposes are purchased from suppliers in other states where sales taxes are applied. As discussed in Subsection 19.3.7, it is assumed that the majority of the SHINE workforce resides within the ROI (Rock County). This includes current residents of Rock County who have been contributing to the local tax base as well as some individuals and families who are anticipated to relocate to Rock County and add to the local tax base. Thus the effects of tax payments associated with development and operation of the SHINE plant are expected to be greatest on the city of Janesville, Janesville School District, and Rock County, as well as the state of Wisconsin. The tax rates for these jurisdictions are discussed below.The state of Wisconsin has a flat corporate tax rate of 7.9 percent. Wisconsin assesses a variable tax rate on earned income. The income tax rate increases from 4.6 to 7.75percent depending on income level and marital status. Wisconsin has a statewide sales tax rate of Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-142Rev. 05percent. An additional 0.5 percent is added by Rock County as local sales tax. Property tax on owned property is assessed at the county and municipal levels. The property tax rates in Rock County vary among local school districts. Within the Janesville School District in the city of Janesville, the net property tax rate in 2011 was $25.0148 per $1,000 of assessed value. Of this net property tax rate, $6.4427 per $1,000 is allocated for the Rock County government, $7.0402 per $1,000 is allocated for the city of Janesville government (City of Janesville, 2012d), $10.1902 is allocated for the Board of Education, $1.8275 per $1,000 is allocated for the Blackhawk Technical College, $0.8612 per $1,000 is allocated for the Public Library System, $0.1738 per $1,000 is allocated for the state of Wisconsin, and a reduction of $1.5208 per $1,000 is applied due to state of Wisconsin tax credit. The SHINE site is located within the Janesville School District in the city of Janesville. 19.3.7.2.5Public ServicesThis subsection addresses the following public services within the ROI:*Public Water Supply and Wastewater Systems *Local Public Schools | ||
*Public | *Public Recreat ional Facilities19.3.7.2.5.1Public Water Supply and Wastewater SystemsPublic Water SuppliesThis subsection provides a characterization of the existing public water supplies and waste water treatment systems within the ROI. All public water supplies in Rock County are from groundwater. Table 19.3.7-14 lists the nine major municipal water suppliers that each serve communities in Rock County. Six of the nine municipal water systems in Rock County have a wellhead protection plan, including Clinton, Evansville, Footville, Janesville, Milton, and Orfordville. Wellhead protection ordinances are in place for only Evansville and Janesville (USGS, 2007).The water systems serving the largest populations are those in Beloit and Janesville. In addition to the public water systems, numerous private wells provide drinking water to residents not connected to municipal water supplies. The Janesville Water Utility provides water supply for both public drinking water and for fire protection utilizing eight wells. The water supply system for the city of Janesville includes two water storage reservoirs and one water tower. According to the city of Janesville, the total pumping capacity of its eight groundwater wells is 29 Mgd (109.8 Mld). Average water usage is about 11 Mgd (41.6 Mld). Accordingly, the excess capacity of the Janesville water supply system is approximately 18 Mgd (68.1 Mld). Public water supplies within Wisconsin are monitored to ensure public health protection, whereas individual well owners are responsible for monitoring and testing private wells. The public water use index for Rock County is 80 (Table 19.3.7-15), which estimates how many people are served by public water supplies. A number greater than 50 means more people are served by public water versus private wells. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-143Rev. 0Wastewater Treatment SystemsWaste water treatment is provided by local jurisdictions. Table 19.3.7-16 details public waste water treatment systems, their permitted capacities, and their average daily usage for each community in Rock County. Sewage within the city of Janesville is collected from about 300mi. (483km) of sewer main, and treated at a plant off Afton Road, near the City's south- west corner. The treatment plant has an average design peak flow of 25 Mgd (94.6 Mld). The average daily discharge flow is 13 Mgd (49.2 Mld). Accordingly, the excess capacity of the Janesville wastewater treatment system is approximately 12 Mgd (45.4 Mld) (Vandewalle & Associates, 2009a). 19.3.7.2.5.2Local Public SchoolsRock County is served by eight local public school districts, in addition to one state of Wisconsin facility (Table 19.3.7-17). Current student enrollment is 27,807. The Janesville School District has an enrollment of 10,325. Collectively, the school districts operate 39elementary schools, 11middle schools, and 15 high schools. Three additional schools are classified as elementary/, providing classes from kindergarten or first grade through | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-143Rev. 0Wastewater Treatment SystemsWaste water treatment is provided by local jurisdictions. Table 19.3.7-16 details public waste water treatment systems, their permitted capacities, and their average daily usage for each community in Rock County. Sewage within the city of Janesville is collected from about 300mi. (483km) of sewer main, and treated at a plant off Afton Road, near the City's south- west corner. The treatment plant has an average design peak flow of 25 Mgd (94.6 Mld). The average daily discharge flow is 13 Mgd (49.2 Mld). Accordingly, the excess capacity of the Janesville wastewater treatment system is approximately 12 Mgd (45.4 Mld) (Vandewalle & Associates, 2009a). 19.3.7.2.5.2Local Public SchoolsRock County is served by eight local public school districts, in addition to one state of Wisconsin facility (Table 19.3.7-17). Current student enrollment is 27,807. The Janesville School District has an enrollment of 10,325. Collectively, the school districts operate 39elementary schools, 11middle schools, and 15 high schools. Three additional schools are classified as elementary/, providing classes from kindergarten or first grade through 12 th grade (DPI, 2012). The closest public schools to the SHINE site, defined as those within 2.5 mi. (4 km), are units of the Janesville School district and are located to the north of the SHINE site: Janesville Academy for International Studies (20 enrollment), Jackson Elementary School (325 enrollment), Lincoln Elementary School (397 enrollment), and Edison Middle School (724 enrollment). Janesville Academy for International Studies is located at 2909Kellogg Avenue, Jackson Elementary School is located at 441 West Burbank Avenue, Lincoln Elementary School is located at 1821 Conde Street, and Edison Middle School is located at 1649 South Chatham Street (Janesville School District, 2012).Other educational institutions are located in the vicinity of the SHINE site. Private schools located within 2.5 mi. (4 km) of the SHINE site include Rock County Christian School (111enrollment), and Oakhill Christian School (69 enrollment). Higher education institutions located within 2.5 mi. (4 km) of the SHINE site include Blackhawk Technical College (Janesville Aviation Center and Janesville Central Campus), and the University of Wisconsin-Rock County.19.3.7.2.5.3Public Recreational FacilitiesFigure 19.3.7-4 and Table 19.3.7-18 identify the major recreational facilities within the ROI and provide information relative to their distance from the SHINE site. Rock County owns and maintains 888.2 ac. (359.4 ha) of park space (Design Perspectives Inc., 2009). The county parks are classified as regional parks, community parks, and trails. Other community and regional recreational facilities in the county are owned and maintained by the city of Janesville and the city of Beloit. Janesville maintains 64 improved parks, 10 of which are regional or community parks (City of Janesville, 2012f). Beloit's park system is comprised of 42 parks, including one regional park and four community parks (Vandewalle & Associates, 2006). The WDNR owns and maintains 17,000 ac. (6879.7 ha) of State Wildlife Areas, which are open to the public for recreational use, including seasonal hunting. As is illustrated in Figure 19.3.7-4, each of the State Wildlife Areas is located a minimum of 10mi. (16km) from the SHINE site (WDNR, 2009). | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-144Rev. 0Regional and community parks in the Rock County, Janesville, and Beloit park systems are identified on Table 19.3.7-18 and shown on Figure 19.3.7-4. Included is indication of the distance from each park to the SHINE site and the recreational purpose of each park in terms of active (recreation facilities such as ball fields and recreation centers) or passive (recreation facilities such as trails and picnic facilities). One park, Airport Park, is located within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the SHINE site. It is a two-acre (0.8-ha) passive use park with picnic tables, benches, and a picnic shelter (Design Perspectives Inc., 2009). Eight parks are located at distances between 1mi. and 5 mi. (1.6km and 8 km) from the SHINE site; they include a mix of passive and active recreational amenities (Table 19.3.7-18). Trails in the area of the SHINE site are primarily for recreational use. The city of Janesville manages the South Connector Trail, a multi-use trail that runs adjacent to the north of, and parallel to, SH 11 from west of the Rock River eastward to near the Union Pacific Railroad. There are no direct trail connections or marked bike routes to the SHINE site. Rock County also maintains 226 mi. (364 km) of snowmobile trails, with the nearest snowmobile trail located approximately 2.4 mi. (3.9 km) south of the site. Though not classified as public recreational facilities, there are two private golf facilities within the immediate area of the SHINE site. Glen Erin Golf Course (1417 W. Airport Road) is located immediately southwest of the site (adjacent to the south of SWRA), and Mid City Golf Range (4337 S. US 51) is located immediately south of the site. | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-144Rev. 0Regional and community parks in the Rock County, Janesville, and Beloit park systems are identified on Table 19.3.7-18 and shown on Figure 19.3.7-4. Included is indication of the distance from each park to the SHINE site and the recreational purpose of each park in terms of active (recreation facilities such as ball fields and recreation centers) or passive (recreation facilities such as trails and picnic facilities). One park, Airport Park, is located within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the SHINE site. It is a two-acre (0.8-ha) passive use park with picnic tables, benches, and a picnic shelter (Design Perspectives Inc., 2009). Eight parks are located at distances between 1mi. and 5 mi. (1.6km and 8 km) from the SHINE site; they include a mix of passive and active recreational amenities (Table 19.3.7-18). Trails in the area of the SHINE site are primarily for recreational use. The city of Janesville manages the South Connector Trail, a multi-use trail that runs adjacent to the north of, and parallel to, SH 11 from west of the Rock River eastward to near the Union Pacific Railroad. There are no direct trail connections or marked bike routes to the SHINE site. Rock County also maintains 226 mi. (364 km) of snowmobile trails, with the nearest snowmobile trail located approximately 2.4 mi. (3.9 km) south of the site. Though not classified as public recreational facilities, there are two private golf facilities within the immediate area of the SHINE site. Glen Erin Golf Course (1417 W. Airport Road) is located immediately southwest of the site (adjacent to the south of SWRA), and Mid City Golf Range (4337 S. US 51) is located immediately south of the site. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-145Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-1 Rock County Labor Force Distribution by County of Employee ResidenceCounty of Employee ResidenceStateRock County Labor ForceNumberPercentRock CountyWI56,85082.9%Winnebago CountyIL4,0956.0%Dane CountyWI1,9902.9% | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-145Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-1 Rock County Labor Force Distribution by County of Employee ResidenceCounty of Employee ResidenceStateRock County Labor ForceNumberPercentRock CountyWI56,85082.9%Winnebago CountyIL4,0956.0%Dane CountyWI1,9902.9% | ||
| Line 1,041: | Line 2,265: | ||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), 2012 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-146Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-2 Comparison of Estimated Major SHINE Labor Force Needs with Estimated Rock County Available Work ForceOccupationSHINE Peak Need(a)Estimate of Labor Force Availability in Rock County(b)Construction | American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), 2012 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-146Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-2 Comparison of Estimated Major SHINE Labor Force Needs with Estimated Rock County Available Work ForceOccupationSHINE Peak Need(a)Estimate of Labor Force Availability in Rock County(b)Construction Phase Boilermaker24No DataCarpenter 45360Electrician55190Ironworker50No DataLaborer70340Equipment Operator/Eng. | ||
26130Plumber/Pipefitter 7070Sheet Metal Worker 3080(c)Construction Supervisor 20160Total Construction Labor Force(d)420Operational PhaseOperation Support40340 first-line supervisors of production and operating workers Productions/Operations37110 industrial production managers Tech Support (e)40500 maintenance, 90 engineers, 2,000 craftspeopleTotal Operational Labor Force(d)150b) Rock County labor force estimate from BLS, 2011 unless otherwise notedc) Labor force estimates from BLS, 2009; no data available for 2011 d) SHINE total labor force estimate at peak month includes all labor categories e) Tech support subcategories include: maintenance (machinery maintenance workers and general maintenance and repair workers), engineers (industrial engineers and mechanical drafters), and craftspeople (janitors and cleaners, landscaping and groundskeepers, electricians, plumbers and pipefitters, industrial | |||
==References:== | ==References:== | ||
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), 2009 and BLS, 2011 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-147Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-3 Population and Growth Rates of Municipalities within Rock | Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), 2009 and BLS, 2011 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-147Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-3 Population and Growth Rates of Municipalities within Rock CountyMunicipalityPopulation 2000Population2010Observed Growth Rate (%)TownAvon5866083.8%Beloit 7,0387,6628.9%Bradford 1,0071,12111.3%Center1,0051,0666.1%Clinton8939304.1%Fulton 3,1583,2523.0%Harmony2,3512,5699.3%Janesville3,7503,434-8.4%Johnstown802778-3.0%La Prairie 929834-10.2%Lima1,3121,280-2.4%Magnolia 854767-10.2%Milton2,8442,9232.8%Newark 1,5711,541-1.9%Plymouth1,2701,235-2.8%Porter9259452.2%Rock3,3383,196-4.3%Spring Valley813746-8.2%Turtle2,4442,388-2.3%Union1,8602,09912.8%VillageClinton 2,1622,154-0.4%Footville 7888082.5%Orfordville 1,2721,44213.4%CityBeloit 35,77536,9663.3%Broadhead(a)N/A90Edgerton4,8915,3649.7%Evansville 4,0395,01224.1%Janesville 59,49863,5756.9%Milton5,1325,5468.1%Total Rock County152,307160,3315.3%a) 2000 data for Broadhead, Rock County is unavailable. The majority of Broadhead is located in Green County, WI. | ||
==References:== | ==References:== | ||
USCB, 2000a; USCB, 2010c Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-148Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-4 Resident Population Distribution, Growth Rates, and Projections for Rock CountyCountyPopulationProjected Population(a)200020102000-2010 Growth Rate (%)201520252035204520552015-2055 Projected Growth Rate (%)Rock County152,307160,3315.3165,354174,018182,644191,703201,21221.7a) The growth rate of 4.96 percent per ten year time period, calculated based on the projected ten year growth from 2025 and 2035 published projections, is extrapolated to determine projections for the years 2045 and 2055 | USCB, 2000a; USCB, 2010c Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-148Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-4 Resident Population Distribution, Growth Rates, and Projections for Rock CountyCountyPopulationProjected Population (a)200020102000-2010 Growth Rate (%)201520252035204520552015-2055 Projected Growth Rate (%)Rock County152,307160,3315.3165,354174,018182,644191,703201,21221.7a) The growth rate of 4.96 percent per ten year time period, calculated based on the projected ten year growth from 2025 and 2035 published projections, is extrapolated to determine projections for the years 2045 and 2055 | ||
==References:== | ==References:== | ||
Rock County, 2009; USCB, 2000a; and USCB, 2010d Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-149Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-5 Estimated Transient Population within 5 mi. (8 km) of the SHINE Site (2010)Transient SourceNumber of FacilitiesRaw Population EstimateWeighted Population EstimateMajor Employers 149,8412,657Schools, Colleges, Universityies3214,8604,014Recreation Areas431,366451Medical Facilities21717717 Lodging Facilities3149149 Total11326, | Rock County, 2009; USCB, 2000a; and USCB, 2010d Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-149Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-5 Estimated Transient Population within 5 mi. (8 km) of the SHINE Site (2010)Transient SourceNumber of FacilitiesRaw Population EstimateWeighted Population EstimateMajor Employers 149,8412,657Schools, Colleges, Universityies3214,8604,014Recreation Areas431,366451Medical Facilities21717717 Lodging Facilities3149149 Total11326,933 8,073(a)a)Total Weighted Population Estimate includes passengers, crew, and all employees of various companies at the SWRA which are not included in any individual transient source subtotal. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-150Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-6 Demographic (Race and Ethnicity) Characteristics of Rock | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-150Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-6 Demographic (Race and Ethnicity) Characteristics of Rock CountyLocationYear Total PopulationPopulation by Race (%)Persons of Hispanic OriginWhiteMinority Population (including Hispanic Black or African AmericanAmerican Indian and Alaska NativeAsianNative Hawaiian and Other Pacific IslanderSome Other RaceCity of Janesville200059,49895.36.11.30.21.0012.6201063,57591.711.22.60.31.3025.4% Change6.9-3.65.11.30.10.3012.8City of Beloit200035,77575.628.115.40.41.20.14.69.1201036,96668.936.515.10.41.101017.1% Change3.3-6.78.4-0.30-0.1-0.15.48 Rock County 2000152,30791.010.84.60.30.801.83.92010160,33187.615.55.00.31.003.77.6% Change5.3-3.44.70.400.201.93.7State of WI20005,363,67588.912.75.70.91.701.63.6 20105,686,98686.216.76.31.02.302.45.9% Change6.0-2.74.00.60.10.600.82.3 Nation2000281,421,90675.130.912.30.93.60.15.512.5 2010308,745,53872.436.312.60.94.80.26.216.3% Change9.7-2.75.40.301.20.10.73.8 | ||
==References:== | ==References:== | ||
USCB, 2000a and 2010a Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-151Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-7 Median Household and Per Capita Income Levels within RockCountyIncome2000(a)2010% ChangeMedian | USCB, 2000a and 2010a Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-151Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-7 Median Household and Per Capita Income Levels within RockCountyIncome2000 (a)2010% ChangeMedian Household City of Janesville$58,200$48,257-17.1City of Beloit$46,111$37,430-18.8Rock County$57,638$49,144-14.8State of WI$55,452$50,814-8.4Nation$53,177$51,222-3.7Per Capita City of Janesville$28,142$23,300-17.2City of Beloit$21,416$17,180-19.8Rock County$26,459$23,209-12.3State of WI$26,935$26,279-2.4Nation$27,336$26,942-1.4a)Adjusted for inflation to year 2010 dollars based on the BLS Consumer Price Index Inflation Calculator | ||
==References:== | ==References:== | ||
USCB, 2008-2010; USCB, 2000b; BLS, 2012b Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-152Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-8 Civilian Labor Force and Unemployment Rates within Rock County, 2002-201220022003200420052006200720082009201020112012(a)Growth Rate (%)2002-12Rock CountyLabor Force82,43382,48882,72983,60884,66484,61983,45982,87480,96578,68778,132-5.2Employed77,42277,39178,07178,66580,41079,97978,28372,27471,89171,22370,949-8.4Unemployed5,0115,0974,6584,9434,2544,6405,17610,6009,0747,4647,18343.3 Unemployment Rate (%)6.16.25.65.95.05.56.212.811.29.59.2State of WisconsinLabor Force3,021,0683,033,6743,020,4023,035,8083,077,0963,096,9263,089,3763,115,3573,082,6763,062,2593,049,7021.0Employed2,860,9152,862,5872,868,3762,890,1172,932,4822,948,7252,939,7732,842,9162,821,8032,833,4312,819,901-1.4Unemployed160,153171,087152,026145,691144,614148,201149,603272,441260,873228,828229,80143.5Unemployment Rate (%)5.35.65.04.84.74.84.88.78.57.57.5United StatesLabor Force(b)144,863146,510147,401149,320151,428153,124154,287154,142153,889153,617154,7076.8Employed(b)136,485137,736139,252141,730144,427146,047145,362139,877139,064139,869142,0344.1Unemployed(b)8,3788,7748,1497,5917,0017,0788,92414,26514,82513,74712,67351.3Unemployment Rate (%)5.86.05.55.14.64.65.89.39.68.98.2a) Through March 2012. | USCB, 2008-2010; USCB, 2000b; BLS, 2012b Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-152Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-8 Civilian Labor Force and Unemployment Rates within Rock County, 2002-201220022003200420052006200720082009201020112012 (a)Growth Rate (%)2002-12Rock CountyLabor Force82,43382,48882,72983,60884,66484,61983,45982,87480,96578,68778,132-5.2Employed77,42277,39178,07178,66580,41079,97978,28372,27471,89171,22370,949-8.4Unemployed5,0115,0974,6584,9434,2544,6405,17610,6009,0747,4647,18343.3 Unemployment Rate (%)6.16.25.65.95.05.56.212.811.29.59.2State of WisconsinLabor Force3,021,0683,033,6743,020,4023,035,8083,077,0963,096,9263,089,3763,115,3573,082,6763,062,2593,049,7021.0Employed2,860,9152,862,5872,868,3762,890,1172,932,4822,948,7252,939,7732,842,9162,821,8032,833,4312,819,901-1.4Unemployed160,153171,087152,026145,691144,614148,201149,603272,441260,873228,828229,80143.5Unemployment Rate (%)5.35.65.04.84.74.84.88.78.57.57.5United StatesLabor Force(b)144,863146,510147,401149,320151,428153,124154,287154,142153,889153,617154,7076.8Employed(b)136,485137,736139,252141,730144,427146,047145,362139,877139,064139,869142,0344.1Unemployed(b)8,3788,7748,1497,5917,0017,0788,92414,26514,82513,74712,67351.3Unemployment Rate (%)5.86.05.55.14.64.65.89.39.68.98.2a) Through March 2012. | ||
b) Numbers in thousands | b) Numbers in thousands | ||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
BLS, 2012a Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-153Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-9 Employment by Industry within Rock CountyEmployment Industry20002012(a)2000-2012 Change (%)NumberPercentNumberPercentRock CountyConstruction, Mining and Natural Resources(b)5,7387.52,0003.3-65.1Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting, and | BLS, 2012a Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-153Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-9 Employment by Industry within Rock CountyEmployment Industry20002012(a)2000-2012 Change (%)NumberPercentNumberPercentRock CountyConstruction, Mining and Natural Resources (b)5,7387.52,0003.3-65.1Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting, and Mining 1,3141.7No dataNo data--Construction 4,4245.8No dataNo data--Manufacturing 22,64029.78,400 13.9-62.9Wholesale Trade2,5923.43,4005.631.2Retail Trade 9,27012.18,300 13.8-10.5Transportation, Warehousing, Utilities3,4994.62,6004.3-25.7Information 1,4972.01,1001.8-26.5Finance, Insurance, Real Estate3,0294.02,0003.3-34.0Professional and Business Services 3,7244.94,3007.115.5Education and Health Services14,19718.610,400 17.2-26.7Leisure and Hospitality5,1626.85,7009.510.4Other Services (except Public Administration) 2,8893.83,5005.821.1Public Administration 2,0992.78,60014.3309.7State of Wisconsin Construction, Mining and Natural Resources (b)237,0438.781,9003.0-65.4Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting, and Mining 75,4182.8No dataNo dataConstruction161,6255.9No dataNo dataManufacturing606,84522.2442,300 16.3-27.1Wholesale Trade 87,9793.2115,7004.331.5Retail Trade317,88111.6287,400 10.6-9.6Transportation, Warehousing, Utilities123,6574.597,4003.6-21.2Information 60,1422.246,0001.7-23.5Finance, Insurance, Real Estate168,0606.1155,5005.7-7.5Professional and Business Services179,5036.6280,900 10.456.5Education and Health Servic es548,11120.0416,000 15.3-24.1Leisure and Hospitality198,5287.3235,6008.718.7Other Services (except Public Administration)111,0284.1134,1004.920.8Public Administration 96,1483.5420,100 15.5336.9a) Through April 2012b) 2012 figures reflect non-farm employment and do not isolate "construction," contrasted to 2000 data. | ||
==References:== | ==References:== | ||
USCB, 2000b; Department of Workforce Development (DWD), 2012 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-154Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-10 Top 10 Employers within the ROI (Rock County), City of JanesvilleEmployerNumber of EmployeesPercentProduct/ServiceTop 10 Employers within Rock CountyMercy Health System(a)3,68729.0Medical ServicesBeloit Health System 1,48611.7Medical ServicesJanesville School District 1,36810.8Public EducationRock County 1,1709.2GovernmentHendricks Holdings (ABC et. al.) 8576.7Wholesale DistributorBeloit School District 8496.7Public EducationWal-Mart/Sam's Club(a)8556.7RetailGHC Specialty Brands 8436.6Wholesale DistributorBlackhawk Technical College 8256.5Educational | USCB, 2000b; Department of Workforce Development (DWD), 2012 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-154Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-10 Top 10 Employers within the ROI (Rock County), City of JanesvilleEmployerNumber of EmployeesPercentProduct/ServiceTop 10 Employers within Rock CountyMercy Health System (a)3,68729.0Medical ServicesBeloit Health System 1,48611.7Medical ServicesJanesville School District 1,36810.8Public EducationRock County 1,1709.2GovernmentHendricks Holdings (ABC et. al.) 8576.7Wholesale DistributorBeloit School District 8496.7Public EducationWal-Mart/Sam's Club(a)8556.7RetailGHC Specialty Brands 8436.6Wholesale DistributorBlackhawk Technical College 8256.5Educational Services Kerry Americas(a)7596.0Food ProductsTotal12,699100.0Top 10 Employers within the City of JanesvilleMercy Health System (a)3,68734.8Medical ServicesJanesville School District 1,36812.9Public EducationRock County 1,17011.1GovernmentWal-Mart/Sam's Club(a)8558.1RetailGHC Specialty Brands 8438.0Wholesale DistributionBlackhawk Technical College 8257.8Public EducationWoodman's Food Market, Inc.5415.1RetailLemans Corporation4504.3Wholesale DistributionJ.P. Cullen & Sons4324.1ConstructionSeneca Foods Corporation4153.9Food ProcessingTotal10,586100.0Top 5 Manufacturing Sector Employers within the City of JanesvilleSeneca Foods Corporation41526.0Food ProcessingSSI Technologies, Inc.38223.9Metal Components and SensorsPrent Corporation34221.4Plastic PartsSimmons23915.0MattressesHUFCOR, Inc.22013.8Accordion Doors & WallsTotal1,598100.0a) Employees located at multiple locations | ||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
| Line 1,070: | Line 2,295: | ||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
USCB, 2008-2010; USCB, 2000b Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-156Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-12 Housing Unit Characteristics within Rock CountyHousing Category200020102000- | USCB, 2008-2010; USCB, 2000b Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-156Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-12 Housing Unit Characteristics within Rock CountyHousing Category200020102000-2010 ChangeCity of JanesvilleTotal Number of Units25,08327,4339.4%Number of Occupied Units23,89425,2595.7%Number of Vacant Units1,1892,17482.8% | ||
Number of Occupied Units105,480,101114,596,9278.6%Number of Vacant Units10,424,54016,613,67959.4%Vacancy Rate9.0%12.7%3.7%Median Value(a)$151,449$187,50023.8%a)Adjusted for inflation to year 2010 dollars based on the BLS Consumer Price Index Inflation Calculator | Vacancy Rate4.7%7.9%3.2%Median Value (a)$126,630$135,4006.9%City of BeloitTotal Number of Units14,26215,3307.5%Number of Occupied Units13,37013,5831.6%Number of Vacant Units 8921,74795.9% | ||
Vacancy Rate6.3%11.4%5.1%Median Value (a)$86,361$90,5004.8%Rock CountyTotal Number of Units62,18768,39210.0%Number of Occupied Units58,61762,4066.5%Number of Vacant Units3,5705,98667.7% | |||
Vacancy Rate5.7%8.8%3.1%Median Value (a)$124,350$140,30012.8%State of WisconsinTotal Number of Units2,321,1442,612,29912.5%Number of Occupied Units2,084,5442,282,5079.5%Number of Vacant Units236,600329,79239.4% | |||
Vacancy Rate10.2%12.6%2.4%Median Value (a)$142,078$171,00020.4% | |||
NationTotal Number of Units115,904,641131,210,60613.2% | |||
Number of Occupied Units105,480,101114,596,9278.6%Number of Vacant Units10,424,54016,613,67959.4% | |||
Vacancy Rate9.0%12.7%3.7%Median Value (a)$151,449$187,50023.8%a)Adjusted for inflation to year 2010 dollars based on the BLS Consumer Price Index Inflation Calculator | |||
==References:== | ==References:== | ||
| Line 1,077: | Line 2,308: | ||
==References:== | ==References:== | ||
City of Janesville, 2012d; Department of Revenue (DOR), 2011; and DOR, 2012LocationCorporate Tax Rate(%)Income Tax Rate(%)Property Tax Rate (Dollars per $1,000 value)Sales Tax Rate (%) | City of Janesville, 2012d; Department of Revenue (DOR), 2011; and DOR, 2012LocationCorporate Tax Rate(%)Income Tax Rate(%)Property Tax Rate (Dollars per $1,000 value)Sales Tax Rate (%)CountyCity Board of EducationNet(a)Rock Countyn/an/a6.44277.040210.190225.01480.50State of WI 7.9 4.6-7.755.0 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-158Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-14 Major Municipal Water Suppliers in Rock County | ||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
USGS, 2007MunicipalWater SystemWellheadProtection PlanWellheadProtection OrdinanceCity of BeloitNoNoClinton WaterworksYesNo Edgerton WaterworksNoNoEvansville WaterworksYesYesFootville WaterworksYesNo Fulton Utility DistrictNoNoJanesville Water UtilityYesYesMilton WaterworksYesNo Orfordville WaterworksYesNo Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-159Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-15 Rock County Community Water Supply Characteristics (2010)Groundwater PopulationSurface Water PopulationPopulation ServedCounty PopulationPublic Water Use Index122,5850122,585152,30780 | USGS, 2007MunicipalWater SystemWellheadProtection PlanWellheadProtection OrdinanceCity of BeloitNoNoClinton WaterworksYesNo Edgerton WaterworksNoNoEvansville WaterworksYesYesFootville WaterworksYesNo Fulton Utility DistrictNoNoJanesville Water UtilityYesYesMilton WaterworksYesNo Orfordville WaterworksYesNo Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-159Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-15 Rock County Community Water Supply Characteristics (2010) | ||
Groundwater PopulationSurface Water PopulationPopulation ServedCounty PopulationPublic Water Use Index122,5850122,585152,30780 | |||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
| Line 1,086: | Line 2,318: | ||
==References:== | ==References:== | ||
USEPA, 2008 and | USEPA, 2008 and Vand ewalle & Asso ciates, 2009aTreatment Facility/ Project Name Existing Total Flow(Mgd)Present Design Total Flow (Mgd)ExcessCapacity(Mgd)ExcessCapacity(Percent)Beloit WWTP9.0011.002.0018%Clinton STP 0.130.380.2566%Edgerton STP 0.530.700.1725% | ||
Evansville WWTP 0.450.600.1626%Footville STP 0.080.110.0328%Janesville WWTP(a) 13.0025.0012.0048%Milton STP 0.380.630.2540%Orfordville STP 0.120.400.2870%Consolidated Koshkonong STP0.420.600.1830%Plymouth #1STP0.020.030.0133%Beloit, Town0.450.650.2132% | Evansville WWTP 0.450.600.1626%Footville STP 0.080.110.0328%Janesville WWTP (a) 13.0025.0012.0048%Milton STP 0.380.630.2540%Orfordville STP 0.120.400.2870%Consolidated Koshkonong STP0.420.600.1830% | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-161Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-17 Public School Enrollment (2012) within Rock | Plymouth #1STP0.020.030.0133%Beloit, Town0.450.650.2132% | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-161Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-17 Public School Enrollment (2012) within Rock County DistrictStudentEnrollmentNumber of SchoolsElementaryElementary/Secondary Middle SchoolHigh SchoolBeloit School District6,96711223Beloit Turner School District1,4612011Clinton Community School District1,1901011Edgerton School District1,7862011Evansville Community School District1,7752011Janesville School District10,32513036Milton School District3,3635011Parkview School District940 3011WI Department of Public Instruction00100Total, Rock County27,8073931115 | |||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
Department of Public Instruction (DPI), 2012 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-162Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-18 Recreation Facilities within Rock County (Sheet 1 of 2)ParkAmenitiesAcreageDistance from SHINE SitePassiveActiveac.hami.kmRegional | Department of Public Instruction (DPI), 2012 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-162Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-18 Recreation Facilities within Rock County (Sheet 1 of 2) | ||
ParkAmenitiesAcreageDistance from SHINE SitePassiveActiveac.hami.kmRegional Parks Rock CountyBeckman Mill County Park51.620.910.817.4Carver-Roehl Park5221.010.216.4 Gibbs Lake ParkX286.6116.013.621.9Happy Hollow ParkX191.277.41.93.1Lee ParkXX4016.211.318.2 Magnolia Bluff ParkX112.145.418.129.1Murwin ParkX4217.013.922.4City of JanesvilleNortheast Regional ParkX8735.27.411.9 Palmer ParkX16466.446.4Riverside ParkXX8735.26.310.1 Rockport ParkXX24699.63.45.5City of BeloitBig Hill Memorial ParkX197.279.84.77.6Community Parks Rock CountyAirport ParkX20.80.50.8 Avon ParkX176.916.827.0Koshkonong Lake AccessX12.75.115.424.8Ice Age ParkX3.41.48.814.2 Indianford ParkX1.20.512.820.6Royce Dallman ParkX2.30.915.324.6Schollmeyer ParkX10.45.58.9 Sugar River ParkX6.52.616.125.9Sweet-Allyn ParkXX3915.85.58.9 Walt Lindemann Sportsman's ParkXX104.06.911.1City of JanesvilleBond ParkX124.946.4 Kiwanis Community ParkX93.66.410.3Lustig ParkX3212.934.8Monterey ParkX4217.03.25.1 Optimist Community Park3514.25.18.2Traxler ParkX2710.94.67.4City of BeloitKrueger Recreation AreaX15.76.47.111.4 Leeson ParkX41.516.87.712.4Riverside ParkX24.910.17.712.4 Telfer ParkX28.811.76.310.1 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-163Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-18 Recreation Facilities within Rock County (Sheet 2 of 2) | |||
ParkAmenitiesLength (a)Distance from SHINE SitePassiveActivemi.kmmi.kmRock County TrailsSouth Connector TrailX4.06.40.81.3Ice Age Connector TrailX3.76.07.712.4Pelishak-Tiffany Nature TrailX6.09.79.715.6Hanover Wildlife Area 1X17.67.16.810.9a) Hanover Wildlife Area is measured in acres/hectares | |||
==References:== | ==References:== | ||
City of Janesville, 2012c; City of Janesville, 2012f, Design Perspectives Inc, 2009, and Vandewalle & Associates, 2006 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-164Rev. 019.3.8HUMAN HEALTHThis subsection describes the existing public and occupational health issues.19.3.8.1Maps of Potentially Sensitive Surrounding Facilities Figures 19.3.8-1 and 19.3.8-2 show distances from the proposed action to the following points or areas:*Nearest full-time resident.*Nearest sensitive receptors.-Educational facilities-Medical facilities | City of Janesville, 2012c; City of Janesville, 2012f, Design Perspectives Inc, 2009, and Vandewalle & Associates, 2006 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-164Rev. 019.3.8HUMAN HEALTHThis subsection describes the existing public and occupational health issues.19.3.8.1Maps of Potentially Sensitive Surrounding Facilities Figures 19.3.8-1 and 19.3.8-2 show distances from the proposed action to the following points or areas:*Nearest full-time resident.*Nearest sensitive receptors. | ||
-Educational facilities-Medical facilities | |||
-Community centers | -Community centers | ||
-Animal production facilities-Parks-Religious institutionsThe site boundary distances to these locations are summarized in Table 19.3.8-1. The nearest site boundary is approximately 300m (0.19mi.) east of the production facility building centerpoint (see Figure19.2.1-1).The nearest drinking water intake is an active, drilled, private well (Wisconsin unique well number MF461) located northwest of the site at 1112 W. Knilans Road, Janesville, Wisconsin, 53545.19.3.8.2Background Radiation Exposure The major sources and levels of background radiation exposure, both natural and man-made, are discussed in this subsection. | -Animal production facilities-Parks-Religious institutionsThe site boundary distances to these locations are summarized in Table 19.3.8-1. The nearest site boundary is approximately 300m (0.19mi.) east of the production facility building centerpoint (see Figure19.2.1-1).The nearest drinking water intake is an active, drilled, private well (Wisconsin unique well number MF461) located northwest of the site at 1112 W. Knilans Road, Janesville, Wisconsin, 53545.19.3.8.2Background Radiation Exposure The major sources and levels of background radiation exposure, both natural and man-made, are discussed in this subsection. | ||
Based on the information contained in the following subsections, there are no abnormal radiation hazards in the vicinity of the SHINE site; therefore, the background radiation exposure due to both natural and man-made sources is 6.2 millisievert per year (mSv/yr) (620 millirem [roentgen equivalent man] per year [mrem/yr]) (NRC, 2012a).19.3.8.2.1Natural SourcesThe U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) divides natural sources of radiation into three categories: cosmic, internal, and terrestrial. Cosmic radiation is the result of radiation received from extraterrestrial sources, such as the sun and other stars, that penetrate the Earth's atmosphere. Internal radiation is the result of naturally occurring potassium-40 (K-40) and carbon-14 (C-14) in all humans. Lastly, terrestrial radiation is the result of dose received from naturally occurring uranium, thorium, and radium found in soil and rock. Also, radon gas seeps through the ground and into the air where it is inhaled; this source represents the majority of the background radiation for an average member of the public (NRC, 2012b). | Based on the information contained in the following subsections, there are no abnormal radiation hazards in the vicinity of the SHINE site; therefore, the background radiation exposure due to both natural and man-made sources is 6.2 millisievert per year (mSv/yr) (620 millirem [roentgen equivalent man] per year [mrem/yr]) (NRC, 2012a).19.3.8.2.1Natural SourcesThe U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) divides natural sources of radiation into three categories: cosmic, internal, and terrestrial. Cosmic radiation is the result of radiation received from extraterrestrial sources, such as the sun and other stars, that penetrate the Earth's atmosphere. Internal radiation is the result of naturally occurring potassium-40 (K-40) and carbon-14 (C-14) in all humans. Lastly, terrestrial radiation is the result of dose received from naturally occurring uranium, thorium, and radium found in soil and rock. Also, radon gas seeps through the ground and into the air where it is inhaled; this source represents the majority of the background radiation for an average member of the public (NRC, 2012b). | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-165Rev. 0Based on information in the following subsections, there are no natural features of the SHINE site vicinity that would place natural background radiation at levels higher than the United States average. Therefore, the public receives an average natural background dose of 3.1 mSv/yr (310mrem/yr) (NRC, 2012a).19.3.8.2.1.1Cosmic RadiationCosmic radiation exposure depends on the site elevation. The terrain in the vicinity of the SHINE site is relatively flat, and the site elevation is well within the national elevation average. Therefore, it is appropriate to use the average annual dose due to cosmic radiation, 0.31 mSV/yr (31 mrem/yr) (NRC, 2012a).19.3.8.2.1.2Internal Radiation There are no above-normal sources of radioactivity contained in the food and water consumed in Janesville, Wisconsin based on publicly available USEPA data (USEPA, 2009). The average annual dose due to internal radiation, 0.31 mSv/yr (31 mrem/yr), is applicable (NRC, 2012a). 19.3.8.2.1.3Terrestrial RadiationThe national average for terrestrial radiation, 2.48 mSv/yr (248 mrem/yr), which includes uranium, thorium, radium, and radon gas, is applicable to the vicinity of the SHINE site (NRC,2012a).19.3.8.2.2Man-Made SourcesMan-made sources of radiation consist of medical sources, consumer products, and nuclear power sources. Medical procedures (e.g., X-rays, whole body CT scans, nuclear medicine procedures) account for a vast majority of the man-made radiation received annually. Consumer products, such as smoke detectors, televisions, and combustible fuels, also contribute to man-made radiation dose. Lastly, nuclear fuel cycle facilities (from uranium mining and milling to the disposal of spent nuclear fuel), nuclear power plants, and the transportation of radioactive material contribute to man-made radiation dose (NRC, 2012c). Based on the information in the following subsections, there are no abnormal sources of radiation located in the vicinity of the SHINE site; therefore, the public receives an average dose due to man-made radiation sources of 3.1 mSv/yr (310 mrem/yr) (NRC, 2012a).19.3.8.2.2.1Medical SourcesThe area surrounding the SHINE site contains three medical facilities: First Choice Women's Health Center, Mercy Clinic South, and Mercy Hospital, which are all located in Janesville, Wisconsin (see Table 19.3.8-1). First Choice Women's Health Center does not provide services that utilize ionizing radiation. Mercy Clinic South provides imaging services to patients (MHS,2012a). Mercy Hospital provides modern medical services to patients that include imaging services, radiation oncology, and nuclear medicine (MHS, 2012b).Those members of the public who are employed at Mercy Hospital or Mercy Clinic South may receive a higher dose due to medical sources than that of the average citizen medical dose, an Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-166Rev. 0average total dose of 2.98 mSv/yr (298 mrem/yr), but the medical workers do not receive a dose in excess of the occupational limits set in 10 CFR 20, 0.05 Sv/yr (5 rem/yr) (NRC, 2012a).19.3.8.2.2.2Consumer Products Ionizing radiation dose from the use of consumer products will fluctuate based on the lifestyle of the individual in question; therefore, a best estimate of the average annual dose due to consumer products, 0.12 mSv/yr (12 mrem/yr), is used (NRC, 2012a). | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-165Rev. 0Based on information in the following subsections, there are no natural features of the SHINE site vicinity that would place natural background radiation at levels higher than the United States average. Therefore, the public receives an average natural background dose of 3.1 mSv/yr (310mrem/yr) (NRC, 2012a).19.3.8.2.1.1Cosmic RadiationCosmic radiation exposure depends on the site elevation. The terrain in the vicinity of the SHINE site is relatively flat, and the site elevation is well within the national elevation average. Therefore, it is appropriate to use the average annual dose due to cosmic radiation, 0.31 mSV/yr (31 mrem/yr) (NRC, 2012a).19.3.8.2.1.2Internal Radiation There are no above-normal sources of radioactivity contained in the food and water consumed in Janesville, Wisconsin based on publicly available USEPA data (USEPA, 2009). The average annual dose due to internal radiation, 0.31 mSv/yr (31 mrem/yr), is applicable (NRC, 2012a). 19.3.8.2.1.3Terrestrial RadiationThe national average for terrestrial radiation, 2.48 mSv/yr (248 mrem/yr), which includes uranium, thorium, radium, and radon gas, is applicable to the vicinity of the SHINE site (NRC,2012a).19.3.8.2.2Man-Made SourcesMan-made sources of radiation consist of medical sources, consumer products, and nuclear power sources. Medical procedures (e.g., X-rays, whole body CT scans, nuclear medicine procedures) account for a vast majority of the man-made radiation received annually. Consumer products, such as smoke detectors, televisions, and combustible fuels, also contribute to man-made radiation dose. Lastly, nuclear fuel cycle facilities (from uranium mining and milling to the disposal of spent nuclear fuel), nuclear power plants, and the transportation of radioactive material contribute to man-made radiation dose (NRC, 2012c). Based on the information in the following subsections, there are no abnormal sources of radiation located in the vicinity of the SHINE site; therefore, the public receives an average dose due to man-made radiation sources of 3.1 mSv/yr (310 mrem/yr) (NRC, 2012a).19.3.8.2.2.1Medical SourcesThe area surrounding the SHINE site contains three medical facilities: First Choice Women's Health Center, Mercy Clinic South, and Mercy Hospital, which are all located in Janesville, Wisconsin (see Table 19.3.8-1). First Choice Women's Health Center does not provide services that utilize ionizing radiation. Mercy Clinic South provides imaging services to patients (MHS,2012a). Mercy Hospital provides modern medical services to patients that include imaging services, radiation oncology, and nuclear medicine (MHS, 2012b).Those members of the public who are employed at Mercy Hospital or Mercy Clinic South may receive a higher dose due to medical sources than that of the average citizen medical dose, an Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-166Rev. 0average total dose of 2.98 mSv/yr (298 mrem/yr), but the medical workers do not receive a dose in excess of the occupational limits set in 10 CFR 20, 0.05 Sv/yr (5 rem/yr) (NRC, 2012a).19.3.8.2.2.2Consumer Products Ionizing radiation dose from the use of consumer products will fluctuate based on the lifestyle of the individual in question; therefore, a best estimate of the average annual dose due to consumer products, 0.12 mSv/yr (12 mrem/yr), is used (NRC, 2012a). | ||
19.3.8.2.2.3Nuclear Reactor Facilities The contribution to man-made | 19.3.8.2.2.3Nuclear Reactor Facilities The contribution to man-made radiat ion from nuclear reactor facilities in the proposed action area is small. There are no nuclear fuel cycle facilities in the area; however, I-39/90 is approximately 2 mi. (3.2 km) from the site boundary, so there may be some radiation received from the transportation of radioactive material along that roadway. Railroads surround the proposed action area on all but the southeast sides, so transportation of radioactive materials along the railroads may contribute additional doses. In addition, the SHINE site is located between two nuclear reactors: Exelon's Byron Station (a two-unit pressurized water reactor (PWR) with a total net electrical generation of 2336 megawatts [MWe]) and the University of Wisconsin Nuclear Reactor (UWNR) research facility (variable thermal power up to 1 MWt) (Exelon, 2012; UWNR, 2011a). Byron Station is located approximately 40 mi. (64 km) south-southwest of the project facility (Google, 2012). Based on off-site dose calculations from Byron Station, the dose to the public near the SHINE site is very low due to the distance between the site and Byron Station (TBEES, 2011). Similarly, the UWNR is approximately 37 mi. (60 km) north-northwest of the project facility, and the dose to the public is very low due to the distance between the UWNR and the SHINE site (Google, 2012; UWNR,2011b). 19.3.8.3Description of Radioactive and Nonradioactive Liquid, Gaseous, and Solid Waste Management Effluent Control SystemsThere are no radioactive materials currently stored on the site or within the vicinity of the SHINE site; therefore, there are no radioactive effluent control systems on or within the vicinity of the site. See Subsection 19.3.8.8 for a description of nearby nuclear reactor facilities' radioactive effluent monitoring programs.Nonradioactive liquid, gaseous, and solid waste effl uents from facilities in the vicinity of the SHINE site report hazardous effluents to the USEPA (USEPA, 2012e). | ||
19.3.8.4Information on Radioactive and Nonradioactive Effluents Released to the EnvironmentThere are no radioactive materials stored on the site; therefore, there are no radioactive effluents released to the environment on-site. Mercy Hospital stores medical isotopes for use in their nuclear medicine program (MHS, 2012b). See Subsection 19.3.8.2.2.3 for a discussion of nearest operating nuclear reactor facilities' radioactive releases. | 19.3.8.4Information on Radioactive and Nonradioactive Effluents Released to the EnvironmentThere are no radioactive materials stored on the site; therefore, there are no radioactive effluents released to the environment on-site. Mercy Hospital stores medical isotopes for use in their nuclear medicine program (MHS, 2012b). See Subsection 19.3.8.2.2.3 for a discussion of nearest operating nuclear reactor facilities' radioactive releases. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-167Rev. 0See Table 19.3.8-2 for a list of hazardous materials stored within 5 mi. (8 km) of the SHINE site. It is assumed that any of these materials could be released to the environment in the vicinity of the SHINE site.19.3.8.5Radioactive and Nonradioactive Hazardous Material Stored On-Site or within the VicinityThere are no radioactive materials currently stored on the site. Mercy Hospital stores medical isotopes for use in their nuclear medicine program (MHS, 2012b). | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-167Rev. 0See Table 19.3.8-2 for a list of hazardous materials stored within 5 mi. (8 km) of the SHINE site. It is assumed that any of these materials could be released to the environment in the vicinity of the SHINE site.19.3.8.5Radioactive and Nonradioactive Hazardous Material Stored On-Site or within the VicinityThere are no radioactive materials currently stored on the site. Mercy Hospital stores medical isotopes for use in their nuclear medicine program (MHS, 2012b). | ||
There are no hazardous industrial materials stored on the site. However, since the SHINE site is currently used for agricultural purposes (see Subsection 19.3.4.1.1.3), chemical fertilizers and pesticides may have been used on the site. See Table 19.3.8-2 for a list of hazardous material stored within 5 mi. (8 km) of the SHINE site.19.3.8.6Current On-Site or Nearby Sources and Levels of Exposure to Members of the Public and Workers from Radioactive MaterialsThere are no existing radioactive materials currently stored on-site; therefore there is no exposure to the public. Mercy Hospital is the only facility in the vicinity of the SHINE site that possesses radioactive material. Patients at the hospital may be exposed to this radiation in a planned and controlled manner based on professionally prepared treatments. See Subsection 19.3.8.2.2.1 for the average annual radiation dose from medical facilities. There may be some radiation dose received from the transportation of radioactive material along I-39/90, which is located approximately 2mi. (3.2km) east of the site boundary. Railroads surround the proposed action area on all but the southeast sides, so transportation of radioactive materials along the railroads may contribute additional doses. Contributions from these sources are discussed in Subsection 19.3.8.2.2.3.19.3.8.7Historical Exposures to Radioactive Materials to Both Workers and Members of the PublicThere are no recordable incidents involving radioactive material in the vicinity of the SHINE site (USEPA, 2012e). | There are no hazardous industrial materials stored on the site. However, since the SHINE site is currently used for agricultural purposes (see Subsection 19.3.4.1.1.3), chemical fertilizers and pesticides may have been used on the site. See Table 19.3.8-2 for a list of hazardous material stored within 5 mi. (8 km) of the SHINE site.19.3.8.6Current On-Site or Nearby Sources and Levels of Exposure to Members of the Public and Workers from Radioactive MaterialsThere are no existing radioactive materials currently stored on-site; therefore there is no exposure to the public. Mercy Hospital is the only facility in the vicinity of the SHINE site that possesses radioactive material. Patients at the hospital may be exposed to this radiation in a planned and controlled manner based on professionally prepared treatments. See Subsection 19.3.8.2.2.1 for the average annual radiation dose from medical facilities. There may be some radiation dose received from the transportation of radioactive material along I-39/90, which is located approximately 2mi. (3.2km) east of the site boundary. Railroads surround the proposed action area on all but the southeast sides, so transportation of radioactive materials along the railroads may contribute additional doses. Contributions from these sources are discussed in Subsection 19.3.8.2.2.3.19.3.8.7Historical Exposures to Radioactive Materials to Both Workers and Members of the PublicThere are no recordable incidents involving radioactive material in the vicinity of the SHINE site (USEPA, 2012e). | ||
Any historical exposure to radioactive material would come from treatment in the Mercy Hospital nuclear medicine department. Patients at the hospital may have been historically exposed to this radiation in a planned and controlled manner, based on professionally-prepared treatments.19.3.8.8Description of Nearby | Any historical exposure to radioactive material would come from treatment in the Mercy Hospital nuclear medicine department. Patients at the hospital may have been historically exposed to this radiation in a planned and controlled manner, based on professionally-prepared treatments.19.3.8.8Description of Nearby Operatin g Facilities' Effluent Monitoring ProgramsExelon's Byron Station submits an annual radiological environmental operating report to the NRC, and the most recent results of the radiological environmental monitoring program are approximately the same as those found during the pre-operational studies conducted at Byron Station. Liquid effluents from Byron Station are released to the Rock River in controlled batches after radioassay of each batch. Gaseous effluents are released to the atmosphere and are calculated on the basis of analyses of weekly grab samples and grab samples of batch releases Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-168Rev. 0prior to the release of noble gases as well as continuously-collected composite samples of iodine and particulate radioactivity sampled during the course of the year. The results of effluent analyses are summarized on a monthly basis. Airborne concentrations of noble gases, iodine-131 (I-131), and particulate radioactivity in off-site areas are calculated using isotopic composition of effluents and meteorological data. C-14 concentration in off-site areas is calculated based on industry-approved methodology for estimation of the amount released and meteorological data. (TBEES, 2011)Environmental monitoring is conducted by sampling at indicator and control (background) locations in the vicinity of Byron Station to measure changes in radiation or radioactivity levels that may be attributable to station operation. If significant changes attri butable to Byron Station are measured, these changes are correlated with effluent releases. An environmental monitoring program is conducted which also includes all potential pathways at the site. Gaseous pathways include ground plane (direct), inhalation, vegetation, meat, and milk. Liquid pathways include potable water and freshwater fish. The critical pathway for 2010 gaseous dose was vegetation. | ||
The critical pathway for 2010 liquid dose was freshwater fish. (TBEES, 2011)The UWNR effluent monitoring program uses Landauer Luxel brand area monitors located in areas surrounding the reactor laboratory. Liquid effluents are monitored, recorded, and discharged to the sanitary sewer from the | The critical pathway for 2010 liquid dose was freshwater fish. (TBEES, 2011)The UWNR effluent monitoring program uses Landauer Luxel brand area monitors located in areas surrounding the reactor laboratory. Liquid effluents are monitored, recorded, and discharged to the sanitary sewer from the fac ility. Exhaust effluents are monitored, recorded, and discharged through the UWNR stack. Solid waste is monitored, recorded, and transferred to the UW Broad Scope license for ultimate disposal in accordance with the UWNR radioactive materials license. Quantities of released effluents are reported in the UWNR annual operating report. (UWNR, 2011b)19.3.8.9Relevant Occupational Injury Rates and Occupational Fatal Injury Rates Occupational injury and fatal injury rates for occupations relevant to the construction, operation, and decommissioning of the SHINE facility are discussed in this subsection. | ||
Recent BLS data, which lists the national incidence rates of nonfatal occupational injuries and illnesses by industry, was consulted to estimate relevant occupational injury rates for the SHINE project. The incidence rate is defined as the number of injuries and illnesses per 100 full-time workers. For this estimate the incidence rate of the total number of recordable cases was used. | Recent BLS data, which lists the national incidence rates of nonfatal occupational injuries and illnesses by industry, was consulted to estimate relevant occupational injury rates for the SHINE project. The incidence rate is defined as the number of injuries and illnesses per 100 full-time workers. For this estimate the incidence rate of the total number of recordable cases was used. | ||
During the construction and decommissioning phases, the total number of recordable cases for construction workers in the construction industry is 3.9 per 100full-time workers. During the operation phase, SHINE employees work in environments found in multiple industries, therefore, the total number of recordable cases for all industries (3.8 per 100full-time workers), is used to estimate the occupational injury rate for SHINE employees. (BLS, 2012c)Comparable BLS data exists for national occupational fatal injury rates. The BLS defines fatal injury rates as the number of fatal occupational injuries per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers. For the construction industry, the fatal injury rate is estimated to be 8.9 per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers. As discussed above, SHINE employees work in varying environments, so the fatal injury rate for all industries (3.5 per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers) is used to estimate the occupational fatal injury rate for SHINE employees. (BLS, 2012d) | During the construction and decommissioning phases, the total number of recordable cases for construction workers in the construction industry is 3.9 per 100full-time workers. During the operation phase, SHINE employees work in environments found in multiple industries, therefore, the total number of recordable cases for all industries (3.8 per 100full-time workers), is used to estimate the occupational injury rate for SHINE employees. (BLS, 2012c)Comparable BLS data exists for national occupational fatal injury rates. The BLS defines fatal injury rates as the number of fatal occupational injuries per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers. For the construction industry, the fatal injury rate is estimated to be 8.9 per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers. As discussed above, SHINE employees work in varying environments, so the fatal injury rate for all industries (3.5 per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers) is used to estimate the occupational fatal injury rate for SHINE employees. (BLS, 2012d) | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-169Rev. 0Table 19.3.8-1 Distance to Nearest Agricultural and Urban FacilitiesFacility Type Location of InterestDistance to SHINE Site BoundaryResidentialNearest Full-Time Resident0.33 mi. (0.53 km)ParkAirport Park0.30 mi. (0.48 km)Paw Print Park1.16 mi. (1.87 km) | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-169Rev. 0Table 19.3.8-1 Distance to Nearest Agricultural and Urban FacilitiesFacility Type Location of InterestDistance to SHINE Site BoundaryResidentialNearest Full-Time Resident0.33 mi. (0.53 km) | ||
ParkAirport Park0.30 mi. (0.48 km)Paw Print Park1.16 mi. (1.87 km) | |||
Burbank Park1.38 mi. (2.22 km)MedicalFirst Choice Women's Health Center1.37 mi. (2.20 km) | Burbank Park1.38 mi. (2.22 km)MedicalFirst Choice Women's Health Center1.37 mi. (2.20 km) | ||
Mercy Clinic South1.58 mi. (2.54 km) | Mercy Clinic South1.58 mi. (2.54 km) | ||
| Line 1,113: | Line 2,350: | ||
Blackhawk Technical College Aviation Center0.89 mi. (1.43 km) | Blackhawk Technical College Aviation Center0.89 mi. (1.43 km) | ||
Rock County Christian School1.14 mi. (1.83 km) | Rock County Christian School1.14 mi. (1.83 km) | ||
Jackson Elementary School1.28 mi. (2.06 km)Community Kids Learning Centers1.36 mi. (2.19 km)Community CenterCaravilla Education and Rehabilitation Comm Center1.62 mi. (2.61 km)Religious InstitutionsIglesia Hispania Pentecostes0.35 mi. (0.56 km)Summit Baptist Church1.37 mi. (2.20 km)Animal ProductionDairy Production0.51 mi. (0.82 km)Horse Pasture0.52 mi. (0.84 km) | Jackson Elementary School1.28 mi. (2.06 km)Community Kids Learning Centers1.36 mi. (2.19 km)Community CenterCaravilla Education and Rehabilitation Comm | ||
Center1.62 mi. (2.61 km)Religious InstitutionsIglesia Hispania Pentecostes0.35 mi. (0.56 km)Summit Baptist Church1.37 mi. (2.20 km) | |||
Animal ProductionDairy Production0.51 mi. (0.82 km)Horse Pasture0.52 mi. (0.84 km) | |||
Goat Production0.69 mi. (1.11 km)MacFarland Pheasants, Inc.0.86 mi. (1.38 km)Beef Production Area0.97 mi. (1.56 km) | Goat Production0.69 mi. (1.11 km)MacFarland Pheasants, Inc.0.86 mi. (1.38 km)Beef Production Area0.97 mi. (1.56 km) | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-170Rev. 0Table 19.3.8-2 Chemicals Used/Stored Within Five Miles of the Site(Sheet 1 of 4)List of ChemicalsNo. 2 Diesel FuelNo. 2 Fuel Oil 1,2,3-Propanetriol10-34-0 Ammonium Polyphosphate Solution2,2-Dimethypropane - 1,3-Diol 2-Ethylhexnol 2-Phenoxyethanol 4,4-Diphenylmethane Diisocyanate77-80% Calcium | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-170Rev. 0Table 19.3.8-2 Chemicals Used/Stored Within Five Miles of the Site(Sheet 1 of 4)List of ChemicalsNo. 2 Diesel FuelNo. 2 Fuel Oil 1,2,3-Propanetriol10-34-0 Ammonium Polyphosphate Solution2,2-Dimethypropane - 1,3-Diol 2-Ethylhexnol 2-Phenoxyethanol 4,4-Diphenylmethane Diisocyanate77-80% Calcium Chloride AC-101 Acetic Acid | ||
Ammonium Polyph, 4%N 10%P205 10%K20 1%S, .25Ammonium Polyphosphate Potassium ChlorideAmmonium Polyphosphate Potassium Hydro Ammonium Polyphosphate Potassium Hydroxide, 6-24-6 Ammonium Polyphosphate Potassium Solution Ammonium Polyphoste Potassium ChlorideAnionic Asphalt EmulsionAmmonium Thiosulfate Aromatic Polyester Polyol ArosurfBattery | |||
Acrylamide Copolymer AdogenAlkyl Dimethylamine C1295Aminoethylethanolamine Anhydrous Ammonia Ammonium Hydroxide Solution (29%) | |||
Ammonium Polyph, 4%N 10%P205 10%K20 1%S, .25Ammonium Polyphosphate Potassium ChlorideAmmonium Polyphosphate Potassium Hydro Ammonium Polyphosphate Potassium Hydroxide, 6-24-6 Ammonium Polyphosphate Potassium Solution Ammonium Polyphoste Potassium ChlorideAnionic Asphalt EmulsionAmmonium Thiosulfate | |||
Aromatic Polyester Polyol | |||
ArosurfBattery Acid Battery Electrolyte Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-171Rev. 0Table 19.3.8-2 Chemicals Used/Stored Within Five Miles of the Site (Sheet 2 of 4)List of Chemicals Benzoic Acid Benzyl Chloride Biodiesel ChlorineD-36 Condensate Treatement Diary Acid #5W De-icing Fluid | |||
Diesel Fuel Diethyloxyester Dimethylammonium ChlorideDiethanolamine Diethyl Sulfate | |||
Diethylene Glycol Diethylene TriamineDihydrogenated Tallowmethyl AmineDimethyl C12 Amine 95% | |||
Dimethyl C16 Amine 95% | Dimethyl C16 Amine 95% | ||
Dimethyl Sulfate DimethylamineopropylamineDXP 5522-048DXP 5522-131 DXP 5558-66 DXP 5536-094 Ethyl AlcoholEthyl MercaptanEthylene Oxide Fatty Acid C8-C18 Fatty Alcohol C12-C18Fertilizer RinsatcFertilizer, Commercial BlenD Liquid N-P-K Furfuryl Alcohol Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-172Rev. 0Table 19.3.8-2 Chemicals Used/Stored Within Five Miles of the Site (Sheet 3 of 4)List of ChemicalsGasolineGlyphosphate HerbicideHubercarb Q200 (Calcium Carbonate)Hydrogen Hydrogen Peroxide INDULIN 747IsopropanolJet Fuel Lauric Acid 1299 Liquified Petroleum Propane Metam-SodiumMethoxypolyglycol | |||
REWOTERIC AM TEG Road Saver | Dimethyl Sulfate DimethylamineopropylamineDXP 5522-048DXP 5522-131 DXP 5558-66 DXP 5536-094 | ||
Ethyl AlcoholEthyl MercaptanEthylene Oxide Fatty Acid C8-C18 Fatty Alcohol C12-C18Fertilizer RinsatcFertilizer, Commercial BlenD Liquid N-P-K Furfuryl Alcohol Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-172Rev. 0Table 19.3.8-2 Chemicals Used/Stored Within Five Miles of the Site (Sheet 3 of 4)List of ChemicalsGasolineGlyphosphate | |||
HerbicideHubercarb Q200 (Calcium Carbonate) | |||
Hydrogen Hydrogen Peroxide | |||
INDULIN 747IsopropanolJet Fuel Lauric Acid 1299 Liquified Petroleum Propane | |||
Metam-SodiumMethoxypolyglycol Basic Methyl Chloride Methyldiethanolamine | |||
N-Butyl Alcohol Nitric Acid Oleic AcidP&G Code 10020418 P&G Code 65163 Pesticides/Insecticides Peracetic AcidPhosphoric AcidPolyethylene Glycol POLYHEED 997 | |||
Polyol Potassium ChloridePotassium HydroxidePropylene Glycol Propylene Oxide Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-173Rev. 0Table 19.3.8-2 Chemicals Used/Stored Within Five Miles of the Site (Sheet 4 of 4)List of ChemicalsPropaneQUESTAR CAF | |||
REWOCOROS AC 100 US REWODERM S 1333REWOPAL 12 REWOQUAT (WE 18, E US, WE 28 US, WE 16, CQ 100) | |||
REWOTERIC AM TEG Road Saver Sealants Sodium Bisulfate Sodium Bisulfite Sodium Hydroxide Sodium Hypochlorite Soft Tallow DiesterSolvent Blend 19205Sorbitan Trioleate | |||
Stearic Acid | |||
Styrene Sulfuric AcidTEGO IL IMESTEGO AMID S 18 TEGOTENS EC 11 TEGOSOFT PBE Triethanolamine UreaVarious Oils | |||
Varamide Varine OVariquatVarisoft Varonic Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTable of ContentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-iRev. 0SECTION 19.4IMPACTS OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION, OPERATIONS, AND DECOMMISSIONINGTable of Contents SectionTitlePage19.4IMPACTS OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION, OPERATIONS, AND DECOMMISSIONING..................................................................................19.4-119.4.1LAND USE AND VISUAL RESOURCES..................................................19.4-119.4.2AIR QUALITY AND NOISE.......................................................................19.4-619.4.3GEOLOGIC ENVIRONMENT....................................................................19.4-3119.4.4WATER RESOURCES..............................................................................19.4-3419.4.5ECOLOGICAL RESOURCES...................................................................19.4-40 19.4.6HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES.............................................19.4-4919.4.7SOCIOECONOMICS.................................................................................19.4-50 19.4.8HUMAN HEALTH......................................................................................19.4-61 19.4.9WASTE MANAGEMENT...........................................................................19.4-8119.4.10TRANSPORTATION.................................................................................19.4-8319.4.11POSTULATED ACCIDENTS.....................................................................19.4-92 19.4.12ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE...................................................................19.4-10419.4.13CUMULATIVE EFFECTS..........................................................................19.4-111 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-iiRev. 1List of Tables NumberTitle19.4.2-1Isotope Production Process - Gaseous Effluents19.4.2-2Standby Diesel Generator - Emissions19.4.2-3Emissions from Production Facility Building - Natural Gas-Fired Boiler19.4.2-4Emissions from Administration Building - Natural Gas-Fired Heater19.4.2-5Emissions from Support Facility Building - Natural Gas-Fired Heater19.4.2-6Emissions from Waste Staging & Shipping Building - Natural Gas-Fired Heater19.4.2-7Emissions from Diesel Generator Building - Natural Gas-Fired Heater19.4.2-8Total Annual Emissions19.4.2-9SHINE Facility Release Point Characteristics 19.4.2-10Pollutant Impacts Compared to the SIL19.4.2-11Pollutant Impacts Compared to the NAAQS19.4.2-12Typical Noise and Emissions from Construction Equipment19.4.5-1Summary of Impacts to 2006 Land Use/Land Cover(a)19.4.7-1Projected ROI Labor Availability and On-site Labor Requirements at Peak Month of Construction, Operations and Decommissioning Schedules19.4.7-2Summary of Traffic Impacts during Construction and Operations19.4.7-3Summary of the Effects of Mitigative Measures on Traffic ConditionsduringOperations19.4.8-1Summary of Major Chemical Inventory and Quantity 19.4.8-2Chemical Storage Area Characteristics19.4.8-3Potential Occupational Hazards19.4.8-4This table number not used 19.4.8-5Annual Total Effective Dose Equivalent to the Public at Bounding Dose Receptors Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-iiiRev. 0List of Tables(Continued) | |||
NumberTitle19.4.8-6Environmental Monitoring Locations19.4.8-7Administrative Dose Limits 19.4.10-1Population Density, Exposed Population, and the Adjustment Factor for Transportation Route to Andrews, Texas 19.4.10-2Population Density, Exposed Population, and the Adjustment Factor for Transportation Route to Clive, Utah19.4.10-3Population Density, Exposed Population, and the Adjustment Factor for Transportation Route to Hazelwood, Missouri19.4.10-4Population Density, Exposed Population, and the Adjustment Factor for Transportation Route to North Billerica, Massachusetts19.4.10-5Incident-Free Radiological Dose Summary (Person-Rem/Year) 19.4.11-1SHINE Hazardous (Toxic) Chemical Source Terms and Concentrations 19.4.12-1Minority and Low-Income Population Statistics for Block Groups within a 5-Mi. Radius of the SHINESite19.4.13-1Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Projects and Other Actions Considered in the Cumulative Effects Analysis19.4.13-2Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Projects and Other Actions Retained for the Cumulative Effects Analysis19.4.13-3Cumulative Impacts on Environmental Resources, Including the Impacts of the Proposed Project Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of FiguresSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-ivRev. 0List of Figures NumberTitle19.4.1-1Conceptual Rendering of SHINE Facility19.4.1-2SHINE Facility Construction Grading Plan19.4.8-1Location of Environmental Monitors19.4.10-1Population Density for Transportation Route to Andrews, Texas 19.4.10-2Population Density for Transportation Route to Clive, Utah19.4.10-3Population Density for Transportation Route to Hazelwood, Missouri19.4.10-4Population Density for Transportation Route to North Billerica, Massachusetts19.4.12-1Low Income Populations in the Vicinity of the SHINE Site19.4.13-1Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Projects and Other Actions Retained for the Cumulative Effects Analysis Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-vRev. 0Acronyms and AbbreviationsAcronym/Abbreviation Definition | |||
µg/m3micrograms per cubic meter/Qrelative atmospheric concentration ac.acreacfmactual cubic feet per minute ALARAAs Low As Reasonably Achievable AMSLabove mean sea level BLSBureau of Labor Statistics BMPbest management practice Btubritish thermal unitBtu/hrBtu per hour Btu/scfBtu per standard cubic foot Bu.bushelCCelsiusCAMcontinuous air monitor CEDEcommitted effective dose equivalent CEQCouncil on Environmental Quality CFRCode of Federal Regulations Ci/yrCuries per year COcarbon monoxide CO2carbon dioxide CO2eCO2 equivalentD/Qground level deposition factor dBAdecibels Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-viRev. 1Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition DBAdesign basis accident DOEU.S. Department of Energy DORWisconsin Department of Revenue DOTU.S. Department of Transportation DPIWisconsin Department of Public Instruction DSSIDiversified Scientific Services, Inc. | |||
EDEeffective dose equivalent EJEnvironmental Justice ESFengineered safety feature FFahrenheit FRFederal Register ft.feetft/secfeet per second GHGgreenhouse gas GISGeographic Information Systemgpdgallons per daygrams/bhp-hrgrams per brake horsepower-hour H1Hhigh, first high H2Hhigh, second high hahectareHATHazard Analysis Team HAZOPSHazard and Operability Study Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-viiRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd) | |||
Acronym/AbbreviationDefinition HChydrocarbons HEPAhigh-efficiency particulate air hr.hourHVACheating, ventilation, and air conditioningI-129iodine-129I-131iodine-131 IAIowaIEinitiating event ILIllinoisINIndianaISAIntegrated Safety Analysis ISCIndustrial Source Complex ISGInterim Staff Guidance JSDJanesville School District keffneutron multiplication factorkmkilometer km2square kilometerKr-85krypton-85L/cylliters per cylinder lb/hrpounds per hour lb/MMBtupounds per million Btu lb/yrpounds per year Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-viii Rev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd) | |||
Acronym/AbbreviationDefinition lb.poundLEUlow enriched uranium LNBlow NOx burnersLOSlevel of service lpdliters per day LSAlow specific activity mmeterm/smeter per second MAMassachusetts MARmaterial-at-risk MEBmass and energy balance MEImaximally exposed individual Mgdmillion gallons per day MHAmaximum hypothetical accident mi.mileMldmillion liters per dayMMBtu/hrmillion Btu per hour MOMissouriMo-99molybdenum-99 mremmilliremmrem/yrmillirem per year mSvmillisievert mSv/yrmillisievert per year NAAQSNational Ambient Air Quality Standards Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-ixRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd) | |||
Acronym/AbbreviationDefinition NAVD 88North American Vertical Datum 1988 NENebraskaNEPANational Environmental Policy Act of 1969 NESHAPNational Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants NHRPNational Register of Historic Properties NLCDNational Land Cover Database NO2nitrogen dioxide NOxnitrogen oxideNPDESNational Pollutant Discharge Elimination SystemNRNatural ResourcesNRCU.S. Nuclear Regulatory CommissionNSPSNew Source Performance Standards NWSNational Weather ServiceNYNew York O3ozoneOHOhioOKOklahomaOSHAOccupational Safety and Health Administration PAPennsylvania PCSprimary cooling system PHAPreliminary Hazard Analysis PMparticulate matter Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-xRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd) | |||
Acronym/AbbreviationDefinition PM10particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than 10 microns PM2.5particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than 2.5 micronsPOTWpublically owned treatment worksPPEpersonal protective equipmentPrHAProcess Hazard AnalysisPSARPreliminary Safety Analysis ReportPSBprimary system boundaryPSDPrevention of Significant DeteriorationPVVSprocess vessel vent system RCARadiologically Controlled AreaRCRAResource Conservation and Recovery Actremroentgen equivalent manrem/srem per secondROIregion of influence RPCSradioisotope process facility cooling system RPFRadioisotope Production Facility rpmrevolutions per minute RPSreactivity protection system RVZ1RCA ventilation system Zone 1 RVZ2RCA ventilation system Zone 2 RVZ3RCA ventilation system Zone 3 SACTISeasonal/Annual Cooling Tower Impact Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-xiRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd) | |||
Acronym/AbbreviationDefinition SCASsubcritical assembly system scfstandard cubic foot scf/hrstandard cubic foot per hour scfmstandard cubic feet per minute SDGstandby diesel generatorsec.secondSHINESHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. | |||
SH 11State Highway 11 SHPOState Historic Preservation Office SILSignificant Impact Level SOsulfur oxides SO2sulfur dioxideSPspecial purpose district SPCCSpill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure SSCsstructures, systems, and components SWPPPStorm Water Pollution Prevention Plan T/yrtons per year TBPtri-n-butyl phosphate TEDEtotal effective dose equivalent TIFTax Increment FinancingTLDthermoluminescent dosimeter TSVtarget solution vessel TXTexas Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-xiiRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd) | |||
Acronym/AbbreviationDefinition U.S.United States UREXuranium extraction US 14U.S. Highway 14 US 51U.S. Highway 51 USCBU.S. Census Bureau USEPAU.S. Environmental Protection Agency USFWSU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service UTUtahVOCvolatile organic compound WCSWaste Control Specialists WDNRWisconsin Department of Natural Resources WHSWisconsin Historical Society WIWisconsin WIAAQSWisconsin Ambient Air Quality Standards WPDESWisconsin Pollutant Discharge Elimination System WYWyomingXe-133xenon-133 yd.yardyryear Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-1Rev. 0CHAPTER 1919.4IMPACTS OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION, OPERATIONS, AND DECOMMISSIONINGThis chapter provides an analysis of the impacts of construction, operation and decommissioning of the SHINE facility. Overall impact rankings are given to each environmental resource evaluated. Unless otherwise defined, criteria followed the guidance given in NRC Impact Rankings 10 CFR 51 Subpart A, Appendix B, Table B-1, Footnote 3 as follows: *SMALL (S) - Environmental effects are not detectable or are so minor that they will neither destabilize nor noticeably alter any important attribute of the resource.*MODERATE (M) - Environmental effects are sufficient to alter noticeably, but not to destabilize, important attributes of the resource.*LARGE (L) - Environmental effects are clearly noticeable and are sufficient to destabilize important attributes of the resource.19.4.1LAND USE AND VISUAL RESOURCESThis subsection assesses the impacts of construction and operation on land use and visual resources for the SHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. (SHINE) site and region. As described in Subsection19.3.1, the land use for the site and region is analyzed using the National Land Cover Database 2006 (Fry et al, 2011). Impacts include effects from activities associated with construction and operation, including excavation, grading, placement of fill material, temporary staging and construction laydown, construction of permanent features, and potential operational disturbances. 19.4.1.1Land UseThis subsection discusses the land use impacts from construction and operation of the SHINE facility. | |||
19.4.1.1.1Site and RegionAs described in Subsections19.3.1 and19.3.5, the SHINE site consists of a 91.27-acre(ac.) (36.94-hectare[ha]) parcel that has been historically farmed and is routinely disturbed by the disking, plowing, herbicide application and harvesting activities associated with row crop production. The region surrounding the SHINE site is defined in Subsection19.3.1.1.2 as the area within a 5-mile(mi.) (8-kilometer[km]) radius of the site centerpoint. The entire region is located within Rock County, Wisconsin. The potential construction-related land use impacts to the SHINE site and near off-site areas are based on the SHINE facility construction grading plan (Figure 19.4.1-2). Activities such as earthmoving, excavation, pile driving, erection, batch plant operation, and construction-related traffic generate potential disturbances to land use during the construction phase of the SHINE project. Construction-related direct impacts to the site and near site areas are limited to land previously utilized for agricultural/cultivated crop production. | 19.4.1.1.1Site and RegionAs described in Subsections19.3.1 and19.3.5, the SHINE site consists of a 91.27-acre(ac.) (36.94-hectare[ha]) parcel that has been historically farmed and is routinely disturbed by the disking, plowing, herbicide application and harvesting activities associated with row crop production. The region surrounding the SHINE site is defined in Subsection19.3.1.1.2 as the area within a 5-mile(mi.) (8-kilometer[km]) radius of the site centerpoint. The entire region is located within Rock County, Wisconsin. The potential construction-related land use impacts to the SHINE site and near off-site areas are based on the SHINE facility construction grading plan (Figure 19.4.1-2). Activities such as earthmoving, excavation, pile driving, erection, batch plant operation, and construction-related traffic generate potential disturbances to land use during the construction phase of the SHINE project. Construction-related direct impacts to the site and near site areas are limited to land previously utilized for agricultural/cultivated crop production. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-2Rev. 0Of the 91.27ac. (36.94ha) comprising the SHINE site, construction permanently converts 25.67ac. (10.39ha) of agricultural/cultivated crops to industrial facilities (Table19.4.1-1). Permanent conversions to industrial facilities include the construction of facility buildings, employee parking lot, facility access road/driveway, stormwater detention area, and access road drainage ditches. Direct construction impacts also include the temporary impact of 14.54ac. (5.88ha) of agricultural lands on-site used for the construction parking area, construction material staging or lay down area, and temporary disturbance from water and sewer line installation, as well as, the temporary indirect impact of 0.62ac. (0.25ha) of off-site agricultural lands immediately adjacent to the northern boundary of the site for temporary disturbance from water and sewer line installation. Temporary impact areas are either returned to agriculture or restored with either cool season grasses or native prairie. The loss of agricultural/cultivated crops to industrial facilities is minor when compared to the 25,236ac. (10,213ha) of agricultural land remaining within a 5-mi. (8-km) radius of the site (seeTable19.4.1-1). Furthermore, lands on-site not utilized for development of industrial facilities are returned to agriculture or restored using cool season grasses or native prairie species. As such, impacts to land use from construction and operations are SMALL.19.4.1.1.2Special Land UsesAs discussed in Subsection19.3.1.1.3, there are no federal special land use classification areas within the region of the SHINE site, but there are two state special land use areas in the region, with neither area located on-site. Permanent and temporary impacts from construction and operation of the facility occur on-site and in near off-site areas, but not within either state 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.19.4.1.1.3Agricultural Resources and FacilitiesThe agricultural resources and facilities on-site and within the region of the SHINE site are described in Subsection19.3.1.1.4. Both prime farmland and farmland of state-wide importance occur within the site boundaries, with approximately 41,950ac. (16,977ha) of the area within the region having soils classified as prime farmland and farmland of state-wide importance (see Subsection19.3.1.1.4). Based on the SHINE facility site layout (Figure19.2.1-1), the direct and indirect impacts from construction and operation of the facility occur on-site and near off-site, impacting 25.67ac. (10.39ha) of agricultural/cultivated crops on-site and 0.62ac. (0.25ha) of agricultural/cultivated crops near off-site (see Table19.4.1-1). As described in Subsection19.3.1.1.4, the potential relative value of the farmland for all 91.27ac. (36.94ha) comprising the SHINE site is 13,771bushels (Bu.) of grain corn or 3947Bu. of soybeans, while the 10-year production estimate average for Rock County, Wisconsin, is 22,075,540Bu. of grain corn and 3,786,415Bu. of soybeans. No other agricultural resources within the region of the SHINE site are located on-site or near off-site, as discussed in Subsection19.3.1.1.4, and therefore, will not be impacted by construction and operations-related impacts.The loss of on-site agricultural lands, including prime farmland and farmland of state-wide importance, and the subsequent loss of potential crop production to industrial facilities, is minor when compared to the amount of agricultural land, land designated as prime farmland or farmland of state-wide importance, and potential crop production remaining within the region surrounding the site (see Table19.4.1-1 and Subsection19.3.1.1.4). Furthermore, lands on-site not utilized for development of industrial facilities are returned to agriculture or restored using Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-3Rev. 0cool season grasses or native prairie species. As such, direct and indirect impacts to agricultural resources and facilities from construction and operations are SMALL.19.4.1.1.4Mineral ResourcesAs described in Subsection19.3.1.1.5, important mineral resources within the region include sand, gravel, and crushed stone. Two sand and gravel operations occur within the region of the SHINE site, but neither is located on-site. Permanent and temporary impacts from construction and operation 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 and operations of the facility are SMALL. Impacts to mineral resources are discussed further in Subsection19.4.3. | ||
19.4.1.1.5Major Population Centers and InfrastructureSubsection19.3.1.1.6 summarizes the major population centers and infrastructure located within Rock County, which include the major population centers of Janesville and Beloit, several major transportation corridors, and the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport. While US51 and the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport are located just west of the SHINE site, none of the major population centers or infrastructure are located on-site. Permanent and temporary impacts from construction and operations of the facility occur on-site and immediately adjacent to the northern boundary of the site. Therefore, construction and operations-related direct and indirect impacts on major population centers and infrastructure are SMALL.19.4.1.1.6Impacts from Decommissioning Construction of the SHINE facility is expected to begin in 2015. Following the cessation of operations, the facility will be decommissioned. Decommissioning activities, however, are similar to construction activities and involve heavy equipment to dismantle buildings and remove roadway and parking facilities. Resultant land uses following decommissioning are undetermined but may consist of agricultural lands or open space. As such, direct and indirect impacts from decommissioning are anticipated to be similar to the impacts associated with construction and SMALL.19.4.1.2Visual ResourcesThe visual setting of the area affected by the construction and operation of the SHINE site is described in Subsection19.3.1.2. Illustrations of the bounding condition of the SHINE facility superimposed on the current viewshed are shown on Figure19.4.1-1.The existing site is composed entirely of land used for agricultural purposes and has no existing architectural features, established structures, or natural or built barriers, screens or buffers. Consequently, the SHINE facility alters the on-site condition and partially obstructs views of the existing landscape. However, the visual setting of the site is generally flat and uniform in landform with low vegetation diversity and a low visual quality rating (see Subsection19.3.1.2). Bounding dimensions of the production facility building for visual impact assessment include a height of 86 feet (ft.) (26 meters [m]), a length of 416ft. (127m), and a width of 167 ft. (51m). | 19.4.1.1.5Major Population Centers and InfrastructureSubsection19.3.1.1.6 summarizes the major population centers and infrastructure located within Rock County, which include the major population centers of Janesville and Beloit, several major transportation corridors, and the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport. While US51 and the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport are located just west of the SHINE site, none of the major population centers or infrastructure are located on-site. Permanent and temporary impacts from construction and operations of the facility occur on-site and immediately adjacent to the northern boundary of the site. Therefore, construction and operations-related direct and indirect impacts on major population centers and infrastructure are SMALL.19.4.1.1.6Impacts from Decommissioning Construction of the SHINE facility is expected to begin in 2015. Following the cessation of operations, the facility will be decommissioned. Decommissioning activities, however, are similar to construction activities and involve heavy equipment to dismantle buildings and remove roadway and parking facilities. Resultant land uses following decommissioning are undetermined but may consist of agricultural lands or open space. As such, direct and indirect impacts from decommissioning are anticipated to be similar to the impacts associated with construction and SMALL.19.4.1.2Visual ResourcesThe visual setting of the area affected by the construction and operation of the SHINE site is described in Subsection19.3.1.2. Illustrations of the bounding condition of the SHINE facility superimposed on the current viewshed are shown on Figure19.4.1-1.The existing site is composed entirely of land used for agricultural purposes and has no existing architectural features, established structures, or natural or built barriers, screens or buffers. Consequently, the SHINE facility alters the on-site condition and partially obstructs views of the existing landscape. However, the visual setting of the site is generally flat and uniform in landform with low vegetation diversity and a low visual quality rating (see Subsection19.3.1.2). Bounding dimensions of the production facility building for visual impact assessment include a height of 86 feet (ft.) (26 meters [m]), a length of 416ft. (127m), and a width of 167 ft. (51m). | ||
The high bay footprint has bounded dimensions of 58ft. (18m) wide by 190ft. (58m) long. The facility's main building has an exhaust vent stack that under the bounding condition extends to Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical | The high bay footprint has bounded dimensions of 58ft. (18m) wide by 190ft. (58m) long. The facility's main building has an exhaust vent stack that under the bounding condition extends to Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-4Rev. 096ft. (29m) above grade. Figure19.4.1-1 presents a conceptual rendering of the facility and the arrangements on-site based upon bounded dimensions. As discussed in Subsection 19.4.2.1.2.2.5, plume visibility from the production process is expected to be minimal. Additionally, the facility does not utilize cooling towers, radar towers or other large structures that visibly intrude upon the existing landscape. Based upon these site characteristics and the bounded dimensions of the facility as illustrated in Figure 19.4.1-1, facility structures have a relatively low profile, so any impacts to the viewshed are SMALL. The operation of the SHINE facility results in minor increases in noise as described in Subsection19.4.2. However, noise levels are localized to the SHINE site and not elevated above background noise emissions from US51, immediately adjacent to the site. Therefore, noise emissions from the site do not create audible intrusions that are out of character with the setting around the SHINE site.As described in Subsection19.3.1.2, two large warehouses are located immediately adjacent to the southern border of the site that support local agricultural operations and provide storage for large farming equipment. The viewshed to the west of the site across US51 is a light industrial development landscape that consists of the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport and its associated facilities, which include the airport control tower and several large warehouses and hangers. Additionally, the viewshed to the south includes several stacks associated with power generation facilities. Together with the buildings and structures to the south and west, the SHINE facility does not significantly alter the visual setting. Therefore, impacts to visual resources from construction and operation of the SHINE facility are SMALL. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-5Rev. 0Table 19.4.1-1 Summary of Impacts to Land Use/Land CoverNLCD 2006 Land Cover ClassPermanent Site ImpactsTemporary Site ImpactsTotal Land Cover within theRegion (a)Percentac.haac.haac.haOpen Water7963221.6Developed, Open Space0.180.07304312316.1Developed, Low Intensity5858237111.7Developed, Medium Intensity19687963.9Developed, High Intensity9924012Barren43170.1Deciduous Forest329813356.6Evergreen Forest68280.1 Mixed Forest100Shrub/Scrub5052041Grassland10494252.1 Pasture/Hay5896238611.7Cultivated Crops25.67(b)10.39(b)14.54(b)5.88(b)25,23610,21350.2Woody Wetlands7222921.4Emergent Herbaceous Wetland7873181.6Total(c)28.8510.4614.545.8850,26220,339100a) | ||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
Fry et al., 2011. | Fry et al., 2011. | ||
b)Cultivated Crops on the SHINE site are entirely prime farmland and farmland of state-wide importance.c)Total may add up to more or less than 100 percent due to rounding. | b)Cultivated Crops on the SHINE site are entirely prime farmland and farmland of state-wide importance.c)Total may add up to more or less than 100 percent due to rounding. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-6Rev. 019.4.2AIR QUALITY AND NOISEThis subsection addresses the direct physical impacts of construction and operation on the communities within the vicinity of the SHINE site. Direct physical impacts include the effects from air emissions and noise. This evaluation indicates the magnitude of potential impacts and whether mitigation measures are required. 19.4.2.1Air Quality19.4.2.1.1Impacts from Construction Construction activities result in localized increases in air emissions. Earthmoving, excavation, clearing, pile driving, erection, batch plant operation, and construction-related traffic generate fugitive dust and fine particulate matter that potentially impact both on-site workers and off-site residents of the community. Vehicles and engine-driven equipment (e.g., generators and compressors) generate combustion product emissions such as carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides and, to a lesser extent, sulfur dioxides. Painting, coating, and similar operations also generate emissions from the use of volatile organic compounds.People living near or working at or near construction sites may be subject to the physical impacts of construction activities. Activities associated with the use of construction equipment may result in varying amounts of dust, air emissions, noise, and vibration. The magnitude and area of extent of the impacts from these emissions depends on atmospheric conditions at the time of the activity. The magnitude of these potential impacts is typically related to the specific construction activities that occur at a given site, the nature and effectiveness of implemented environmental controls, and the proximity of the site to populated areas. Contractors, vendors, and subcontractors are required to adhere to appropriate federal and state occupational health and safety regulations. These regulations set limits to protect workers from adverse conditions, including air emissions. On-site equipment use and traffic due to constructi on activities can also result in local increases in emissions. Subsection19.4.7 provides information regarding the type and volume of traffic generated by the SHINE facility during construction. While guidance from the Final ISG Augmenting NUREG-1537 suggests that emissions from on-site and o ff-site vehicle use (including fugitive dust) be estimated, SHINE believes that this information is not necessary to evaluate the impacts of the SHINE facility given the absence of near off-site receptors, the short term duration of such emissions, and the classification of the regional air quality as "attainment." Analysis of on-site and off-site vehicle use, including fugitive dust, are more appropriate for projects requiring a Conformity Analysis in non-attainment areas. Because construction equipment use and generated traffic volumes are relatively minor compared to other regional traffic generated emissions, and because the SHINE site is largely surrounded by agricultural fields and other undeveloped areas associated with the airport, potential air quality impacts from construction are limited. Implementation of controls and limits at the source of emissions on the construction site result in reduction of impacts off-site. For example, the dust control program reduces dust due to construction activities to minimize dust reaching site boundaries. Transportation and other off-site activities result in emissions from vehicle usage. Off-site transportation activities generally occur on improved surfaces, limiting fugitive dust emissions. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-7Rev. 0Specific mitigation measures to control fugitive dust may include any or all of the following:*Stabilizing construction roads and spoil piles.*Limiting speeds on unpaved construction roads. | ||
*Periodically watering unpaved construction roads.*Performing housekeeping (e.g., remove dirt spilled onto paved roads). | *Periodically watering unpaved construction roads.*Performing housekeeping (e.g., remove dirt spilled onto paved roads). | ||
*Covering haul trucks when loaded or unloaded. | *Covering haul trucks when loaded or unloaded. | ||
*Minimizing material handling (e.g., drop heights, double-handling).*Phased grading to minimize the area of disturbed soils.*Re-vegetating road medians and slopes.While emissions from construction activities and equipment are unavoidable, implementation of mitigation measures minimize impacts to local ambient air quality and the nuisance impacts to the public in proximity to the project. The mitigation may include any or all of the following:*Implementing controls to minimize daily emissions such as reducing engine idle time, using cleaner fuels (e.g., ultra low sulfur diesel fuel or biodiesel), installing pollution control equipment on construction equipment (e.g., diesel oxidation catalysts and particulate matter filters), and curtailing or controlling the time of day construction activities are performed.*Performing proper maintenance of construction vehicles to maximize efficiency and minimize emissions.In summary, air emission impacts from construction are SMALL because emissions are controlled at the source where practicable; maintained within established regulatory limits designed to minimize impacts; and located a significant distance from the public.19.4.2.1.2Impacts from OperationSection19.2 provides information regarding the cooling and heating dissipation systems and the waste systems for the SHINE facility. The design of the new plant includes a cooling system that does not require the use of either mechanical or natural draft cooling towers. The SHINE site is located in Rock County, Wisconsin, which is part of the Rockford (Illinois)-Janesville-Beloit (Wisconsin) Interstate Air Quality Control Region (40Code of Federal Regulations [CFR]81.71, Natural Resources [NR]404.03 Wisconsin Administrative Code) (Section14.4.3.2.2). The Clean Air Act and | *Minimizing material handling (e.g., drop heights, double-handling).*Phased grading to minimize the area of disturbed soils.*Re-vegetating road medians and slopes.While emissions from construction activities and equipment are unavoidable, implementation of mitigation measures minimize impacts to local ambient air quality and the nuisance impacts to the public in proximity to the project. The mitigation may include any or all of the following:*Implementing controls to minimize daily emissions such as reducing engine idle time, using cleaner fuels (e.g., ultra low sulfur diesel fuel or biodiesel), installing pollution control equipment on construction equipment (e.g., diesel oxidation catalysts and particulate matter filters), and curtailing or controlling the time of day construction activities are performed.*Performing proper maintenance of construction vehicles to maximize efficiency and minimize emissions.In summary, air emission impacts from construction are SMALL because emissions are controlled at the source where practicable; maintained within established regulatory limits designed to minimize impacts; and located a significant distance from the public.19.4.2.1.2Impacts from OperationSection19.2 provides information regarding the cooling and heating dissipation systems and the waste systems for the SHINE facility. The design of the new plant includes a cooling system that does not require the use of either mechanical or natural draft cooling towers. The SHINE site is located in Rock County, Wisconsin, which is part of the Rockford (Illinois)-Janesville-Beloit (Wisconsin) Interstate Air Quality Control Region (40Code of Federal Regulations [CFR]81.71, Natural Resources [NR]404.03 Wisconsin Administrative Code) (Section14.4.3.2.2). The Clean Air Act and it s amendments establish National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ambient pollutant concentrations that are considered harmful to public health and the environment. Similarly, Wisconsin has established the Wisconsin Ambient Air Quality Standards (WIAAQS) (NR404.03 Wisconsin Administrative Code). Primary standards set limits to protect public health and secondary standards set limits to protect public welfare such as decreased visibility, and damage to animals, crops, vegetation, and buildings. The principal pollutants for which NAAQS have been set are carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), lead, sulfur dioxide (SO 2), particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than 10 microns (PM 10), particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than 2.5 microns (PM2.5), and ozone (O 3). One or more averaging times are associated with each pollutant for which the standard must be attained. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-8Rev. 0Areas having air quality as good as, or better than, the NAAQS are designated as attainment areas. Areas having air quality that is worse than the NAAQS are designated as nonattainment areas. Rock County is designated as better than national Standards for SO 2 and unclassifiable/ attainment for CO, 1-hour (hr.) ozone, 8-hr. ozone (1997 and 2008 standards), NO 2, PM2.5, and lead (2008 standard) (40CFR81, SubpartC, §350). Rock County is near (but not part of) the Milwaukee-Racine PM 2.5 (2006) and 8-hr.ozone nonattainment areas (Subsection19.3.2.2). Walworth County separates Rock County from the nonattainment area.The nearest Class I area is Rainbow Lake, a U.S. Forest Service site about 311mi. (500km) north of Janesville, Wisconsin (Subsection19.3.2.2). Rainbow Lake is not a federally mandated Class I area (40CFR81, SubpartD). A Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) source within 31mi. (50km) of the Rainbow Lake Class I area must perform a significance analysis for the increase in emissions. In addition, any PSD source that locates within approximately 124mi. | ||
(200km) of a Class I Area, must notify the applicable Federal Land Manager. Since Rainbow Lake is well beyond the distance limits, the additional analysis and notification are not required.19.4.2.1.2.1Gaseous EffluentsGaseous effluents at the SHINE facility are from two types of processes: isotope production and fuel combustion. | (200km) of a Class I Area, must notify the applicable Federal Land Manager. Since Rainbow Lake is well beyond the distance limits, the additional analysis and notification are not required.19.4.2.1.2.1Gaseous EffluentsGaseous effluents at the SHINE facility are from two types of processes: isotope production and fuel combustion. | ||
19.4.2.1.2.1.1Isotope Production Gaseous effluents from the SHINE isotope production process originate from two main sources: Mo-99, Xe-133, and I-131 production and purification and uranium recycling. Process off-gases are treated in two separate, but connected, systems: the target solution vessel (TSV) off-gas system and the process vessel vent system (PVVS).Tritium gas is the accelerator target in the accelerator-based neutron source used in the production process. Maintenance operations on the accelerator will result in the release of tritium gas that will be exhausted by the ventilation system.The TSV off-gas system is dedicated to treating only the off-gas from the TSVs, with each TSV being equipped with its own system. The PVVS treats gases from the following sources: vent streams from process vessels in contact with streams containing fissile or radioactive materials, thermal denitration off-gas, after initial caustic scrubbing, and off-gas from the uranium oxidation furnace.The SHINE production facility utilizes a ventilation scheme for the process operating areas that is typical for nuclear processing facilities of this type. The operating areas are divided into zones, with each zone representing a specific hazard, and being subject to specific constraints, in terms of the potential for radioactive contamination or dose to the facility workers. Gaseous effluents resulting from the production process are summarized in Table19.4.2-1. These values are based on a 50-week per year operating schedule. There are no emissions of carbon monoxide, lead, ozone, or particulate matter (PM). | 19.4.2.1.2.1.1Isotope Production Gaseous effluents from the SHINE isotope production process originate from two main sources: Mo-99, Xe-133, and I-131 production and purification and uranium recycling. Process off-gases are treated in two separate, but connected, systems: the target solution vessel (TSV) off-gas system and the process vessel vent system (PVVS).Tritium gas is the accelerator target in the accelerator-based neutron source used in the production process. Maintenance operations on the accelerator will result in the release of tritium gas that will be exhausted by the ventilation system.The TSV off-gas system is dedicated to treating only the off-gas from the TSVs, with each TSV being equipped with its own system. The PVVS treats gases from the following sources: vent streams from process vessels in contact with streams containing fissile or radioactive materials, thermal denitration off-gas, after initial caustic scrubbing, and off-gas from the uranium oxidation furnace.The SHINE production facility utilizes a ventilation scheme for the process operating areas that is typical for nuclear processing facilities of this type. The operating areas are divided into zones, with each zone representing a specific hazard, and being subject to specific constraints, in terms of the potential for radioactive contamination or dose to the facility workers. Gaseous effluents resulting from the production process are summarized in Table19.4.2-1. These values are based on a 50-week per year operating schedule. There are no emissions of carbon monoxide, lead, ozone, or particulate matter (PM). | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-9Rev. 019.4.2.1.2.1.2Fuel CombustionSeveral combustion sources at the SHINE facility contribute to the gaseous effluents. These combustion sources are a natural gas-fired boiler that is used for the production facility building, natural gas-fired heaters in the administration building, support facility building, waste staging and shipping building, and the standby generator building. In addition to these natural gas-fired heaters, a diesel-fired standby diesel generator (SDG) is present at the facility. Each of these sources vents emissions to the outside through an associated stack. The boiler, heaters, and generator all emit CO, nitrogen oxides (NO x), PM, SO 2, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and carbon dioxide (CO 2), as summarized in Tables19.4.2-2 to 19.4.2-7. Total annual emissions are presented in Table 19.4.2-8.19.4.2.1.2.2Evaluation of Emission Impacts on Air Quality19.4.2.1.2.2.1Vehicle and Other Emissions During the operations phase, vehicular air emissions occur from the commuting workforce and from routine deliveries to/from the SHINE facility. As described in Subsection19.4.7, the volume of traffic generated during operations is considerably lower than that expected during construction. Additionally, the lands on the developed SHINE site are either developed surfaces (buildings, paved parking/access road) or consist of either agricultural or landscaped uses. Limitation of routine vehicle uses to paved areas reduces the emissions of fugitive dust. Impacts from vehicular air emissions and fugitive dust are far less than during the construction phase. Impacts during the operations phase are therefore, SMALL.The AERMOD modeling system was used to assess the impacts of pollutants expected to be generated by the new plant from the production unit and five natural gas-fired heaters. A SDG is only operated for limited periods of time for testing and therefore is not modeled. A March 2012 Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) memorandum on dispersion modeling of intermittent sources, states "In conjunction with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) document cited previously, dispersion modeling for intermi ttent units is not performed for any of the state or federal ambient air quality standards or increments." (WDNR, 2012a). 19.4.2.1.2.2.2Release Point CharacteristicsEmissions and stack characteristics for each emission source are based on the design parameters, assumptions, and emission factors. Exhaust characteristics for the SDG are estimated based on heat input to the source, fuel consumption, and combustion calculations assuming 25percent excess combustion air. Exhaust gas temperatures for the SDG are based on data in the CATC175-20 Diesel Engine Technical Data Sheet, and the calculated exhaust gas flow rates are benchmarked against exhaust flow data included in the CAT technical data sheet. Exhaust characteristics for the production facility building natural gas-fired boiler are estimated based on heat input to the source, fuel consumption, and combustion calculations assuming 25percent excess combustion air. Exhaust gas temperatures for the natural gas-fired boiler are based on temperature data provided by boiler vendors for other similar projects. Exhaust from the natural gas-fired boiler is vented to the atmosphere through a stack that is separate from the Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-10Rev. 0process stack, which is designed primarily to vent gaseous effluents from the SHINE isotope production process. Stack characteristics for the indirect-fired heaters are based on information available from equipment vendors for packaged indirect-fired heaters. Vertical convection stack vents equipped with a rain cap are assumed for each natural gas-fired heater for all buildings except the production facility. No rain cap is assumed for the main production facility. Each stack is assumed to be 5ft. (1.5m) higher than the highest point of the roof of the building. Natural gas heater information sources referenced for this evaluation include those by Reznor (Reznor, 2002) and Hastings (Hastings, 2011). Process-related and natural gas boiler exhaust flows are released through separate stacks. Release point characteristics for the process-related, boiler, and natural gas-fired heater gaseous effluents are presented in Table19.4.2-9.19.4.2.1.2.2.3Gaseous Effluent Control Systems Emission calculations included in this evaluation are intended to provide bounding values for emissions from the SHINE facility. As such, emission calculations assume that emissions are limited using standard combustion controls, but do not assume the installation of post-combustion control systems.The SHINE facility generates gaseous effluents resulting from process operations and the ventilation of operating areas. The gaseous effluent from ventilation of operating areas includes the following control systems: *The Zone 1 exhaust airstream passes through two stages of HEPA filtration and a single stage activated carbon bed prior to discharge from the stack.*The Zone 2 and Zone 3 exhaust airstreams pass through two stages of HEPA filtration prior to discharge from the stack.*Additional controls may be implemented as required by local permit conditions. Acid gases from the thermal denitration process pass through a scrubber before being emitted to the atmosphere. All the gaseous effluents from the production process are vented to the atmosphere through the main stack on the production facility building.The diesel generator specified for the SHINE facility is required to meet all applicable New Source Performance Standards (NSPS, 40CFRPart 60 SubpartIIII) and National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP, 40CFRPart63 Subpart ZZZZ). The NSPS and NESHAP standards applicable to the diesel generator depend upon several design parameters and operating variables which have not yet been established, including the year the engine is manufactured, size of the engine, displacement liters per cylinder(L/cyl), speed (revolutions per minute [rpm]), annual hours of operation, and classification of the facility as a major or area source of hazardous air pollutants. Therefore, diesel engine emissions for this evaluation are based on published emissions data for a CATC175-20 engine, which are expected to be typical of emissions from large diesel-fired engines with no post-combustion emission control systems. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-11Rev. 0Emissions of NO x from the natural gas-fired boiler are controlled using low NO x burners (LNB), which are standard equipment on most new boilers manufactured in the United States. LNBs limit NOx formation by controlling both the stoichiometric and temperature profiles of the combustion flame in each burner flame envelope. This control is achieved with design features that regulate the aerodynamic distribution and mixing of the fuel and air, yielding reduced oxygen in the primary combustion zone, reduced flame temperature, and reduced residence time at peak combustion temperatures. The combination of these techniques produces lower NO x emissions during the combustion process. Post-combustion air quality control systems are not anticipated for the natural gas-fired boiler, as natural gas is an inherently clean fuel with minimal SO 2 and PM emissions.Emissions from the natural gas-fired heaters are controlled using combustion controls and properly designed and tuned burners. Gas burners come in a great variety of shapes, sizes, and designs. Typical gas burners found in indirect-fired heaters are the ribbon-port type, which vary in length and in port sizes, and may employ a single ribbon or many ribbons depending on the volume of gas to be burned (Reznor, 2002). The emission calculations assume properly designed and tuned burners, with a proper balance of primary air and secondary air to ensure complete combustion. Post-combustion air quality control systems are not anticipated for the natural gas-fired heaters, as natural gas is an inherently clean fuel with minimal SO 2 and PM emissions.19.4.2.1.2.2.4Dispersion Modeling Assumptions and Results19.4.2.1.2.2.4.1Model AssumptionsSince there are no cooling towers associated with the SHINE facility, there are no estimates of fogging, icing, plume shadowing, and salt deposition from the Seasonal/Annual Cooling Tower Impact (SACTI) model.To estimate the impacts of non-radiological pollutants from the process, boiler, and heaters, the AERMOD Modeling System is used. The AERMOD system is a state-of-the-science dispersion model system that the USEPA promulgated in 2005 to replace the Industrial Source Complex (ISC) model. The AERMOD system is composed of a terrain preprocessor (AERMAP, version 11103), a tool to develop building downwash parameters for AERMOD (BPIPPRM, version 04274), and the dispersion model (AERMOD, version 12345).Although the SHINE facility has a standby diesel generator, the emissions from this source are not included in the dispersion modeling because the generator is considered an intermittent unit. | ||
The WDNR issued a policy statement on March 6, 2012, as discussed above, exempting intermittent operating units. Since this modeling demonstration is an assessment of potential impacts and not for the purposes of an air permitting, 5 years of preprocessed meteorological data for Madison, Wisconsin (available from the WDNR web site) | The WDNR issued a policy statement on March 6, 2012, as discussed above, exempting intermittent operating units. Since this modeling demonstration is an assessment of potential impacts and not for the purposes of an air permitting, 5 years of preprocessed meteorological data for Madison, Wisconsin (available from the WDNR web site) wa s used in place of processing 5 years of National Weather Service (NWS) data from Janesville. Comparing the location of the NWS instrumentation at the Madison airport (Dane County Regional Airport) and Janesville airport (Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport), some differences in the processed meteorological input to AERMOD can be expected, but not enough to cause an exceedance of a federal or state ambient air quality standard. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-12Rev. 0The stacks associated with the heaters in all buildings except the production building are designed to have rain caps, which restricts the vertical flow. AERMOD has two ways to model this situation: modify the source characteristics or use the non-default beta option to define the type of source. For this modeling demonstration, the former method is used so the modeling is conducted in accordance with AERMOD's regulatory default options.For this modeling demonstration, an assumption was made, based on information contained on the SHINE facility site layout (Figure 19.2.1-1) that a fence encircles the entire property boundary (fence line), forming a continuous physical barrier restricting public access to the SHINE site. Ambient air is defined as "-that portion of the atmosphere, external to buildings, to which the general public has access" (40CFR50.1(e)). If plant property is accessible to the public (exclusive of the workforce), then impacts from facility emissions are required to be modeled at those locations.AERMOD analyses were performed using a number of bounded conditions. Since the boiler and heater stacks are subject to downwash, the actual stack diameter and exit temperature are used, but the exit velocity is set to a nominally low value, such as 0.001meter per second (m/s). This value is used on modeling the SHINE facility stacks associated with the heaters in all buildings except the production building. The stack associated with heating of the production building is modeled without a rain cap.The modeling results assume full-time operations for the year of the natural gas-fired heating system in each building (8760 hr.). A proposed operating schedule of the heating system, limiting operations of those units to about 5600 hr. per year (with no heating from June through August and a limited schedule in the month prior to and the month after the summer months), was not modeled. Additionally, the emission rate used for the modeling assumed a 25percent design margin on the heating load. These assumptions provide a bounding analysis on the expected impacts from the facility.19.4.2.1.2.2.4.2AERMOD Model ResultsA Significant Impact Level (SIL) establishes the concentration below which a pollutant impact is presumed not to cause or contribute to a violation of a NAAQS or WIAAQS. If pollutant concentrations do not exceed the SIL, then no further modeling (i.e., a compliance demonstration) is required (unless the WDNR would require additional modeling). The estimated highest impacts for each pollutant and averaging time are compared to the individual SILs in Table19.4.2-10. Based on this assessment the impacts for all pollutants and averaging times are less than the SIL except for the 1-hr. and annual NO 2 standard. The 1-hr. and annual NO 2 impacts, which do exceed the respective SILs, are about 53 percent and 26 percent of the | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | |||
respective NAAQS.To assess potential impacts of the SHINE facility operation relative to the NAAQS, the concentration estimates are added with background concentrations and are compared to the NAAQS standards for each pollutant and averaging time (Table19.4.2-11). Most background concentrations were obtained from a WDNR draft memorandum on regional background concentrations (WDNR,2011a). A background concentration for the 1-hr. NO 2 impacts was obtained from a WDNR technical support document (WDNR, 2 010) and a background Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-13Rev. 0concentration for the 1-hr. SO 2 impacts was obtained from a document that identifies procedures to be followed by Region 5 states in conducting modeling (Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium, 2011).Table19.4.2-11 shows that none of the pollutants exceed the NAAQS for the SHINE facility alone, or in combination with background concentration. Both the 24-hr. and annual PM 2.5 values are approximately 85 percent of the NAAQS, but most of this is due to the background concentration. Additionally, neither PM2.5 averaging period exceeds their respective SIL. Comparing the impacts to the PSD increment shows that the impacts from the SHINE facility alone are orders of magnitude smaller than the PSD increment.In summary, the initial AERMOD analysis with the assumptions described above for emissions from the process, boiler, and heaters shows that none of the pollutants exceed the NAAQS, and do not result in a modeled exceedance of the USEPA SILs for any pollutant and averaging time, except for 1-hr. and annual NO 2 impacts. 19.4.2.1.2.2.4.3 Potential Maximum Concentration Since AERMOD can directly estimate concentrations that are more precise, normalized concentrations are not presented. The SILs establish the concentration below which a pollutant impact is presumed not to cause or contribute to a violation of an ambient air quality standard. The SILs are shown in Table19.4.2-10 along with the highest concentration estimates at points within a reasonable area that could be impacted (a square area 4 km x 4 km [2.5 mi. x 2.5 mi.] in size). Highest impacts range from the fence line to about 325ft. (100m) from the fence line.Pollutant impacts at points of maximum individual exposure will be less than the maximum impacts at the fence line for each averaging time. The nearest residence is about 0.33mi (0.53km) to the north-northwest from the proposed SHINE site. A church is about 0.35mi (0.56km) to the south-southeast. For all pollutants and averaging times except for the 1-hr. and annual NO 2, the maximum concentration anywhere within a reasonable area is less than the SIL. Applying AERMOD without limitations on the operating schedule, the 1-hr. NO 2 impacts at the residence and at the church are 35.4micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m | |||
: 3) and 29.7µg/m 3, respectively. For the annual NO 2 exposure, the impacts are 0.36 µg/m 3 and 0.21 µg/m 3 for the residence and church, respectively. As is demonstrated in Table19.4.2-11, no impacts exceed the primary ambient air quality standards that have been established to protect public health, including the health of sensitive populations such as children, the elderly, and those with respiratory problems. Therefore, pollutant impacts within a reasonable area that could be impacted and at points of the maximum individual exposure are SMALL.19.4.2.1.2.2.5Plume Visibility CharacteristicsThe plume from the production process should not be visible. All process exhaust passes through two stages of tested high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filters in series. The HEPA filters remove all visible particulate from the exhaust air stream. The vapors are removed with Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-14Rev. 0process off-gas treatment systems and all of the exhaust air passes through a single stage activated carbon bed prior to discharge from the stack.Plume visibility from the natural gas-fired boiler and heaters is expected to be minimal. Because natural gas is a gaseous fuel, filterable PM emissions which generally contribute to plume visibility are expected to be very low. PM emissions associated with natural gas combustion are usually larger molecular weight hydrocarbons that are not fully combusted; thus increased PM emissions can result from poor air/fuel mixing or maintenance problems (USEPA, 1995). With proper burner maintenance and tuning, opacity associated with the natural gas-fired boiler and heaters is expected to be minimal.White, blue, and black smoke can be emitted from diesel-fired engines (USEPA, 1995). Liquid particles can appear as white smoke in the exhaust during an engine cold start, idling, or low load operation. These emissions are formed in the quench layer adjacent to the engine's cylinder walls, where the temperature is not high enough to ignite the fuel. Blue smoke can be emitted when lubricating oil leaks into the combustion chamber and is partially burned. Proper maintenance is the most effective method of preventing blue smoke emissions from all types of internal combustion engines. The primary constituent of black smoke is agglomerated carbon particles or soot. Proper engine maintenance and combustion controls will minimize particulate matter emissions and limit opacity from the SDG. Opacity is expected to be less than 5percent at all times excluding, potentially, periods of startup.19.4.2.1.2.3Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Greenhouse gases trap heat in the atmosphere, absorbing and emitting radiation in the thermal infrared range. The most important of these gases are CO 2, methane, nitrous oxide, and fluorinated gases. Greenhouse gases (GHG) are reported as CO 2 equivalent (CO 2e) and refer to the global warming potential of the greenhouse gas or gases being emitted.Activities associated with the proposed SHINE site that are expected to contribute to the greenhouse gases include: *Construction activities at t he SHINE site resulting in principally emissions of CO 2; GHG emissions associated with construction activities include the commuting of the construction workforce and operation of construction equipment at the site. *Plant operation activities associated with the operation of plant equipment and the operations workforce. *Decommissioning activities associated with the decommissioning workforce and decommissioning equipment.*Life cycle activities related to the mining, processing, and transport of materials and waste storage should also be considered as part of the GHG inventory.As noted in Subsection19.3.2.5, SHINE will develop a comprehensive program to avoid and control GHG emissions associated with the SHINE facility. It is expected that this program will include elements such as developing a GHG emission inventory, investigating and implementing methods for avoiding or controlling the GHG emissions identified in the inventory, encouraging car pooling or other measures to minimize GHG emissions due to vehicle traffic during construction and operation of the SHINE facility, and conducting periodic audits of GHG control procedures and implementing corrective actions when necessary. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-15Rev. 019.4.2.1.2.4Mitigative MeasuresEmission-specific strategies and measures will be developed and implemented to ensure compliance within the applicable regulatory limits defined by the National Primary and Secondary Ambient Air Quality Standards (40CFRPart50) and National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (40CFRPart61). Contractors, vendors, and subcontractors are required to adhere to appropriate federal and state occupational health and safety regulations. These regulations set limits to protect workers from adverse conditions, including air emissions. Implementation of controls and limits at the source of emissions on the construction site result in reduction of impacts off-site. 19.4.2.1.3Impacts of DecommissioningDecommissioning is the removal of a nuclear facility from service and to reduce residual radioactivity to a level that permits release of the property for unrestricted use and termination of the license. During the decommissioning phase, activities, equipment usage and their associated emissions are expected to be similar, but less than that of the construction phase as decommissioning activities are less extensive than construction. Therefore, impacts during the decommissioning phase are SMALL.19.4.2.1.4Required PermitsAs described in Subsection19.1.2, several air quality permits are required to support the construction and operation of the SHINE facility. Table19.1.2-1 indicates that an Air Pollution Control Construction Permit pursuant to the Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapter NR406, and an Air Pollution Control Construction Permit pursuant to the Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapter NR407 are required.After the greenhouse gases are quantified, as noted in Subsection 19.4.2.1.2.3, a determination will be made as to whether the proposed SHINE facility will be subject to regulation. | |||
19.4.2.2NoiseThis subsection provides an assessment of noise impacts from construction, operation and decommissioning of the SHINE facility. | 19.4.2.2NoiseThis subsection provides an assessment of noise impacts from construction, operation and decommissioning of the SHINE facility. | ||
19.4.2.2.1Impacts of Construction Typical noise levels from equipment commonly used during construction are listed on Table19.4.2-12. On-site noise level exposure is controlled through appropriate training, personal protective equipment, periodic health and safety monitoring, and industry best practices. Practices such as maintenance of noise limiting devices on vehicles and equipment, controlling access to high noise areas, duration of emissions, and/or shielding high noise sources near their origin limit the adverse effects of noise on workers. Non-routine activities with potential adverse impacts on noise levels are limited and use best industry practices that further limit adverse effects. | 19.4.2.2.1Impacts of Construction Typical noise levels from equipment commonly used during construction are listed on Table19.4.2-12. On-site noise level exposure is controlled through appropriate training, personal protective equipment, periodic health and safety monitoring, and industry best practices. Practices such as maintenance of noise limiting devices on vehicles and equipment, controlling access to high noise areas, duration of emissions, and/or shielding high noise sources near their origin limit the adverse effects of noise on workers. Non-routine activities with potential adverse impacts on noise levels are limited and use best industry practices that further limit adverse effects. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-16Rev. 0The City of Janesville has no published ordinance governing noise emissions from developed land uses. As a point of reference, Rock Township has published noise level limits for properties outside of the M-1 Light Industrial District, the M-2 Heavy Industrial District, and the SP Special Purpose District. The SHINE site falls within the B1 Local Commercial District zoning boundary (TownofRock,2006). The protective level for B1 Local Commercial zoning is 79 decibels (dBA) (TownofRock,2008). No distinction is made between day and night noise level limits.As shown in Table19.4.2-12, noise levels for construction equipment range from 80 to 88dBA at 50ft. (15m) to 50 to 58dBA at 1500ft. (457 m). These data indicate that noise levels attenuate rapidly with distance (30dBA over a distance of 1450ft. [442m]). Based on the natural attenuation of noise levels over distance, the bounding condition construction noise level is below the Rock Township standard between 50 and 500ft. (15 and 457m) from its source. As is evident in Figures 19.3.1-1 and 19.3.1-7, the SHINE site is relatively isolated from potential sensitive noise receptors, the closest residences, churches and recreation areas are between 1700 and 2100ft. (518 and 640m) from the SHINE site. Thus, the impact of noise from construction of the new site on nearby residences, churches and recreational areas is SMALL.Traffic associated with the construction workforce traveling to and from the SHINE site also generates noise. The increase in noise relative to background conditions is most noticeable during the shift changes in the morning and late afternoon. The 451vehicles and 14heavy vehicles are dispersed in shifts, with the largest shift working during the day. Additionally, posted speed limits, traffic control and administrative measures, such as staggered shift hours, are employed that reduce traffic noise during the weekday business hours. Therefore, potential noise impacts to the community are intermittent and limited primarily to shift changes. The impact from noise from construction-related traffic to nearby residences and recreat ional areas is SMALL.Potential indirect impacts may be anticipated to off-site areas associated with the roadway network and adjacent lands beyond the site boundary. Noise related impacts may result from an increased traffic volume and resultant increases in traffic generated noise as discussed above. | ||
Noise levels during shift changes in these off-site areas are not notable as these residences are currently located within a roadway network that is characterized by traffic volumes that exhibit traffic noise.In summary, noise control practices at the construction site and the additional attenuation provided by the distance between the public and the site, limits noise effects to the public and workers during construction so that its impact is SMALL and temporary.19.4.2.2.2Impacts of Operation External noise emission from the SHINE facility during operation is primarily limited by the walls and other physical barriers of the facility itself. Noise generated during operations relates primarily to vehicular movements associated with employees and with truck deliveries. | Noise levels during shift changes in these off-site areas are not notable as these residences are currently located within a roadway network that is characterized by traffic volumes that exhibit traffic noise.In summary, noise control practices at the construction site and the additional attenuation provided by the distance between the public and the site, limits noise effects to the public and workers during construction so that its impact is SMALL and temporary.19.4.2.2.2Impacts of Operation External noise emission from the SHINE facility during operation is primarily limited by the walls and other physical barriers of the facility itself. Noise generated during operations relates primarily to vehicular movements associated with employees and with truck deliveries. | ||
Traffic associated with the operation of the SHINE facility also generates noise. The increase in traffic relative to background traffic conditions is most evident during the morning and afternoon drive time when workers are going to and leaving work. Approximately 118work-related vehicles per day are expected to access the site once the site is operational. As discussed in Subsection19.3.7.2.3.1, existing (2010) traffic volume on US51 is 9000vehicles per day. The work-related trips generated by the SHINE facility are insignificant in the existing traffic flow. | Traffic associated with the operation of the SHINE facility also generates noise. The increase in traffic relative to background traffic conditions is most evident during the morning and afternoon drive time when workers are going to and leaving work. Approximately 118work-related vehicles per day are expected to access the site once the site is operational. As discussed in Subsection19.3.7.2.3.1, existing (2010) traffic volume on US51 is 9000vehicles per day. The work-related trips generated by the SHINE facility are insignificant in the existing traffic flow. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-17Rev. 0Therefore, potential noise impacts to the community from noise from operations-related traffic to nearby residences and recreational areas are SMALL.Normal operations also include stationary external equipment (a standby diesel generator, heating, ventilation, and air conditioning [HVAC] equipment) that represent a lesser component of noise emission and are more limited in operation. The standby diesel generator is operated intermittently (i.e., for periodic testing and for asset protection during a loss of offsite power), and is therefore not part of normal operations. HVAC equipment is an expected noise source that is a characteristic of normal summer operations.Potential indirect impacts to off-site areas are associated with the roadway network and adjacent residences and lands beyond the site boundary. Noise related impacts may result from an increased traffic volume and resultant increases in traffic generated noise as discussed above. | ||
Noise levels during shift changes in these off-site areas are not notable as these residences are currently located within a roadway network that is characterized by traffic volumes that exhibit traffic noise. The intermittent increase in traffic volume associated with shift changes, and the natural noise attenuation over distance results in noise levels that attenuate to levels below the local standards for continuous noise levels. Therefore, noise impacts resulting from normal operations are SMALL.19.4.2.2.3Impacts of DecommissioningDecommissioning is the removal of a nuclear facility from service and reduction of residual radioactivity to a level that permits release of the property for unrestricted use and termination of the license. During the decommissioning phase, activities, equipment usage and the noise associated with their operation are expected to be similar or less than that of the construction phase. Therefore, impacts during the decommissioning phase are SMALL. | Noise levels during shift changes in these off-site areas are not notable as these residences are currently located within a roadway network that is characterized by traffic volumes that exhibit traffic noise. The intermittent increase in traffic volume associated with shift changes, and the natural noise attenuation over distance results in noise levels that attenuate to levels below the local standards for continuous noise levels. Therefore, noise impacts resulting from normal operations are SMALL.19.4.2.2.3Impacts of DecommissioningDecommissioning is the removal of a nuclear facility from service and reduction of residual radioactivity to a level that permits release of the property for unrestricted use and termination of the license. During the decommissioning phase, activities, equipment usage and the noise associated with their operation are expected to be similar or less than that of the construction phase. Therefore, impacts during the decommissioning phase are SMALL. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-18Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-1 Isotope Production Process - Gaseous Effluentsa)Based on 50 weeks operationEffluentRate NOX< 6000 pounds per year (lb/yr) | ||
Table 3.4-13457187165 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | (a)CO, lead, O 3, PMnoneSulfuric acid (H 2SO4)< 50 lb/yr (a)krypton-85 (Kr-85)< 120 Curies per year (Ci/yr)iodine-131 (I-131) | ||
<1.5 Ci/yrxenon-133 (Xe-133)< 17,000 Ci/yr tritium (H-3)< 4400 Ci/yr Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-19Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-2 Standby Diesel Generator - Emissionsa) AP-42 from USEPA, 1995b) Assuming 96 hours operation per yearPollutantEmission Rates(grams/bhp-hr)Source (a)Annual Emissions (T/yr)(b)Hourly Emissions (lb/hr)Equivalent Heat Input Emission Factor(lb/MMBtu)CO0.52CAT C175-20 Diesel Engine Technical Data Sheet0.367.50.17 NOx 5.07CAT C175-20 Diesel Engine Technical Data Sheet3.5273.31.68PM0.04CAT C175-20 Diesel Engine Technical Data Sheet0.0260.550.013Hydrocarbons | |||
(VOC)0.17CAT C175-20 Diesel Engine Technical Data Sheet0.122.510.058 SO20.015Calculated based on maximum fuel sulfur content of 50 ppm0.010.220.005 CO2497AP-42 (10/96) | |||
Table 3.4-13457187165 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-20Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-3 Emissions from Production Facility Building - Natural Gas-Fired BoilerPollutantEmission FactorUnitsSource (a)Annual Emissions(b)Hourly Emissions(T/yr)(lb/hr)(lb/MMBtu) | |||
CO84lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1 (7/98)10.372.47 0.082 NOx50lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1 (7/98)6.221.480.049 PM10 (filterable) 1.9lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.250.060.0020 PM10 (total)7.6lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.920.220.0073 VOC 5.5lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.670.160.0053 SO2 0.6lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.080.0180.0006 CO2 120,000lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)14,8223529117.6Design Firing Rate: | |||
30.0MMBtu/hrEstimated based on preliminary building sizing and materials of construction plus 25% design marginHeating Value for Natural Gas:1,020Btu/scfAP-42 Table 1.4-1 Maximum Fuel FiringRate:29,412scf/hrCalculated (Firing Rate/Heating Value)a)AP-42 from USEPA, 1995b) Based on 50 weeks per year Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-21Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-4 Emissions from Administration Building - Natural Gas-Fired Heatera)Exhaust characteristics for the indirect-fired heaters were based on information available from equipment vendors for packaged indirect-fired heaters.b)AP-42 from USEPA, 1995c)Based on 50 weeks per year | |||
==References:== | ==References:== | ||
Hastings, 2011; Reznor, 2002 PollutantEmission FactorUnitsSource(b)Annual Emissions(c)Hourly Emissions(T/yr)(lb/hr)(lb/MMBtu)CO(Residential Furnace)40lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1(7/98)0.050.0110. | Hastings, 2011; Reznor, 2002 PollutantEmission FactorUnitsSource (b)Annual Emissions (c)Hourly Emissions(T/yr)(lb/hr)(lb/MMBtu) | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | CO(Residential Furnace)40lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1 (7/98)0.050.0110.038 NOx(Residential Furnace)94lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1 (7/98)0.110.0270.093 PM10 (filterable) 1.9lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.0020.00050.002 PM10 (total) 7.6lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.0090.00220.008 VOC 5.5lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.0070.00160.006 SO2 0.6lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.0010.000170.0006 CO2 120,000lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)143.234.1117.6Estimated Heating Load:233,278Btu/hrEstimated based on preliminary building size and materials of constructionDesign Firing Rate:290,000Btu/hrHeating load plus a design margin of approximately 25% to provide bounding valueHeating Value for NaturalGas:1,020Btu/scfAP-42 Table 1.4-1Firing Rate:284.3scf/hrCalculated (Firing Rate/Heating Value) | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-22Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-5 Emissions from Support Facility Building - Natural Gas-Fired Heatera)Exhaust characteristics for the indirect-fired heaters were based on information available from equipment vendors for packaged indirect-fired heaters.b)AP-42 from USEPA, 1995c)Based on 50 weeks per year | |||
==References:== | ==References:== | ||
Hastings, 2011; Reznor, 2002PollutantEmission FactorUnitsSource(b)Annual Emissions(c)Hourly Emissions(T/yr)(lb/hr)(lb/MMBtu)CO(Residential Furnace)40lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1(7/98)0.0670.0160. | Hastings, 2011; Reznor, 2002PollutantEmission FactorUnitsSource (b)Annual Emissions (c)Hourly Emissions(T/yr)(lb/hr)(lb/MMBtu) | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | CO(Residential Furnace)40lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1 (7/98)0.0670.0160.038 NOx(Residential | ||
Furnace)94lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1 (7/98)0.160.0390.093 PM10 (filterable) 1.9lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.0030.00080.002 PM10 (total) 7.6lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.0130.00310.007VOC 5.5lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.0100.00230.005 SO2 0.6lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.0010.000250.0006 CO2 120,000lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)207.549.4117.6Estimated Heating Load:337,317Btu/hrEstimated based on preliminary building size and materials of constructionDesign Firing Rate:420,000Btu/hrHeating load plus a design margin of approximately 25% to provide bounding valueHeating Value for NaturalGas:1,020Btu/scfAP-42 Table 1.4-1Firing Rate:411.8scf/hrCalculated (Firing Rate/Heating Value) | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-23Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-6 Emissions from Waste Staging & Shipping Building - Natural Gas-Fired Heatera)Exhaust characteristics for the indirect-fired heaters were based on information available from equipment vendors for packaged indirect-fired heaters.b)AP-42 from USEPA, 1995c)Based on 50 weeks per year | |||
==References:== | ==References:== | ||
Hastings, 2011; Reznor, 2002PollutantEmission FactorUnitsSource(b)Annual Emissions(c)Hourly Emissions(T/yr)(lb/hr)(lb/MMBtu)CO(Residential Furnace)40lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1(7/98)0.0290.0070.039NOx(Residential Furnace)94lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1(7/98)0.0710.0170.094PM10 (filterable) 1.9lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2(7/98)0.0010.00030. | Hastings, 2011; Reznor, 2002PollutantEmission FactorUnitsSource(b)Annual Emissions(c)Hourly Emissions(T/yr)(lb/hr)(lb/MMBtu) | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | CO(Residential Furnace)40lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1(7/98)0.0290.0070.039NOx(Residential Furnace)94lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1(7/98)0.0710.0170.094PM10 (filterable) 1.9lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2(7/98)0.0010.00030.002 PM10 (total) 7.6lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2(7/98)0.0050.00130.007 VOC 5.5lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2(7/98)0.0040.00100.006 SO2 0.6lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2(7/98)<0.0010.0000110.0006 CO2 120,000lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2(7/98)89.021.2117.8Estimated Heating Load:141,597Btu/hrEstimated based on preliminary building size and materials of constructionDesign Firing Rate:180,000Btu/hrHeating load plus a design margin of approximately 25% to provide bounding | ||
valueHeating Value for NaturalGas:1,020Btu/scfAP-42 Table 1.4-1Firing Rate:176.5scf/hrCalculated (Firing Rate/Heating Value) | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-24Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-7 Emissions from Diesel Generator Building - Natural Gas-Fired Heatera)Exhaust characteristics for the indirect-fired heaters were based on information available from equipment vendors for packaged indirect-fired heaters.b)AP-42 from USEPA, 1995c)Based on 50 weeks per year | |||
==References:== | ==References:== | ||
Hastings, 2011; Reznor, 2002PollutantEmission FactorUnitsSource(b)Annual Emissions(c)Hourly Emissions(T/yr)(lb/hr)(lb/MMBtu)CO(Residential Furnace)40lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1(7/98)0.0130.0030. | Hastings, 2011; Reznor, 2002PollutantEmission FactorUnitsSource (b)Annual Emissions (c)Hourly Emissions(T/yr)(lb/hr)(lb/MMBtu) | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical | CO(Residential Furnace)40lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1 (7/98)0.0130.0030.042 NOx(Residential | ||
Conc.(µg/m3)Total Conc.(µg/m3)NAAQS(b)(µg/m3)% of NAAQSPSD Increment(µg/m3)CO1-hr.H2H(c)2820091363139140,0003None8-hr.H2H(c)1320081191120410, | |||
Furnace)94lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1 (7/98)0.0290.0070.097 PM10 (filterable) 1.9lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)< 0.0010.00010.001 PM10 (total) 7.6lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.0020.00050.007 VOC 5.5lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.0020.00040.006 SO2 0.6lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)< 0.0010.000040.0006 CO2 120,000lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)35.78.5118.1Estimated Heating Load: | |||
57,987Btu/hrEstimated based on preliminary building size and materials of constructionDesign Firing Rate: | |||
72,000Btu/hrMaximum heat input required plus 25% design marginHeating Value for NaturalGas:1,020Btu/scfAP-42 Table 1.4-1Firing Rate: | |||
70.6scf/hrCalculated (Firing Rate/Heating Value) | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-25Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-8 Total Annual Emissionsa) Includes 3 T/yr (6,000 lb/yr) NO x emissions from process stackPollutantAnnual Emissions (T/yr)CO10.9NOx 13.1 (a)PM (total)0.98HC (VOC)0.81SO20.09CO215,642 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-26Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-9 SHINE Facility Release Point Characteristics(Sheet 1 of 2)Production Facility BuildingStack DataUnitsBoilerProcessExhaust Flowacfm14,45053,251Exhaust Temperature oF585104Heightfeet above grade 6666Diameterfeet1.674.67Exhaust Velocityfeet/sec110.451.9Stack Base Elevationfeet above mean sea level821821Administration Building Stack DataUnitsValueDescriptionHeightfeet above grade21Based on Administration Building height of 16 feet and heater exhaust height of 5 feet above roofExhaust OrientationVerticalAssumed vertical with rain capDiameterinches5.0Typical exhaust vent outlet for 200,000 to 300,000 Btu/hr heaterExhaust Fan Flow acfm180Approximate full load exhaust gas flow rate based on natural gas combustionExhaust Temperature oF160Assumed for indirect-fired natural gas heaterExhaust Velocityft/sec22CalculatedStack Base Elevationfeet AMSL817Support Facility Building Stack DataUnitsValueDescriptionHeightfeet above grade26Based on support facility building height of 21 feet and heater exhaust height of 5 feet above roofExhaust OrientationVerticalAssumed vertical with rain capDiameterinches6.0Typical exhaust vent outlet for >300,000 Btu/hr heaterExhaust Fan Flowacfm260Approximate full load exhaust gas flow rate based on natural gas combustionExhaust Temperature oF160Assumed for indirect-fired natural gas heaterExhaust Velocityft/sec22CalculatedStack Base Elevationfeet AMSL822 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-27Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-9 SHINE Facility Release Point Characteristics(Sheet 2 of 2)Waste Staging and Shipping BuildingStack DataUnitsValueDescription Heightfeet above grade23Based on Administration Building height of 18 feet and heater exhaust height of 5 feet above roofExhaust OrientationVerticalAssumed vertical with rain capDiameterinches4.0Typical exhaust vent outlet for <200,000 Btu/hr heaterExhaust Fan Flowacfm120Approximate full load exhaust gas flow rate based on natural gas combustionExhaust Temperature oF160Assumed for indirect-fired natural gas heaterExhaust Velocityft/sec23CalculatedStack Base Elevationfeet AMSL824Diesel Generator Building Stack DataUnitsValueDescriptionHeightfeet above grade22Based on Diesel Generator Building height of 17 feet and heater exhaust height of 5 feet above roofExhaust OrientationVerticalAssumed vertical with rain capDiameterinches4.0Typical exhaust vent outlet for <200,000 Btu/hr heaterExhaust Fan Flowacfm60Approximate full load exhaust gas flow rate based on natural gas combustionExhaust Temperature oF160Assumed for indirect-fired natural gas heaterExhaust Velocityft/sec11CalculatedStack Base Elevationfeet AMSL823 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-28Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-10 Pollutant Impacts Compared to the SILa)A recent court decision (US Court of Appeals, For the District of Columbia Circuit), January 22, 2013, Sierra Club vs. EPA (No.10-1413) vacated the PM 2.5 SIL and remanded it to EPA. The SILs for other pollutants remain in effect.b)Values represent the highest predicted impacts for each pollutant and averaging time.PollutantAveraging PeriodMaximum Predicted Impact (µg/m 3)(b)YearSIL(µg/m3)CO1-hr.30200920008-hr.152007500NO21-hr.64.65-yr7.5Annual2.320071SO21-hr.0.235-yr7.93-hr.0.1420082524-hr.0.07420085Annual0.008520071PM1024-hr.0.925-yr5Annual0.095-yr1PM2.5 (a)24-hr.0.755-yr1.2Annual0.095-yr0.3 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-29Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-11 Pollutant Impacts Compared to the NAAQSa) 5-yr indicates an average over the 5 modeled yearsb) Primary standards except SO 2 3-hr., which is a secondary standardc) H1H is the high, first high and H2H is the high, second high concentration of ranked concentrations at all receptors d) NOx modeled; assume a 100% conversion rate of NO x to NO2e) 6th highest value over 5 yearsf)Although there is a SIL for the annual PM 10 impacts, there is no NAAQS standardg) 24-hr. and Annual standards revoked June 22, 2010 (75 FR 35520)PollutantAveraging PeriodRankPredicted Impact (µg/m3)Year(a)Bkgd. | |||
Conc.(µg/m3)Total Conc. | |||
(µg/m3)NAAQS(b)(µg/m3)% of NAAQSPSD Increment | |||
(µg/m3)CO1-hr.H2H(c)2820091363139140,0003None8-hr.H2H(c)1320081191120410,00012None NOx(as NO2)(d)1-hr.98th %47.45-yr55102.418854NoneAnnualH1H(c)2.3200724.126.41002625 PM10(f)24-hr.H6H(e)0.75-yr47.047.71503230 PM2.524-hr.98th %0.545-yr28.929.435849AnnualH1H(c)0.095-yr10.210.312864 SO2(g)1-hr.99th %0.195-yr1313.21967None3-hr.H2H0.14200843.243.313003512 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-30Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-12 Typical Noise and Emissions from Construction Equipmenta)Rock Township, Wisconsin, Noise Limits:M-1 Light Industrial, M-2 Heavy Industrial and SP Special Purpose District: 79 dBAAll other districts: 72 dBA | |||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
California Energy Commission, 2009Equipment TypeNoise Level in dBA(a)At 50 FeetAt 500 FeetAt 1500 FeetEarthmoving Loaders886858 Dozer886858 Tractor806050 Grader856555 Trucks866656 Shovels846454 Materials Handling Concrete pumps/mixers816151 Derrick and mobile cranes836353 Stationary Portable Generator846454Impact Paving breaker806050Light Duty VehiclesNANANA Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewGeologic EnvironmentSHINE Medical | California Energy Commission, 2009Equipment TypeNoise Level in dBA (a)At 50 FeetAt 500 FeetAt 1500 FeetEarthmoving Loaders886858 Dozer886858 Tractor806050 Grader856555 Trucks866656 Shovels846454 | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewGeologic EnvironmentSHINE Medical | |||
Materials Handling Concrete pumps/mixers816151 Derrick and mobile cranes836353 Stationary Portable Generator846454Impact Paving breaker806050Light Duty VehiclesNANANA Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewGeologic EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-31Rev. 019.4.3GEOLOGIC ENVIRONMENTPotential impacts to geologic and soil resources during the construction, operation, and decommissioning of the proposed facility include large-scale hazards and local hazards. The large-scale hazards include earthquakes, volcanic activity, landslides, subsidence, and erosional processes. Local hazards are associated with site-specific properties of the soil and bedrock and include soil disturbances due to excavation, exposure of contaminated soil during excavation, blasting of bedrock (if required for construction), volume of material excavated or used during construction, impacts to rare or unique geologic resources, and impacts to rock/mineral/energy rights.19.4.3.1Impacts of Large-Scale HazardsAs noted in Subsection 19.3.3, the probability of large-scale impacts due to geologic factors is low. The seismologic regime (Subsection 19.3.3.5) of the region demonstrates that the site is located in one of the lowest earthquake hazard regions of the country. The lack of earthquakes in the region is associated with a lack of tectonic and volcanic activity, as discussed in Subsections 19.3.3.2 and19.3.3.6.2. The geologic environment features that are associated with landslides, subsidence, and erosional processes are discussed in Subsections 19.3.3.3 and 19.3.3.4. While landslides and subsidence can occur, the risk for subsidence or landslides within Rock County is not considered high. In addition, no sinkholes have been reported in the county in recent years. The primary soils present at the SHINE site are classified as slightly erodible and the secondary soils at the site are classified as moderately erodible. No soils present at or near the site are classified as highly erodible soils. Consequently, impacts relative to the geologic environment are SMALL.19.4.3.2Other Impacts on Soils and Geology The construction of the facility will include the excavation of the Radiologically Controlled Area (RCA) to an approximate depth of approximately 39ft. (11.9m) below a final grade of 826.0 ft. (251.8m). The resulting final elevation of the base of the excavation is 787 ft. (239.9 m). The maximum frost depth is 4ft. (1.2m) below ground surface, and all underground utilities will be designed accordingly, with a preliminary estimation of utility excavation depth of 5ft. (1.5m) below ground surface. No evidence of "recognized environmental conditions" as described in ASTM E 1527-05 were found to exist at the SHINE site, nor were any samples collected during the groundwater monitoring (as described in Subsection 19.3.4.3, Table 19.3.4-9) found to contain contamination indicating the presence of contaminated soil above the groundwater.An analysis of the geology of Rock County indicates that it is similar to the geology of much of southern Wisconsin and northern Illinois in that it comprises glacial sediments and limestone which are not unique or rare geological resources in the region (Olcott, Perry G., 1969). Historic mineral production in Rock County has included the mining of sand, gravel, and crushed and broken limestone, with no precious- or base-metal mineral resources mapped or discovered within Rock County (Olcott, Perry G., 1969). In addition, no extraction of energy resources occurs at the site. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewGeologic EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-32Rev. 0As noted in Subsection 19.3.4.1.2.2, bedrock at the SHINE site is at a depth greater than 220 ft. (67m) below ground surface. The deepest excavation planned is approximately 39 ft. (11.9m) below ground surface which eliminates the need for blasting to support excavations.Figure 19.4.1-2 provides an illustration of the SHINE facility construction grading plan. Excavation depth of the RCA is bounded at approximately 39ft. (11.9 m) below finished grade. For estimation of excavation quantities, a depth of 5 ft. (1.5m) below finished grade was used for the ancillary buildings. Direct impacts associated with excavation and topsoil removal for underground utilities and site grading has also been estimated. The total amount of material to be excavated at the SHINE site is 278,000 cubic yards (212,550 cubic meters). Additional assumptions made in preparing the estimate include:*Twenty-five percent margin for bounding considerations.*Frost depth is 4 ft. (1.2 m), and ancillary building foundations will be at a minimum depth of 5 ft. (1.5 m).*The bearing material at the final depth of excavation is suitable for supporting the design load, eliminating the need for over-excavation.*An allowance for a 12-inch (30.5-centimeter) thick mudmat was included at the bottom of excavations within the RCA, with the total depth of the excavation, including mudmat allowance, not to exceed approximately 39ft. (11.9m) below ground surface*Excavated slopes are stable on a slope of 1.5 horizontal to 1 vertical.*An 8-ft. (2.4m) wide bench is included in the excavation for slope stability concerns.*The excavation is 10 ft. (3.05 m) wider at the base of the excavation around the sides of the RCA to allow for the erection of forms and to provide a working area.*Below 1 ft. (0.3 m) of topsoil, the underlying material is essentially homogenous.Preliminary plans call for materials excavated during site grading and construction to be stockpiled on-site and used as backfill. Topsoil and other materials not suited for use as structural fill will be stockpiled on-site and placed as non-structural fill. A sediment and erosion control plan is required and mitigates the potential indirect impacts associated with the release of sediment or other runoff constituents to off-site areas.Based on the above assumptions, the estimated quantity of geologic material required for the completion of this project, exclusive of concrete acquired from commercial concrete mixing plants for construction of the buildings, is:*Backfill: 74,000 cubic yards (56,580 cubic meters) around structures in main excavation (reuse of suitable material excavated on-site);*Topsoil: 10,000 cubic yards (7645 cubic meters), acquired from on-site sources.*Granular road base: 7600 cubic yards (5810 cubic meters).*Asphaltic pavement: 2200 cubic yards (1682 cubic meters). | |||
*Gravel surfacing: 8500 cubic yards (6499 cubic meters).*Underground utilities: 3500 cubic yards (2676 cubic meters) for backfill (reuse of suitable material excavated on-site). | *Gravel surfacing: 8500 cubic yards (6499 cubic meters).*Underground utilities: 3500 cubic yards (2676 cubic meters) for backfill (reuse of suitable material excavated on-site). | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewGeologic EnvironmentSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewGeologic EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-33Rev. 0*Site grading: 10,000 cubic yards (7645 cubic meters), to be acquired from material excavated on-site.In order to reduce impacts, on-site materials will be utilized as appropriate and no off-site borrow areas are anticipated. Consequently, direct impacts to the geologic environment are SMALL and no indirect (off-site) impacts are identified.No impacts have been identified due to large scale or local hazards which require mitigation measures beyond compliance with local building codes. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-34Rev. 019.4.4WATER RESOURCES19.4.4.1Hydrology19.4.4.1.1Surface Water19.4.4.1.1.1Facility Construction No surface water features such as creeks, streams or ponds are present on or in the immediate area surrounding the SHINE site. As a result, there are no direct effects to surface water | ||
resources. Federal, state and local regulations and permit procedures provide minimum requirements for stormwater management during construction activities to prohibit adverse impacts on surface water, or stormwater. A sediment and erosion control plan is required and mitigates the potential indirect impacts associated with the release of sediment or other runoff constituents to off-site areas. An assessment of stormwater runoff patterns in the vicinity of the SHINE site indicates that the drainage area upstream of the site is approximately 100 ac. (40.4 ha), based on City of Janesville 2-ft. (0.6-m) contour interval mapping. Due to the area being very flat (0 to 1 percent slopes), having high-permeability subsoils, and being continuously tilled for agricultural use, no dendritic flow patterns develop. In addition, because of the flat terrain, it is difficult to accurately identify the exact drainage area, and tilled rows in the fields could direct flow to other basins. Runoff from this area is diverted around the site using appropriate measures as required by state and local authorities. There are no impoundments or significant detention/retention areas on the site currently that provide detention/reduction of storm runoff. Construction-phase dewatering is not required, because the measured groundwater level is well below the deepest excavation. Thus, there is no effect on surface water quantity or flow characteristics due to drawdown of groundwater or discharge of construction phase dewatering effluent. Consequently, indirect impacts of construction of the SHINE facility on surface water are SMALL. 19.4.4.1.1.2Facility OperationsAs is described in Section 19.2, all water used at the SHINE site is obtained from the City of Janesville municipal water supply system and all sanitary waste water is discharged directly to the City of Janesville sanitary sewer system. Additionally, the facility is designed to have zero liquid discharge from the radiologically controlled area (RCA). Consequently, there is no use or release of water from the facility to the adjacent environment that would affect surface water hydrologic systems. Direct impacts to surface water from plant operations are, therefore, SMALL. The SHINE facility site layout is illustrated in Figure 19.2.1-1. The site plan includes a low degree of impervious areas that are associated with rooftops, paved drives, and parking lots, etc. Additionally, the impervious surfaces are not "directly connected," and stormwater instead flows across or through pervious areas as it drains across the site. These pervious areas, including vegetated swales, provide control of stormwater quantity (volume and peak rate) as well as quality. The state requirements (Wisconsin Administrative Natural Resources Code, Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-35Rev. 0ChaptersNR 151 and NR 216); the City of Janesville requirements (Ordinances Chapter 15, Sections 15.05 [construction erosion and sediment control]; and 15.06 [post-construction stormwater management]) for maintenance of on-site infiltration and phosphorous removal by use of best management practices (BMPs) will be met or exceeded.SHINE has coordinated with the City of Janesville stormwater staff regarding requirements for stormwater management. As a result of that coordination, the stormwater plan for the site incorporates the use of vegetated drainage swales for control of both stormwater quantity and quality. No retention or detention "pond" is to be constructed at the site to avoid larger water surface areas (even during temporary periods of storm runoff), thereby avoiding the potential for glare from the surface that might affect aircraft at the adjacent Southwestern Wisconsin Regional Airport. The absence of permanent or occasional water, as well as food sources, also minimizes frequenting of the site by waterfowl, such as Canada geese, which could otherwise be a concern for both the airport (bird aircraft hazard) and for stormwater quality due to the introduction of fecal material, a common concern for urban stormwater management ponds in the region.Most areas of the site that are not impervious are either landscaped with native vegetation, cool-season grasses, or continue agricultural row-crop production. Use of native vegetation rather than turf grass eliminates or greatly reduces irrigation needs and maintains a low surface runoff and natural (i.e., higher than turf grass) evapotranspiration condition. All of these practices result in minimal impact to surface water downstream of the site, or even a reduction in surface runoff, compared to the current row-crop agricultural use which involves annual tillage practices. During operation, dewatering is not required because the measured groundwater level is well below the deepest basement. Thus, there is no effect on surface water quantity or flow characteristics due to drawdown of groundwater or discharge of operation phase dewatering effluent. Indirect impacts of site runoff on surface waters are, therefore, SMALL. | |||
19.4.4.1.1.3Facility DecommissioningAs described above, no surface water features are present on or in the immediate area surrounding the SHINE site. As a result, there are no direct effects from decommissioning to surface water resources. Federal, state and local regulations and permit procedures provide minimum requirements for stormwater management during decommissioning activities to prohibit adverse impacts on surface water, or stormwater. A stormwater pollution prevention plan, including a sediment and erosion control plan, is required and mitigates the potential indirect impacts associated with the release of sediment or other runoff constituents to off-site areas. There are no impoundments or significant detention/retention areas on the site currently, or as a component of the site plan, that provide retention of storm runoff. During decommissioning, dewatering is not required because the measured groundwater level is well below the deepest basement. Thus, there is no effect on surface water quantity or flow characteristics due to drawdown of groundwater or discharge of decommissioning phase dewatering effluent. Consequently, indirect impacts of decommissioning of the SHINE facility on surface water are SMALL. | 19.4.4.1.1.3Facility DecommissioningAs described above, no surface water features are present on or in the immediate area surrounding the SHINE site. As a result, there are no direct effects from decommissioning to surface water resources. Federal, state and local regulations and permit procedures provide minimum requirements for stormwater management during decommissioning activities to prohibit adverse impacts on surface water, or stormwater. A stormwater pollution prevention plan, including a sediment and erosion control plan, is required and mitigates the potential indirect impacts associated with the release of sediment or other runoff constituents to off-site areas. There are no impoundments or significant detention/retention areas on the site currently, or as a component of the site plan, that provide retention of storm runoff. During decommissioning, dewatering is not required because the measured groundwater level is well below the deepest basement. Thus, there is no effect on surface water quantity or flow characteristics due to drawdown of groundwater or discharge of decommissioning phase dewatering effluent. Consequently, indirect impacts of decommissioning of the SHINE facility on surface water are SMALL. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-36Rev. 019.4.4.1.2Groundwater19.4.4.1.2.1Construction, Operations and DecommissioningThe construction of the facility includes the excavation of the RCA to an approximate depth no greater than approximately 39 ft. (11.9m) below final grade of 827.0 ft. (252.1m) (Section 19.4.3.2). The resulting final elevation of the base of the excavation is 788 ft. (240m), more than 20 ft. (6m) higher than the measured high groundwater elevation of 765.92 ft. (233.45m). All elevations are referenced to North American Vertical Datum 88 (NAVD 88). Consequently, there is no direct impact to groundwater flow. All water used by the SHINE facility is obtained from the City of Janesville municipal water supply system and all sanitary wastes are discharged directly to the City of Janesville sanitary sewer system. No groundwater withdrawals and no groundwater returns are required during the construction, operation, or decommissioning of the facility, with no direct or indirect impacts to groundwater. Consequently, direct and indirect impacts to groundwater are SMALL. | ||
19.4.4.2Water Use19.4.4.2.1Surface WaterAll water used at the SHINE site during construction, operation, and decommissioning is obtained from the City of Janesville municipal water supply system and all waste water discharges go directly to the City of Janesville sanitary sewer system. Additionally, the facility is designed such that there is no liquid discharge from the RCA. Consequently, there is no use or release of water from the facility to the adjacent environment that would affect surface water hydrologic systems. Direct impacts to surface water from plant operations are, therefore, SMALL.19.4.4.2.2GroundwaterConstruction, operation, and decommissioning activities do not involve the use of groundwater. Any water utilized on-site is obtained from the City of Janesville Public Water Utility. Consequently, direct impacts of water use on groundwater are SMALL. The average estimated water usage by the SHINE facility during operations is 6070 gallons (22,977 liters) per day and a consumptive water use of 1560 gallons (5905 liters) per week. As noted in Subsection 19.3.4.2.2, the Janesville Water Utility provides water supply for both public drinking water and for fire protection, utilizing eight wells. The water supply system for the City of Janesville includes two water storage reservoirs and one water tower. According to the City of Janesville, the total pumping capacity of its eight groundwater wells is 29 million gallons per day (Mgd) (109.8million liters per day [Mld]). Average water usage is about 11Mgd (41.6Mld) with a maximum recorded daily demand of 25.8Mgd (97.7 Mld). Accordingly, the excess capacity of the Janesville water supply system is approximately 3.2Mgd (12.1 Mld). Because there is excess capacity within the Janesville water supply system, potential indirect effects from the demand from the SHINE facility are also SMALL. | 19.4.4.2Water Use19.4.4.2.1Surface WaterAll water used at the SHINE site during construction, operation, and decommissioning is obtained from the City of Janesville municipal water supply system and all waste water discharges go directly to the City of Janesville sanitary sewer system. Additionally, the facility is designed such that there is no liquid discharge from the RCA. Consequently, there is no use or release of water from the facility to the adjacent environment that would affect surface water hydrologic systems. Direct impacts to surface water from plant operations are, therefore, SMALL.19.4.4.2.2GroundwaterConstruction, operation, and decommissioning activities do not involve the use of groundwater. Any water utilized on-site is obtained from the City of Janesville Public Water Utility. Consequently, direct impacts of water use on groundwater are SMALL. The average estimated water usage by the SHINE facility during operations is 6070 gallons (22,977 liters) per day and a consumptive water use of 1560 gallons (5905 liters) per week. As noted in Subsection 19.3.4.2.2, the Janesville Water Utility provides water supply for both public drinking water and for fire protection, utilizing eight wells. The water supply system for the City of Janesville includes two water storage reservoirs and one water tower. According to the City of Janesville, the total pumping capacity of its eight groundwater wells is 29 million gallons per day (Mgd) (109.8million liters per day [Mld]). Average water usage is about 11Mgd (41.6Mld) with a maximum recorded daily demand of 25.8Mgd (97.7 Mld). Accordingly, the excess capacity of the Janesville water supply system is approximately 3.2Mgd (12.1 Mld). Because there is excess capacity within the Janesville water supply system, potential indirect effects from the demand from the SHINE facility are also SMALL. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-37Rev. 019.4.4.3Water QualityPotential surface water and groundwater quality impacts of site construction and operation are discussed in this section.19.4.4.3.1Surface Water19.4.4.3.1.1Facility Construction and DecommissioningNo surface water features are present on or in the immediate area surrounding the SHINE site. As a result, there are no direct effects to water quality. Potential indirect surface water quality impacts from facility construction and decommissioning are similar to those of construction of any typical industrial or commercial facility in the area. Erosion and sediment control for ground disturbing activities will meet or exceed the regulatory requirements, including Clean Water Act National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) regulations and Wisconsin regulations (NR 151.11). | ||
In addition to soil erosion and sedimentation, potential release of other potential construction activity pollutants (petroleum products, adhesives, paint, etc.), is minimized by SHINE's waste management and minimization program (Subsection 19.4.8.1.2.3 and 19.2.5.6). 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.Construction- and decommissioning-phase dewatering is not required because the measured groundwater level is well below the deepest excavation. Thus, there is no effect on surface water quality due to drawdown of groundwater or discharge of construction phase and decommissioning phase dewatering effluent. Therefore, indirect impacts to water quality from construction and decommissioning are SMALL.19.4.4.3.1.2Facility Operation As described in Subsection 19.4.1.1, meeting the requirements of state and local stormwater management requirements minimizes potential impacts associated with site development. One of the most significant indicators of urban stormwater quality is imperviousness. The site has a low percentage of imperviousness (Figure 19.2.1-1) and the impervious areas discharge to vegetated pervious areas where treatment of runoff occurs, including infiltration, filtering, and biological uptake of pollutants. According to state permitting requirement at NR151.12, SHINE must complete a detailed simulation of hydrology and pollutant discharges with and without use of stormwater BMPs to show 80 percent removal of total suspended solids by the BMPs to be implemented. As appropriate and as required by permit, the SHINE site design will maintain a minimum site infiltration amount, defined as either: (1)at least 60percent of the pre-development infiltration based on average annual rainfall, or (2)at least 10percent of the 2-year, 24-hour duration storm runoff. | In addition to soil erosion and sedimentation, potential release of other potential construction activity pollutants (petroleum products, adhesives | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | , paint, etc.), is minimized by SHINE's waste management and minimization program (Subsection 19.4.8.1.2.3 and 19.2.5.6). 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.Construction- and decommissioning-phase dewatering is not required because the measured groundwater level is well below the deepest excavation. Thus, there is no effect on surface water quality due to drawdown of groundwater or discharge of construction phase and decommissioning phase dewatering effluent. Therefore, indirect impacts to water quality from construction and decommissioning are SMALL.19.4.4.3.1.2Facility Operation As described in Subsection 19.4.1.1, meeting the requirements of state and local stormwater management requirements minimizes potential impacts associated with site development. One of the most significant indicators of urban stormwater quality is imperviousness. The site has a low percentage of imperviousness (Figure 19.2.1-1) and the impervious areas discharge to vegetated pervious areas where treatment of runoff occurs, including infiltration, filtering, and biological uptake of pollutants. According to state permitting requirement at NR151.12, SHINE must complete a detailed simulation of hydrology and pollutant discharges with and without use of stormwater BMPs to show 80 percent removal of total suspended solids by the BMPs to be implemented. As appropriate and as required by permit, the SHINE site design will maintain a minimum site infiltration amount, defined as either: (1)at least 60percent of the pre-development infiltration based on average annual rainfall, or (2)at least 10percent of the 2-year, 24-hour duration storm runoff. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-38Rev. 0Approximately 53.75 ac. (21.75 ha) of the total site may remain in row-crop agricultural use where applications of chemicals in accordance with best agricultural practices would continue. Alternatively, all or a portion of the existing agricultural use area of the site may be converted to native vegetation, reducing chemical applications and other associated existing agricultural practices that have a higher potential for affecting surface water quality.Additionally, extensive use of native landscaping or cool-season grasses at the site minimizes the need for applications of herbicides, pesticides, and fertilizer at the site. Small areas of turf grass are maintained, and applications of any of these chemicals or fertilizers are performed in a manner consistent with product label instructions to minimize potential impacts. The oil stored on-site, which assumes a bounding value of an approximately 30,000-gallon (113,562 L) underground storage tank containing fuel oil for the standby generator, requires a Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan in accordance with 40 CFR Part 112. The SPCC Plan details requirements for oil spill prevention, preparedness, and response to prevent oil discharges to navigable waters and adjoining shorelines. The implementation of the SPCC Plan prevents releases from the aboveground oil storage from impacting surface waters.During operation, dewatering is not required because the measured groundwater level is well below the deepest basement. Thus, there is no effect on surface water quality due to drawdown of groundwater or discharge of operation phase dewatering effluent. Therefore, impacts to water quality from operation of the SHINE facility are SMALL.19.4.4.3.2Groundwater 19.4.4.3.2.1Construction, Operation, and DecommissioningPossible indirect impacts on groundwater quality can occur during construction, operation or decommissioning if spills from vehicles, equipment, or storage areas penetrate hard surfaces (asphalt or concrete) or are accidentally released to pervious surfaces and migrate to groundwater prior to detection and remediation of the release. All equipment and material storage areas are in compliance with appropriate regulations requiring secondary containment of stored liquids and materials. Oil storage associated with the operation of the facility includes an approximately 30,000-gallon (113,562 L) underground storage tank containing fuel oil for the standby diesel generator. Fuel storage associated with the construction/decommissioning is within secondary containment and the implementation of the SPCC Plan prevents releases from migrating through the subsurface and impacting groundwater. Measured groundwater levels are below the deepest excavation during construction and decommissioning, and below the base of the lowest basement, which prevents any direct impacts to groundwater. Because of the depth of groundwater below the SHINE site, and the use of appropriate management and control measures as stated above, direct and indirect impacts to groundwater quality are SMALL. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-39Rev. 019.4.4.4MonitoringThe facility is eligible for a WPDES stormwater discharge permit exclusion under Wisconsin Administrative Code NR 216.21(3). The stormwater discharge permit exclusion does not include any stormwater monitoring requirements. Because of the absence of direct impacts to surface water, the low potential for indirect impacts, and the use of management measures and controls to prevent releases to surface water, no surface water monitoring activities are planned for the site.Because of the absence of direct impacts to groundwater, the low potential for indirect impacts, and the use of management measures and controls to prevent releases to groundwater, no non-radiological groundwater monitoring activities are planned for the site. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-40Rev. 019.4.5ECOLOGICAL RESOURCESThis subsection addresses the impacts of construction and operation on the ecological resources on and within the vicinity of the SHINE site. The impacts discussed below are based on the characterization and description of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems within the SHINE site and near site region from Subsection 19.3.5. The region surrounding the SHINE site is defined in Subsection19.3.1.1.2 as the area within a 5 mi (8-km) radius of the site centerpoint and is located entirely within Rock County, Wisconsin. The ecological resources described in Subsection19.3.5 are based on recorded information provided by resource agencies (WDNR and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [USFWS]) and supplemental quarterly field surveys conducted in 2011 and 2012. Although the region is defined as the area within a 5 mi (8-km) radius of the site centerpoint, protected species information was provided by the USFWS and WDNR within a 6 mi (9.7 km) radius of the site.Impacts include effects from activities associated with construction and operation, including excavation, grading, placement of fill material, temporary staging and construction laydown, construction of permanent features, and potential operational disturbances. This evaluation indicates the magnitude of potential impacts and whether mitigation measures are required.As described in Subsection 19.3.5, the SHINE site consists of a 91.27-ac. (36.94ha) parcel that has been farmed for the past several decades and is routinely disturbed by the disking, plowing, herbicide application and harvesting activities associated with row crop production. Ecological resources at the SHINE site, therefore, are limited by the active agricultural practices on the site and by a complete lack of surface water resources. Because baseline conditions consist solely of agricultural land lacking native terrestrial or aquatic habitat, post construction ecological monitoring and maintenance plans are not deemed necessary. 19.4.5.1Impacts from Construction This subsection describes the potential construction-related ecological impacts to the SHINE site and near off-site areas based on the SHINE facility site layout (see Figure 19.2.1-1). Activities such as earthmoving, excavation, erection, batch plant operation, and construction-related traffic generate potential disturbances to ecological resources during the construction phase of the SHINE project. Direct and indirect impacts associated with construction-related disturbance to the site and near-site areas is limited to the agricultural lands on-site. Figure 19.2.1-1 depicts the proposed buildings for site construction. Given the agricultural nature of the site, land clearing is not necessary. Furthermore, the project does not involve clearing along stream banks, dredging, disposal of dredged material, or waste disposal areas. On the 91.27-ac. (36.94 ha) SHINE site, direct impacts from construction permanently converts 25.67ac. (10.39ha) of agricultural lands to industrial facilities. Although the entire site is in agricultural production, 0.18 ac. (0.07 ha) of permanent impacts are technically mapped as Developed, Open Space (Table 19.4.5-1). Permanent conversion to industrial facilities include the construction of facility buildings, employee parking lot, facility access road/driveway, stormwater detention area, access road drainage ditches, and US 51 drainage ditches. Construction impacts also include the temporary impact of 14.54 ac. (5.88 ha) of agricultural Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-41Rev. 0lands used for the construction parking area, construction material staging or lay down area, and temporary disturbance from water and sewer line installation. Temporary impact areas are either returned to agriculture or restored with either cool season grasses or native prairie. Construction impacts are summarized in Table 19.4.5-1. 19.4.5.1.1Places and Entities of Special InterestThere are no places or entities of special interest on-site, including wetlands. Habitats of special interest off-site include wetlands and endangered resources identified by the WDNR near the SHINE site. As described in Subsection 19.3.5.6, mapped wetland land cover within a 5-mi. (8-km) radius includes just 722 ac. (292 ha) of woody wetlands and 787 ac. (318ha) of emergent herbaceous wetlands (see Table19.3.1-1). None of these wetland resources are impacted by construction at the SHINE site. As part of a WDNR endangered resources review letter, six habitats of special interest were identified near (within 6mi. [9.6km]) the SHINE site (WDNR, 2012b) including dry prairie, dry-mesic prairie, mesic prairie, Southern dry-mesic forest, Southern mesic forest, and wet prairie (see Subsection 19.3.5.4.1). These habitats are not located on the SHINE site and none of these habitats near the site are either directly or indirectly impacted by construction. Happy Hollow County Park (southwest of the site) was also identified by WDNR near the SHINE site but is not impacted by construction. As discussed in Subsection 19.3.5.4.3, Rock County is located along a principal route of the Mississippi Flyway and, therefore, the natural habitats along the Rock River are particularly useful to migrating birds for resting, feeding and foraging. As stated in Subsection19.3.5.5, the Rock River is 1.9 mi. (3.1 km) southwest of the SHINE site. Although the site may be used occasionally for resting or foraging by migratory birds, habitat on-site and in adjacent lands are dominated by agricultural and developed uses that are not considered high value or important ecological systems. Although the project permanently converts 25.67 ac. (10.39 ha) of agricultural lands to industrial facilities, this direct impact is not significant when compared to the vast amount of agricultural land remaining in the region (see Table 19.4.5-1).In summary, impacts to places and entities of special interest from construction are SMALL because such ecological resources are not present on-site and because the identified off-site resources are distant from the site and are not impacted by construction on the SHINE site. | |||
Specific mitigation measures and management controls are not needed.19.4.5.1.2Aquatic Communities and Wetlands There are no streams, ponds, wetlands, or other aquatic communities present on the SHINE site. Because the site lacks wetlands and aquatic resources, and because dewatering of groundwater in excavations is not anticipated, any potential construction-related impacts to wetlands and aquatic resources are limited to indirect off-site impacts associated with runoff and siltation. As stated in Subsection 19.3.5.5, the nearest water feature is a small intermittent stream 1.6 mi. (2.6 km) south of the site and the Rock River is 1.9 mi. (3.1 km) southwest of the site. However, this intermittent stream receives drainage from lands east of the SHINE site and does not receive runoff from the site. Runoff from the site flows southwest toward the Rock River. However, because of the high infiltration rate of the soils on the SHINE site, no organized stream channel and associated aquatic habitats are present. | Specific mitigation measures and management controls are not needed.19.4.5.1.2Aquatic Communities and Wetlands There are no streams, ponds, wetlands, or other aquatic communities present on the SHINE site. Because the site lacks wetlands and aquatic resources, and because dewatering of groundwater in excavations is not anticipated, any potential construction-related impacts to wetlands and aquatic resources are limited to indirect off-site impacts associated with runoff and siltation. As stated in Subsection 19.3.5.5, the nearest water feature is a small intermittent stream 1.6 mi. (2.6 km) south of the site and the Rock River is 1.9 mi. (3.1 km) southwest of the site. However, this intermittent stream receives drainage from lands east of the SHINE site and does not receive runoff from the site. Runoff from the site flows southwest toward the Rock River. However, because of the high infiltration rate of the soils on the SHINE site, no organized stream channel and associated aquatic habitats are present. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-42Rev. 0BMPs are used in accordance with the SWPPP, as required by the WDNR, to prevent sediment runoff and subsequent siltation in receiving streams during construction. Because of the absence of on-site aquatic communities and wetlands, the distance to off-site streams, the high infiltration rate of the soils near the SHINE site, and the implementation of BMPs on-site, direct and indirect impacts to aquatic communities and wetlands from construction are SMALL. Specific mitigation measures and management controls are not needed.19.4.5.1.3Terrestrial CommunitiesAs summarized in Table 19.4.5-1, direct construction impacts permanently convert 25.67 ac. (10.39 ha) of agricultural lands to industrial facilities including the construction of facility buildings, employee parking lot, facility access road/driveway, vegetated stormwater drainage swales, access road drainage ditches and US 51drainage ditches. Construction impacts also include the direct temporary impact of 14.54ac. (5.88ha) of agricultural lands used for the construction parking area, construction material staging or lay down area, and temporary disturbance from water and sewer line installation. Temporary impact areas are either returned to agriculture or restored with either cool season grasses or native prairie. The terrestrial communities on the SHINE site and near site areas are described in Subsection19.3.5.7. Wildlife potentially affected by construction includes bird, mammal and/or herpetofauna species that occasionally use the site as a travel corridor or for foraging or resting. Given the routine agricultural disturbance and lack of water resources on-site, wildlife occurrence on the SHINE site is relatively infrequent. Mammals were not commonly observed on-site. Their use of the site is sporadic given the lack of cover, shelter, and water supply. Furthermore, there were no amphibians or reptiles observed on the SHINE site. With the dominance of agriculture on the SHINE site and lack of other wildlife habitat, wildlife use on the SHINE site is minimal. The minor loss of agricultural lands to industrial facilities is not significant when compared to the 25,236 ac. (10,213 ha) of agricultural land remaining within a 5-mi. (8-km) radius of the site (seeTable 19.4.5-1). Furthermore, lands on-site not utilized for development of industrial facilities are returned to agriculture or restored using cool season grasses or native prairie species. As such, impacts to wildlife and terrestrial communities from construction are SMALL. Specific mitigation measures and management controls are not needed.White-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus), eastern cottontail (Sylvilagus floridanus), and Canada goose are identified in Subsection 19.3.5 as recreationally valuable game species observed on-site. Their use of the site, however, is infrequent given the lack of cover, shelter, and water supply. As such, impacts to recreationally important species from construction are SMALL and specific mitigation measures and management controls are not necessary. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | 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. The number of bird collisions with construction equipment, such as cranes, or new structures has not been quantitatively assessed. However, based on the findings of NUREG-1437 which demonstrated that the effects of avian collisions with existing structures at nuclear power plants is SMALL, the impacts of such collisions during the construction phase are considered SMALL and specific mitigation measures and management controls are not needed. | ||
Furthermore, no designated critical habitat was identified on-site or within 6 mi. (9.6 km) of the SHINE site. | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-43Rev. 0Wildlife 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, Ron, 2009). Amphibian and bat species, however, are generally lacking from the SHINE site due to the lack of appropriate habitat. In addition, artificial lighting could create or exacerbate an avian-collision hazard if tall cranes are illuminated for work during nighttime construction. According to Ogden, a large proportion of migrating birds affected by human-built structures are songbirds, apparently because of their propensity to migrate at night, their low flight altitudes, and their tendency to be trapped and disoriented by artificial light, making them vulnerable to collision with obstructions (Ogden, L.J.E., 1996). For any nighttime construction at the SHINE site, BMPs such as light source shielding and appropriate directional lighting are used to mitigate the hazards to wildlife associated with artificial nighttime illumination. Based on the general lack of appropriate habitat at the SHINE site for amphibians, bats, and most bird species, and the BMPs to mitigate effects to wildlife, the direct and indirect impacts of artificial illumination at nighttime during the construction phase are SMALL thus specific mitigation measures and management controls are not needed.19.4.5.1.4Invasive SpeciesAlthough several "restricted" or "prohibited" weedy invasive species were observed in various land cover types off-site, as discussed in Subsection 19.3.5.8, no invasive species listed by the WDNR were observed on the SHINE site. Disturbanc e associated with construction activities such as earthmoving and excavation, however, can create conditions for opportunistic invasive species to become established. Temporary impact areas and other areas not permanently converted to industrial uses are either returned to agriculture or restored with either cool season grasses or native prairie species. Invasive species are controlled in areas restored to agriculture as has been done in agricultural fields on-site for the past several decades. If restored to cool-season lawn or native prairie, invasive species are controlled through mowing or similar maintenance activities. Thus, the invasive species impacts from construction are considered SMALL and monitoring or maintenance plans are not anticipated at this time. 19.4.5.1.5Protected SpeciesConsultation letters from the WDNR and USFWS were acquired to provide information regarding ecological resources near (within 6 mi. [9.6 km]) the SHINE site (WDNR, 2012b; USFWS, 2012). This consultation process was used to obtain agency input regarding threatened and endangered species, sensitive habitats, and other ecological characteristics for the site and near-site areas. A list of threatened/endangered species or species of special concern identified within 6 mi. (9.6km) of the SHINE site is provided in Table 19.3.5-7. Terrestrial and aquatic listed species include five fish species, five mussel species, one turtle species, and 27 plant species as identified in Subsection 19.3.5.11. WDNR identified the Blanding's turtle (Emydoidea blandingii) as state threatened and potentially occurring near the site. Blanding's turtles were not observed during field reconnaissance. Given the absence of wetlands and open water habitat on the site or its immediate near-site environs, Blanding's turtles are not expected to occur on-site. Agency consultation did not identify any state or federally listed species on the SHINE site. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Furthermore, no designated critical habitat was identified on-site or within 6 mi. (9.6 km) of the | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | SHINE site. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-44Rev. 0The listed fish, mussel and turtle species inhabit aquatic areas such as rivers, streams, ponds, and/or wetlands which are absent from the site. BMPs are used in accordance with the SWPPP, as required by the WDNR, to prevent sediment runoff and subsequent siltation in receiving streams during construction. As stated in Subsection 19.3.5.5, potential receiving streams such as the Rock River are distant from the SHINE site. The use of proper BMPs combined with the distance to the nearest receiving waters and the high infiltration rate of the soils near the SHINE site minimizes impacts to protected species during construction. As such, construction-related impacts to the nearest receiving waters would be negligible and essentially would eliminate the potential for impacts to protected aquatic species.The listed plant species inhabit forests or woodlands, riparian areas, and prairies. These habitat types are absent from the agricultural SHINE site and none of the listed plant species were observed during field reconnaissance surveys on-site. In addition, protected plants were not observed in riparian areas of nearby streams. Thus, construction would not impact protected woodland or prairie plants on or near the site. As discussed in Subsection 19.3.5.5, receiving streams and their associated riparian zones are distant from the SHINE site. Because of the absence of on-site aquatic communities and wetlands, the distance to off-site streams, the high infiltration rate of the soils near the SHINE site, and the implementation of BMPs on-site, direct and indirect impacts to any protected plant species associated with riparian areas from construction are SMALL. As such, construction-related impacts to protected species on the SHINE site or in near off-site areas are SMALL. Specific mitigation measures and management controls are not needed.19.4.5.2Impacts from OperationsThis subsection provides a description of the potential impacts of operation of the SHINE facility on terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. 19.4.5.2.1Places and Entities of Special Interest Places and entities of special interest, as described in Subsection 19.3.5.4, include a description of communities and habitats of special interest, other sensitive or susceptible areas, and important ecological systems. Communities and habitats of special interest near the SHINE site (within 6 mi. [9.6km]) include wetlands, six endangered resources (habitats) identified by the WDNR, and state designated natural areas of Rock County. Other sensitive or susceptible areas near the SHINE site include Happy Hollow County Park (southwest of the site). Important ecological systems near the SHINE site include the Mississippi Flyway. Due to the complete conversion of the lands of the SHINE site and its immediate environs to cultivated fields or other developed uses, none of the described places and entities of special interest are present either on-site or in adjacent off-site areas. Habitats of the SHINE site and adjacent lands are dominated by agricultural and developed uses and are not considered to be high value or important ecological systems. Although air emissions from natural gas heating facilities are expected, such emissions are not expected to impact agricultural lands on-site or communities and habitats of special interest off site. Additionally, the SHINE facility does not utilize cooling towers. Consequently, there are no operational impacts associated with drift (i.e., gaseous or particulate emissions to the air from cooling towers). Herbicide application for lawn maintenance is minimal and is only used on the SHINE site, thus operational impacts to off-site areas identified as places and entities of special Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-45Rev. 0interest are minimized. The operation of the SHINE facility results in a localized minor increase in noise but noise levels are similar to that of the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport that is immediately adjacent to the SHINE site. Thus, operation impacts to the off-site areas identified as places and entities of special interest are SMALL. Mitigation measures and management controls are not needed.19.4.5.2.2Aquatic Communities and Wetlands Aquatic resources and wetlands near the SHINE site are described in Subsections 19.3.5.5 and 19.3.5.6, respectively. Aquatic resources near the SHINE site include the Rock River and an unnamed stream which is a tributary of the Rock River. In accordance with Subsection 19.3.5.5, the Rock River is 1.9 mi. (3.1 km) from the SHINE site. There are no aquatic resources or water bodies present on the SHINE site and there are no jurisdictional wetlands identified on the | ||
SHINE site.The SHINE facility does not withdraw water from any surface water body or from groundwater. Rather, water is provided by the Janesville Public Water Supply. Thus, there are no operational impacts associated with impingement or entrainment of aquatic biota. Furthermore, the SHINE facility does not discharge directly into the Rock River or any other nearby water body thus avoiding any pollutant or thermal affects to aquatic resources. In addition, a vegetated on-site detention swale is used to control stormwater runoff which, when combined with the distance to the nearest off-site water bodies minimizes runoff and siltation to off-site receiving streams. Thus, operational impacts on aquatic communities or wetlands are SMALL. Specific mitigation measures and management controls are not needed.19.4.5.2.3Terrestrial Communities Terrestrial plant communities are characterized in Subsection 19.3.5.7.1 for the SHINE site and areas in proximity of the SHINE site. The terrestrial communities of the site and areas in proximity to the site are mainly agricultural areas cultivated for crops, hay, and pasture. No federal or state-listed threatened, endangered or special concern plant species have been observed on or in the proximity of the SHINE site. Herbicide application is occasionally used around buildings and driveways as part of lawn maintenance activities to c ontrol weedy species. Thus, operational impacts to plant communities are SMALL.Wildlife communities for the SHINE site and near site areas are described in Subsection19.3.5.7.2. With the dominance of agriculture on the SHINE site and lack of other wildlife habitat, wildlife use is on the SHINE site is minimal. Additionally, there are no known occurrences of threatened or endangered species on the SHINE site. Thus, operational impacts to wildlife are SMALL.The SHINE facility and associated buildings do not result in significant bird mortality from bird collisions, though infrequent bird collisions with buildings resulting in mortality can occur. As is discussed in Subsection 19.4.1 most buildings on the SHINE site have a relatively low profile. Consequently, effects on bird populations from collisions with build ings are minimized. Therefore, the operational impacts to bird species and populations from collisions are SMALL. Specific mitigation measures and management controls are not needed. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-46Rev. 0The operation of the SHINE facility results in a localized minor increase in noise (Subsection19.4.2). But noise levels are localized to the SHINE site and not elevated above background noise emissions from US 51 immediately adjacent to the SHINE site. Thus, operation impacts to wildlife from noise are SMALL. Specific measures and controls are not needed.19.4.5.2.4Invasive Species There were nine "restricted" or "prohibited" weedy invasive species observed off-site in various land cover types including developed lands, agricultural lands, and riparian corridors. Information on these species can be found in Subsection 19.3.5.8. No invasive species listed by the WDNR (neither restricted nor prohibited) were observed on the SHINE site. Additionally, there are no existing plans to implement invasive species management/control activities at the facility. Thus, operational impacts associated with invasive species are SMALL. Specific measures and controls are not needed.19.4.5.2.5Protected SpeciesA list of threatened/endangered species or species of special concern identified near the SHINE site is provided in Table 19.3.5-7. Terrestrial and aquatic listed species include five fish species, five mussel species, one turtle species, and 27 plant species. WDNR identified the Blanding's turtle (Emydoidea blandingii) as state threatened and potentially occurring near the site. Blanding's turtles were not observed during field reconnaissance. Given the absence of wetlands and open water habitat on the site or its immediate near-site environs, Blanding's turtles are not expected to occur on-site. Agency consultation did not identify any state or federally listed mammal, bird, or insect species within 6 mi. (9.6km) of the SHINE site. Furthermore, no designated critical habitat was identified on-site or within 6 mi. (9.6 km) of the SHINE site.The listed fish, mussel and turtle species inhabit aquatic areas such as rivers, streams, ponds, and/or wetlands. Because these habitats are absent from the site, these species are not expected to occur on the SHINE site. Furthermore, the lack of intake and discharge structures on the Rock River or any other nearby water body avoids operational impacts to the aquatic habitats of protected species. The listed plant species inhabit the three general habitat types of forests/woodlands, riparian areas, and prairies. There is no forested, riparian, or prairie habitat on the SHINE site nor were any of the listed plant species observed during any of the vegetation surveys within the site or near the site. Furthermore, the entire SHINE site is composed of agricultural land and does not include the preferred habitat of the listed species. In accordance with Subsection 19.3.5.5, the nearest receiving stream and associated riparian areas are more than a mile from the SHINE site. Although protected plant species were not observed in nearby riparian areas during field reconnaissance, these are areas where protected plant species could become established. The use of appropriate stormwater controls comlow enrichedbined with the distance to the nearest receiving stream minimizes impacts to any protected plant species that could potentially be associated with near site riparian areas. As such, operational impacts to protected species on the SHINE site or in near off-site areas are SMALL. Specific mitigation measures and management controls are not needed. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-47Rev. 019.4.5.3Impacts from DecommissioningConstruction of the SHINE facility is expected to begin in 2015. Following the cessation of operations the facility will be decommissioned. Decommissioning activities, however, are similar to construction activities, and involve heavy equipment to dismantle buildings and remove roadway and parking facilities. As such, impacts from decommissioning are anticipated to be similar to the impacts associated with construction and SMALL. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-48Rev. 0Table 19.4.5-1 Summary of Impacts to 2006 Land Use/Land Cover (a)a)2006 Land Use/Land Cover is the most recent data availableb)Total may add up to more or less than 100 percent due to rounding. | |||
c) | c) | ||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
Fry et al., 2011NLCD 2006 Land Cover ClassPermanent Site ImpactsTemporary Site ImpactsTotal Land Cover Within the Region(c)ac.haac.haac.haPercentOpen Water7963221.6Developed, Open Space0.180.07304312316.1Developed, Low Intensity5858237111.7Developed, Medium Intensity19687963.9Developed, High Intensity9924012.0Barren43170.1Deciduous Forest329813356.6Evergreen Forest68280.1 Mixed Forest100.0Shrub/Scrub5052041.0Grassland10494252.1 Pasture/Hay5896238611.7Cultivated Crops25.6710.3914.545.8825,23610,21350.2Woody Wetlands7222921.4 Emergent Herbaceous Wetland7873181.6Total(b)28.8510.4614.545.8850,26220,339100.0 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical | Fry et al., 2011NLCD 2006 Land Cover ClassPermanent Site ImpactsTemporary Site ImpactsTotal Land Cover Within the Region (c)ac.haac.haac.haPercentOpen Water7963221.6Developed, Open Space0.180.07304312316.1Developed, Low Intensity5858237111.7Developed, Medium Intensity19687963.9Developed, High Intensity9924012.0Barren43170.1Deciduous Forest329813356.6Evergreen Forest68280.1 Mixed Forest100.0Shrub/Scrub5052041.0Grassland10494252.1 Pasture/Hay5896238611.7Cultivated Crops25.6710.3914.545.8825,23610,21350.2Woody Wetlands7222921.4 Emergent Herbaceous Wetland7873181.6Total(b)28.8510.4614.545.8850,26220,339100.0 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-49Rev. 019.4.6HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES19.4.6.1Impacts to Historic PropertiesAs is described in Subsection 19.3.6.3, no on-site historic properties are associated with the SHINE site. No archaeological sites or evidence of cultural resources were identified within the survey area. The Wisconsin Historical Society (WHS) has also reviewed the findings of the Phase I archaeological survey and has indicated that no further consultation with the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) regarding the SHINE facility is required (WHS, 2012).As discussed in Subsection 19.3.6.4, SHINE initiated consultation with 13 federally recognized tribes regarding the proposed development. A single response letter was received from the Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska who indicated that they have cultural properties of interest in the project area, but had no concerns regarding the project. However, they did indicate the desire to be contacted in the event burial sites or other cultural materials were discovered during construction. Follow-up calls were made to representatives of the remaining 12 tribes; however, no return calls to SHINE were received. Prior to construction, SHINE will develop a Cultural Resource Management Plan that will contain procedures governing notification and management of cultural resources during both construction and operations.The nearest listed National Register of Historic Properties (NRHP) property is the Hugunin House located approximately 1.1 mi. (1.7 km) from the SHINE site (see Figure19.3.6-1). No direct impacts occur to this property by either construction or operational activities. Additionally, given the distance of the listed property and the low profile of the proposed structures on the SHINE site, no visual or other indirect impacts occur. Therefore, potential impacts to historic and archaeological resources are SMALL. Due to the absence of historic cemeteries and prehistoric mounds within the boundaries of the SHINE site, the potential for the presence of human burials or human remains is SMALL. | ||
However, if human burials or human remains are identified at any time, work will immediately stop with no further disturbance of the human remains. If human remains are discovered, the construction personnel will contact a representative of SHINE. The representative of SHINE will contact the appropriate local law enforcement and the WHS and communicate that human remains have been discovered. If the human remains are determined to be archaeological in nature, the WHS in conjunction with SHINE will determine what further actions will be taken.Other past, present and reasonably foreseeable Federal and non-Federal projects identified in the immediate area around the SHINE site include the planned development of lands immediately north of the site as part of the Janesville Tax Increment Financing District No. 35 Project Plan (City of Janesville, 2012a). However, because no historic properties are impacted by the SHINE site, no additional cumulative impacts historic and cultural resources would occur. Consequently, potential cumulative impacts of the SHINE project are SMALL. | However, if human burials or human remains are identified at any time, work will immediately stop with no further disturbance of the human remains. If human remains are discovered, the construction personnel will contact a representative of SHINE. The representative of SHINE will contact the appropriate local law enforcement and the WHS and communicate that human remains have been discovered. If the human remains are determined to be archaeological in nature, the WHS in conjunction with SHINE will determine what further actions will be taken.Other past, present and reasonably foreseeable Federal and non-Federal projects identified in the immediate area around the SHINE site include the planned development of lands immediately north of the site as part of the Janesville Tax Increment Financing District No. 35 Project Plan (City of Janesville, 2012a). However, because no historic properties are impacted by the SHINE site, no additional cumulative impacts historic and cultural resources would occur. Consequently, potential cumulative impacts of the SHINE project are SMALL. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-50Rev. 019.4.7SOCIOECONOMICSThis subsection describes potential impacts to the socioeconomic environment, including transportation system impacts associated with the construction, operation and decommissioning of the SHINE facility. The evaluation of potential socioeconomics impacts addresses potential changes in the regional population, economy, housing availability, and public services. The evaluation of transportation system impacts addresses routes and modes that are involved with transporting materials, workers, and equipment to the SHINE site. | ||
19.4.7.1Socioeconomics Impacts This subsection evaluates impacts to the population, housing, public services (i.e. water supply), public education, and tax-revenues in the region of influence (ROI), Rock County, that result from constructing, operating, and decommissioning the SHINE facility. Potential impacts of constructing the facility are attributable to the size of the construction workforce, the expenditures needed to support the construction program, and the tax payments made to political jurisdictions. Because direct impacts are those that occur on-site, the only direct impacts are associated with the presence of the workforce at the SHINE site. All other socioeconomic impacts are considered to be indirect, as they occur off-site. The analysis presented in this subsection is based on the bounding parameters for the projected workforces for construction, operation, and decommissioning. As noted in Table 19.4.7-1, the peak on-site construction phase (contractor) workforce is 420workers, and the maximum on-site operational phase workforce is 150 workers. This analysis assumes a 24-month schedule of construction-related activities. Decommissioning is estimated to start in the year 2046, and will involve a peak month on-site workforce of 261 workers.19.4.7.1.1Population ImpactsThe ROI population is 160,331 (USCB, 2010a). Growth projections show that the population in 2015 is 165,354, and the population in 2045 is 191,703 (see Table 19.3.7-4). The analysis of population impacts considers the population growth potential due to the SHINE workforce requirements for construction, operational and decommissioning phases. As shown in Table 19.4.7-1, a large construction trade workforce is available in the ROI for the major labor categories (those for which a peak labor force need of at least 20workers is projected). Therefore, the potential for large numbers of trade workers moving into the ROI is lessened by the extent to which the estimated local labor force meets construction workforce needs. Because the ROI labor force in the construction trades is demonstrated to be abundant relative to construction workforce requirements (except for boilermakers and iron workers for whom data are not available from the Bureau of Labor Statistics [BLS]), it is estimated that approximately 60percent of the required construction workforce for these trades come from within the ROI. It is conservatively assumed that 20 percent of the required boilermakers and iron workers are available from within the ROI. Similarly, based on the large ROI labor force in the major occupation categories, it is expected that approximately 60 percent of the required operations workforce comes from within the ROI. Furthermore, due to the more specialized nature of some trades required for the decommissioning workforce, it is expected that just over 50 percent of that workforce comes from within the ROI (estimates based on current ROI labor force levels). | 19.4.7.1Socioeconomics Impacts This subsection evaluates impacts to the population, housing, public services (i.e. water supply), public education, and tax-revenues in the region of influence (ROI), Rock County, that result from constructing, operating, and decommissioning the SHINE facility. Potential impacts of constructing the facility are attributable to the size of the construction workforce, the expenditures needed to support the construction program, and the tax payments made to political jurisdictions. Because direct impacts are those that occur on-site, the only direct impacts are associated with the presence of the workforce at the SHINE site. All other socioeconomic impacts are considered to be indirect, as they occur off-site. The analysis presented in this subsection is based on the bounding parameters for the projected workforces for construction, operation, and decommissioning. As noted in Table 19.4.7-1, the peak on-site construction phase (contractor) workforce is 420workers, and the maximum on-site operational phase workforce is 150 workers. This analysis assumes a 24-month schedule of construction-related activities. Decommissioning is estimated to start in the year 2046, and will involve a peak month on-site workforce of 261 | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical | workers.19.4.7.1.1Population ImpactsThe ROI population is 160,331 (USCB, 2010a). Growth projections show that the population in 2015 is 165,354, and the population in 2045 is 191,703 (see Table 19.3.7-4). The analysis of population impacts considers the population growth potential due to the SHINE workforce requirements for construction, operational and decommissioning phases. As shown in Table 19.4.7-1, a large construction trade workforce is available in the ROI for the major labor categories (those for which a peak labor force need of at least 20workers is projected). Therefore, the potential for large numbers of trade workers moving into the ROI is lessened by the extent to which the estimated local labor force meets construction workforce needs. Because the ROI labor force in the construction trades is demonstrated to be abundant relative to construction workforce requirements (except for boilermakers and iron workers for whom data are not available from the Bureau of Labor Statistics [BLS]), it is estimated that approximately 60percent of the required construction workforce for these trades come from within the ROI. It is conservatively assumed that 20 percent of the required boilermakers and iron workers are available from within the ROI. Similarly, based on the large ROI labor force in the major occupation categories, it is expected that approximately 60 percent of the required operations workforce comes from within the ROI. Furthermore, due to the more specialized nature of some trades required for the decommissioning workforce, it is expected that just over 50 percent of that workforce comes from within the ROI (estimates based on current ROI labor force levels). | ||
19.4.7.1.3Public Services Impacts Public services impacts | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-51Rev. 0The estimated numbers of construction workers, operational workers and decommissioning workers that are available locally, and the estimated labor force deficiencies by occupation are shown in Table 19.4.7-1. These estimates show that 248 out of the peak requirement of 420construction workers are present within the ROI labor force. Therefore, 172 construction workers come either from the labor force of the surrounding 50-mi. (80km) radius or relocate from outside the 50-mi. (80-km) radius. The 172 construction workers estimated to be not available within the ROI labor force equates to 41 percent of the peak month construction workforce. Based on analysis of the overall Rock County labor force as shown in Table19.3.7-1, it is estimated that 17 percent of the existing labor force commutes to Rock County from other counties. Consistent with this estimate, it is assumed that 17 percent of the 172 construction workers to be added to the ROI labor force reside in counties outside of Rock County and commute to the ROI. The remainder, 143 construction workers and their families, are assumed to relocate to reside within the ROI. The average household size in the ROI is 2.5persons per household (USCB, 2010a). Therefore, 143 workers relocating to the various communities within the ROI increases the population in the ROI by approximately 358 people. This estimated population increase constitutes 0.22 percent of the ROI's population of 160,331. Therefore, the impact of the construction of the SHINE facility on population is SMALL.Table 19.4.7-1 shows the estimate that 88 out of the required 150 permanent operations workers are available in the ROI. It is assumed that 17 percent of the additional required 62operations workers commute to Rock County from adjacent counties, and that the other 51workers and their families relocate to reside in the ROI. Using the ROI average of 2.5persons per household, the total population increase in the various communities within the ROI due to operational workforce requirements is 128 people. This estimated population increase constitutes 0.08 percent of the projected 2015 population of the ROI. Therefore, the impact of the operation of the SHINE facility on population is SMALL.An estimated 132 of the required 261 decommissioning workers are available in the ROI (see Table19.4.7-1). It is assumed that 17 percent of the additional required 129 decommissioning workers commute to Rock County from adjacent counties, and that the other 107decommissioning workers and their families relocate to the ROI. Based on the ROI average of 2.5persons per household, the ROI population increases by 268 due to the decommissioning workforce. This estimated population increase constitutes 0.14 percent of the projected population of the various communities within the ROI at the end of the 30-year license period. Therefore, the impact of decommissioning of the SHINE facility on population is SMALL.19.4.7.1.2Housing ImpactsSubsection 19.3.7.2.2 and Table 19.3.7-12 provide a summary of the 2010 USCB data concerning availability of housing in the ROI that is used as a basis for estimating the number of housing units that may be available to accommodate housing demands resulting from construction, operation and decommissioni ng. NUREG-1437 presents criteria for the assessment of housing impacts based on the discernible changes in housing availability, prices, and changes in housing construction or conversions. These criteria are:*SMALL: Small and not easily discernible change in housing availability; increases in rental rates or housing values equal or slightly exceed the statewide inflation rate; and no extraordinary construction or conversion of housing. | ||
19.4.7.2.1Construction/Modification of Transportation InfrastructureA traffic analysis was performed to assess the construction-period traffic conditions and the post-development operations-related traffic conditions at the SHINE site. The construction entrance to the site is located along US 51. The peak construction traffic volume is estimated to be 14heavy vehicles (dump truck/deliveries) and 451 vehicles (pick-up trucks and cars) per day in 2015. A summary of the effect of construction traffic volumes on the transportation infrastructure is provided in Table 19.4.7-2. The level of construction-related traffic does not affect the level of service anywhere in the transportation infrastructure and no modifications to the infrastructure are necessary. Based on this projected level of construction traffic to and from the site, the level of impact to the transportation infrastructure is SMALL. The traffic analysis also assesses the traffic associated with the operations of the SHINE facility after construction is complete, which is assumed to be in 2016. The entrance to the site is located along US 51 with 75 percent of site-related traffic assumed to be coming from and going to the north and 25percent to/from the south. The traffic volume generated by employees working at the facility is estimated to be 118 vehicles per day. A summary of the effect of these Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-52Rev. 0*MODERATE: Discernible but short-lived change in housing availability; rental rates or housing values increase slightly faster than state inflation rate with rates realigning as new housing added; and minor and temporary conversions of non-living space to living space.*LARGE: Very limited housing availability; rental rates or housing values increase well above normal inflation rate for state; and substantial conversions of housing units and overbuilding of new housing units. In 2010, there were 5986 vacant housing units in the ROI (see Table 19.3.7-12). This amount of housing available within the ROI at the time the portion of the construction workforce that is non-resident moves into the area is substantially greater than the total estimated demand for housing due to construction of the SHINE facility. For purposes of analysis, the estimates of 143workers relocating to the ROI for construction phase peak, 51 workers relocating to the ROI to meet operational workforce needs, and 107 workers relocating to the ROI to meet decommissioning workforce needs equates to a total of 301 additional households in the ROI. The 5986 vacant housing units in Rock County in 2010 equal approximately 20 times the total estimated demand for housing. There is clearly an adequate supply of vacant housing to accommodate the requirements of new families for temporary or permanent housing. Further, the decommissioning workforce, which represents approximately one-third of the estimated housing demand, does not relocate to the ROI until the end of the 30-year licensing period.The potential impacts on housing are SMALL due to the large number of available vacant housing units in the ROI and the relatively small requirements for the construction, operations and decommissioning workforce. | ||
19.4.7.1.3Public Services Impacts Public services impacts analys is as directed by Final IS G Augmenting NUREG-1537 concerns water supply facilities. NUREG-1437 presents criteria for the assessment of public services impacts based on the ability to respond to the level of demand and need for additional capacity. These criteria are:*SMALL: Little or no change occurs in ability to respond to level of demand and therefore there is no need to add capital facilities.*MODERATE: There is overtaxing of facilities during peak demand.*LARGE: Existing service levels are substantially degraded and additional capacity is needed.Construction of the SHINE facility requires quantities of potable water to support the needs of the construction work force. During construction and operations, the Janesville Water Utility supplies water to the SHINE site, including potable water uses, fire protection uses, and typical construction uses (e.g. dust suppression and concrete mixing). The average per capita water usage in the United States is 90 gallons per day (gpd) (340.7 liters per day [lpd]) per person including personal use, bathing, laundry and other household uses (USGS, 2012). At a conservatively assumed 30gpd (113.6 lpd) for each construction worker who is on-site for 8 to 12 hours per day, an on-site workforce of 420 needs 12,600 gpd (47,696 lpd) for potable and sanitary use. As discussed in Subsection19.3.7.2.5.1, the Janesville Water Utility has excess Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-53Rev. 0water capacity of 18 Mgd (68.1 Mld). Therefore, impacts on public water supply by the on-site construction workforce are SMALL.The impact to the local water supply systems from SHINE-related population growth can be estimated by multiplying the amount of water that is required per capita by the estimated number of individuals who relocate to the ROI. Subsection 19.3.7.2.5.1 describes the public water supply systems in the area, permitted capacities, and current demands. The average per capita water usage in the United States is 90 gpd (340.7 lpd) per person including personal use, bathing, laundry and other household uses (USGS, 2012). The estimated total construction and operation-related population increase within the ROI of 486 people (construction and operations workforces and their families) increases consumption by 43,740 gpd (165,574 lpd). The excess public water supply capacity in Janesville is 18 Mgd (68.1 Mld). Therefore, impacts to the municipal water supplier due to the estimated population increase are SMALL.Public wastewater treatment facilities are directly related to public water supply facilities. The impact to the local wastewater treatment systems from SHINE-related population increases can be determined by calculating the amount of water that is used and disposed of by these individuals. The average person in the United States uses 90 gpd (340.7 lpd) (USGS, 2012). All wastewater from the SHINE facility is disposed of and treated by the City of Janesville wastewater treatment facilities. The total construction and operation-related population increase of 486 people requires 43,740gpd (165,574 lpd) of additional wastewater treatment demand. The excess treatment capacity in the City of Janesville is 12 Mgd (45.4 Mld). Therefore, based on this excess treatment capacity, impacts to wastewater treatment facilities are SMALL.19.4.7.1.4Public Education ImpactsSchools and student populations are discussed in Subsection 19.3.7.2.5.2. For the ROI, the numbers and types of schools and the numbers of students by district are summarized in Table19.3.7-17. NUREG-1437 presents criteria for the assessment of public education impacts based on changes in student enrollment and the number of teaching staff and classrooms. These criteria are:*SMALL: Project-related enrollment increase is less than or equal to 3 percent, there is no change in the school system's ability to provide educational services, and no additional teaching staff or classroom space is needed.*MODERATE: Student enrollment increases between 4 and 8 percent, and there is an increase in the number of teachers or classrooms.*LARGE: Student enrollment increases by more than 8 percent and current institutions are not adequate to accommodate the influx of students. The Janesville School District (JSD) is the largest school district in the ROI by measure of student enrollment, and the public schools in the ROI that are in closest proximity to the SHINE site are units of the JSD. According to its current Strategic Plan, the JSD is officially seeking to grow its student enrollment. More specifically, it is the JSD Board of Education's goal to increase the net open enrollment gain/loss by 15 percent in the 2011-12 school year (JSD,2011a.). The student to teacher ratio is a common evaluation factor with regards to the capacity of a school, or school district, to accommodate student enrollment growth. In the JSD, the reported ratio is 12.8 students per licensed teacher full time equivalency which compares to the WI Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-54Rev. 0statewide ratio of 13.3 students per teacher full time equivalency (DPI, 2012a). The JSD's school enrollment for the 2011-2012 school year was 10,325 (DPI, 2012b). The district could increase its student enrollment by 412 students without adding any licensed teachers and still not exceed the statewide ratio. A 3percent increase in student enrollment would equate to an additional 310 students.The student age cohort (age 5 to 18) accounts for 20percent of the ROI total population (USCB,2010a and USCB, 2010b). The combination of estimated population increase due to construction workforce and operational workforce requirements results in a net construction and operations related population increase of 486 which contributes 97school-aged children within the ROI. If all students are added in the JSD, enrollment would neither exceed 3percent nor cause the JSD to exceed the statewide student to teacher ratio. No professional staff or classroom additions are needed. Beginning in 2046, an estimated population increase of 268 associated with decommissioning workforce demand contributes 54 school-aged children, assuming the student aged population remains 20percent of the total population. No professional staff or classroom additions would be needed based on that level of increased enrollment. Therefore, the level of impact to the local public education system is SMALL. 19.4.7.1.5Tax Revenue Related ImpactsThe U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) defined the magnitude of license renewal-related tax impacts based on previous case-study analysis as described in NUREG-1437 as:*SMALL if the payments are less than 10percent of revenue of the taxing jurisdiction.*MODERATE if the payments are between 10 and 20percent of revenue of the taxing jurisdiction.*LARGE if the payments are greater than 20percent of revenue of the taxing jurisdiction.Additionally, the NRC determined that if a facility's tax payments are projected to be a dominant source of the community's total revenue, new tax-driven land-use changes are LARGE. This is especially true where the community has no pre-established pattern of development or has not provided adequate public services to support and guide development in the past.Tax revenues associated with the construction, operation and decommissioning of the SHINE facility include payroll taxes on wages and salaries of the construction and operations work forces, sales and use taxes on purchases made by SHINE and the construction, operations and decommissioning workforces, and property taxes on owned real property and improvements. Increased tax collections are a benefit to the state, county and municipal-level jurisdictions as well as school districts.19.4.7.1.6Personal and Corporate Income TaxesWorkforce payroll taxes (federal and state) are generated by construction, operations and decommissioning activities and purchases as well as taxes generated by workforce expenditures. State tax payments are distributed throughout the ROI and extend beyond the ROI, based on the expectation that some construction, operations and decommissioning employees reside outside of Rock County. The relocation of workers to Rock County and Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-55Rev. 0surrounding counties, including some expected to relocate to Wisconsin from other states, results in an increase in payroll taxes paid to Wisconsin.19.4.7.1.7Sales Taxes Workers commuting to the SHINE site from within and outside of the ROI contribute sales tax revenues to the State of Wisconsin and to Rock County and any other counties where they live. The vast majority of sales tax revenues from the ROI are collected by the State, as Rock County's sales tax rate is very low. But the ROI does experience an increase in the amount of sales taxes collected, reflecting the concentration of re-located workers. Sales tax revenues also result from direct purchases by SHINE for materials, equipment and services supporting the construction project, long term operations, and decommissioning. The distribution of these tax revenues is determined by the business locations of the material and service providers and likely reflects a broad area including the ROI and beyond to multiple states. The amount of sales taxes collected over a potential 30-year operating period that are attributable to the SHINE facility is significant, but is relatively minor when compared to the total amount of taxes collected in the ROI.19.4.7.1.8Property TaxesThe SHINE facility is located in the City of Janesville in Rock County. As such, property taxes are paid to Janesville and Rock County as well as the JSD. These jurisdictions all provide public services that benefit SHINE's business and employees. It is SHINE's intent to enter into a Tax Increment Financing (TIF) agreement with the City of Janesville. The TIF agreement allows SHINE to make payments in lieu of taxes to Janesville for a period of 10years at the outset of the license period. These payments, estimated to total $600,000 per year, will be directed to offset infrastructure expenses associated with the SHINE development. During the ten year TIF time period, SHINE pays property taxes based on the assessed value of the property prior to improvements, estimated to be $35,000 per year. Following the 10-year TIF time period, property taxes paid by SHINE are based on the assessed value of real property and improvements, using the property tax rates in place at that time. Comparison of the estimated annual SHINE property tax payment (after expiration of the 10-year TIF time period) with the individual property tax revenues of Janesville and Rock County (using 2010 data available from Wisconsin Department of Revenue [DOR]) and the Janesville School District Board of Education shows that the annual portion of total property tax revenues paid by SHINE equates to approximately 0.30percent of total Rock County general property tax revenues, 0.66 percent of total Janesville general property tax revenues, and 0.99 percent of total Janesville School District general property tax revenues (DOR, 2012 and JSD, 2011b). The effect of property taxes paid by the construction, operations and decommissioning workforces is dispersed across the ROI and beyond. Construction workers commuting to the SHINE site from their homes continue to pay existing property taxes. Workers relocating to the ROI also contribute to increased property tax revenues.19.4.7.1.9Summary of Tax ImpactsOverall tax revenues generated by construction, operation and decommissioning of SHINE will be significant in absolute dollars across the lifetime of the facility, even with consideration of the TIF agreement that allows payment in lieu of taxes for 10years. However, the overall tax revenues are relatively small in comparison to the established tax base of Janesville and Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-56Rev. 0RockCounty. The maximum increase in property tax revenues after expiration of the TIF agreement is expected to be substantially less than 10 percent of the total tax revenue at the city and county levels. Therefore, total tax revenues from SHINE result in SMALL positive impacts at the community level. 19.4.7.1.10Other Socioeconomics Related ImpactsSocioeconomics related impacts in addition to those specifically described above include the potential for supportive business expansion and associated land use changes in the Janesville community as a result of the investments from SHINE. Land use changes due to housing needs are not expected due to the large number of existing vacant housing units. Potential land use changes include those to provide for expansion of existing small businesses or locations for new small businesses that might support SHINE and SHINE employees. If realized, such business expansions and/or new business developments are likely to occur in the southern area of the City of Janesville near the SHINE site in locations where conditions are appropriate for business development, including within the TIF district to the north of the SHINE site. Any such land use changes are subject to local zoning regulations and associated impacts on socioeconomic conditions are expected to be SMALL. 19.4.7.1.11Mitigation Measures to Minimize Socioeconomic ImpactsAs described in the subsections above, the socioeconomic impacts on the ROI resulting from construction, operation, and decommissioning of the SHINE facility are SMALL and no mitigation measures are required to minimize socioeconomic impacts.19.4.7.2TransportationConstruction-related and operations-related effects on the transportation network are provided in this subsection. The effects on the local transportation infrastructure as a result of construction and operations are measured against the existing traffic conditions and the future no-build traffic conditions in Table 19.4.7-2. All goods and services to support the SHINE facility will reach the site using existing roadway networks. | |||
19.4.7.2.1Construction/Modification of Transportation InfrastructureA traffic analysis was performed to assess the construction-period traffic conditions and the post-development operations-related traffic conditions at the SHINE site. The construction entrance to the site is located along US 51. The peak construction traffic volume is estimated to be 14heavy vehicles (dump truck/deliveries) and 451 vehicles (pick-up trucks and cars) per day in 2015. A summary of the effect of construction traffic volumes on the transportation infrastructure is provided in Table 19.4.7-2. The level of construction-related traffic does not affect the level of service anywhere in the transportation infrastructure and no modifications to the infrastructure are necessary. Based on this projected level of construction traffic to and from the site, the level of impact to the transportation infrastructure is SMALL. The traffic analysis also assesses the traffic associated with the operations of the SHINE facility after construction is complete, which is assumed to be in 2016. The entrance to the site is located along US 51 with 75 percent of site-related traffic assumed to be coming from and going to the north and 25percent to/from the south. The traffic volume generated by employees working at the facility is estimated to be 118 vehicles per day. A summary of the effect of these Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-57Rev. 0operations volumes on the transportation infrastructure is provided in Table19.4.7-2. The operation of the facility results in a slight degradation in the level of service (from a level of service [LOS] C to an LOS D) at the intersection of US51 and State Highway11 (SH11) during the morning peak hour resulting in an increased delay at the intersection. This can be easily mitigated by optimizing the signal timing at the intersection to accommodate a greater turning movement from westbound SH11 to southbound US 51 as demonstrated in Table 19.4.7-3. | |||
Additionally, the nearby Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport does not need to modify current infrastructure in order to accommodate additional air traffic caused by shipments to and from the SHINE facility. Consequently, there are no impacts to airport facilities. Because traffic conditions during construction are not degraded, and the minor reduction in LOS at SH 11, the transportation impacts are considered to be SMALL and mitigable. 19.4.7.2.2Transportation Routes for Conveying Materials and Personnel to the Site The construction and operation of the SHINE facility does not alter any existing transportation routes for conveying materials and/or personnel to the site. Therefore, the impacts to transportation routes are considered to be SMALL.19.4.7.2.3Traffic Patterns ImpactsThe construction and operation of the SHINE facility does not alter any existing traffic patterns to and from the site. Therefore, the impacts to traffic patterns are considered to be SMALL.19.4.7.2.4Mitigation Measures to Minimize Transportation ImpactsAs mentioned above, the operation of the SHINE facility results in a slight degradation in the LOS at the signalized intersection of US 51 and SH 11. Specifically, the westbound SH 11 to southbound US 51 left-turning movement is affected during the morning peak hour. This condition can be easily mitigated by optimizing the signal timing for this turning movement. A summary of the effect of this mitigated condition is provided in Table 19.4.7-3. By optimizing signal timing for this movement at the intersection, the level of service for the intersection can be improved to its existing level. There are no other transportation infrastructure mitigation requirements in the vicinity of the SHINE site. | Additionally, the nearby Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport does not need to modify current infrastructure in order to accommodate additional air traffic caused by shipments to and from the SHINE facility. Consequently, there are no impacts to airport facilities. Because traffic conditions during construction are not degraded, and the minor reduction in LOS at SH 11, the transportation impacts are considered to be SMALL and mitigable. 19.4.7.2.2Transportation Routes for Conveying Materials and Personnel to the Site The construction and operation of the SHINE facility does not alter any existing transportation routes for conveying materials and/or personnel to the site. Therefore, the impacts to transportation routes are considered to be SMALL.19.4.7.2.3Traffic Patterns ImpactsThe construction and operation of the SHINE facility does not alter any existing traffic patterns to and from the site. Therefore, the impacts to traffic patterns are considered to be SMALL.19.4.7.2.4Mitigation Measures to Minimize Transportation ImpactsAs mentioned above, the operation of the SHINE facility results in a slight degradation in the LOS at the signalized intersection of US 51 and SH 11. Specifically, the westbound SH 11 to southbound US 51 left-turning movement is affected during the morning peak hour. This condition can be easily mitigated by optimizing the signal timing for this turning movement. A summary of the effect of this mitigated condition is provided in Table 19.4.7-3. By optimizing signal timing for this movement at the intersection, the level of service for the intersection can be improved to its existing level. There are no other transportation infrastructure mitigation requirements in the vicinity of the SHINE site. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-58Rev. 0Table 19.4.7-1 Projected ROI Labor Availability and On-site Labor Requirements at Peak Month of Construction, Operations and Decommissioning SchedulesOccupation SHINE Peak Need(a)Estimate of Labor Force by Occupation in Rock County (b)Available Labor Force in Rock County(c)Rock County Labor Force Deficiency(d)Estimated AvailableNeeded for SHINEConstruction PhaseBoilermaker24ND5519 Carpenter4536072450Electrician55190383817Ironworker50ND101040 Laborer7034068682Equipment Operator/Eng.2613026260Plumber/Pipefitter7070141456Sheet Metal Worker3080(e)161614Construction Supervisor 2016032200Other30ND6624TOTAL420248172TOTAL, Percent 5941Operational PhaseOperation Support 4034034346Productions/Operations37110111126Tech Support 402590(f)259400Other33ND3330TOTAL1508862TOTAL, Percent 5941Decommissioning Phase Carpenter2036072200Ironworker 20ND4416Laborer100340686832Equipment Operator/Eng.2013026200Plumber/Pipefitter3070141416Radiation Technicians30ND6624Other41ND0NA41Total261132129Total, Percent 5149a)Peak month estimated need of labor categories where need is greater than or equal to 20b)Rock County labor force estimate from BLS, 2011 unless otherwise notedc)Left column: Estimated available construction and decommissioning labor force based on 20 percent of BLS estimated labor force; Available operational labor force based on 10percent of BLS estimated labor force. Right column: Total reflects the total estimated labor force available to meet the SHINE Peak Need.d)Rock County labor force deficiency determined by subtracting estimated Available Labor Force from SHINE Peak Neede)Labor force estimates from BLS, 2009; no data available for 2011 f)Tech support subcategories include: maintenance (machinery maintenance workers and general maintenance and repair workers), engineers (industrial engineers and mechanical drafters), and craftspeople (janitors and cleaners, landscaping and groundskeepers, electricians, plumbers and pipefitters, industrial machinery mechanics, and machinists)ND = No data, NA = Not available | ||
==References:== | ==References:== | ||
BLS, 2009; BLS, 2011. | BLS, 2009; BLS, 2011. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-59Rev. 0Table 19.4.7-2 Summary of Traffic Impacts during Construction and Operationsa) LOS degraded during operations only due to greater volume during peak hour. Total construction traffic volumne higher, but not at peak hourExisting Level of Service Summary - Weekday Peak-HourIntersections ExistingConditions - AM ExistingConditions - PMLOSDelayLOSDelaySH 11 at County Highway GC23.3 sec.C22.4 sec.US 51 at Highway 11C27.6 sec.C25.6 sec. | ||
US 51 at Town Line RdB10.2 sec.B10.4 sec.Future (2015) No-Build Level of Service Summary - Weekday Peak-HourIntersectionsFuture No-Build - | US 51 at Town Line RdB10.2 sec.B10.4 sec.Future (2015) No-Build Level of Service Summary - Weekday Peak-HourIntersectionsFuture No-Build - AM Future No-Build - PMLOSDelayLOSDelaySH 11 at County Highway GC24.1 sec.C22.8 sec. | ||
US 51 at Highway 11C29.3 sec.C26.3 sec. | US 51 at Highway 11C29.3 sec.C26.3 sec. | ||
US 51 at Town Line RdB10.5 sec.B10.6 sec.Future (2015) Construction Level of Service Summary - Weekday Peak- | US 51 at Town Line RdB10.5 sec.B10.6 sec.Future (2015) Construction Level of Service Summary - Weekday Peak-HourIntersections Future Construction Phase - AMFuture ConstructionPhase - PMLOSDelayLOSDelaySH 11 at County Highway GC24.0 sec.C22.9 sec. | ||
US 51 at Highway 11C31.7 sec.C26.3 sec.US 51 at Town Line RdB10.5 sec.B10.6 sec.US 51 at SHINE siteA0.4 sec.A0.9 sec.Future (2016) Operations Level of Service Summary - Weekday Peak-HourIntersectionsFuture OperationsPhase - AMFuture OperationsPhase - PMLOSDelayLOSDelaySH 11 at County Highway GC24.3 sec.C23.3 sec. | US 51 at Highway 11C31.7 sec.C26.3 sec.US 51 at Town Line RdB10.5 sec.B10.6 sec.US 51 at SHINE siteA0.4 sec.A0.9 sec.Future (2016) Operations Level of Service Summary - Weekday Peak-HourIntersectionsFuture OperationsPhase - AMFuture OperationsPhase - PMLOSDelayLOSDelaySH 11 at County Highway GC24.3 sec.C23.3 sec. | ||
US 51 at Highway | US 51 at Highway 11 D(a)42.9 sec.C26.5 sec.US 51 at Town Line RdB10.5 sec.B10.7 sec. | ||
US 51 at SHINE siteA1.1 sec.A1.5 sec. | US 51 at SHINE siteA1.1 sec.A1.5 sec. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-60Rev. 0Table 19.4.7-3 Summary of the Effects of Mitigative Measures on Traffic ConditionsduringOperationsFuture (2016) Build-Out Mitigated Level of Service Summary - Weekday Peak-HourIntersectionFuture OperationsPhase (Mitigated) - AM Future Operations Phase(Mitigated) - PMLOSDelayLOSDelaySH 11 at County Highway GC20.5 sec.C23.3 sec.US 51 at Highway 11 (a)C27.9 sec.C26.5 sec.US 51 at Town Line RdB10.5 sec.B10.7 sec.US 51 at Project SiteA1.1 sec.A1.5 sec.a) Mitigation consists of signal improvements only Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-61Rev. 019.4.8HUMAN HEALTH19.4.8.1Nonradiological ImpactsThe following subsections discuss the potential nonradiological public and occupational hazards as they pertain to the operation of the SHINE facility. Regulations for generating, managing, handling, storing, treating, protecting, and disposing of wastes during construction, operation, and decommissioning are contained in federal regulations issued and overseen by the NRC and USEPA, and in WDNR. These regulations include comp liance with provisions of the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Atomic Energy Act, and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), among others. Specific ally for Wisconsin, the potentially applic able Environmental Management Regulations are provided in statutes (including Chapters 166, 254, 280, 281, 283, 285, 287, 291, 292 and 299) and the Wisconsin Administrative Code (NR series).Nonradiological hazards are associated with emissions, discharges, and waste from processes within the facility as well as accidental spills/releases. Nonradioactive wastes generated by construction, operation, and decommissioning of the new plant, including solid wastes, liquid wastes, discharges and air emissions, are managed in accordance with applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations, and applicable permit requirements. 19.4.8.1.1Nonradioactive Chemical SourcesDuring construction nonradioactive chemical sources are expected to be on-site in liquid, gaseous and solid forms including fuels, oils, solvents, and other materials necessary for site preparation and construction. During operation, in addition to radioactive chemical sources, production processes include nonradioactive chemical sources in liquid, gaseous and solid forms. For a given industrial facility, pollutants may be present in wastewater and air emissions associated with the production facility. Solid wastes are also generated. The great majority of chemicals in the SHINE facility are either reused or shipped off-site as radioactive waste. Consequently, the focus of the following subsections are impacts of air emissions and solid waste.The bounding inventory of major chemicals (i.e., those in excess of 1000 pounds [454kilograms]) used during operations at the SHINE facility are provided in Table 19.4.8-1. Additionally, Table19.4.8-2 provides information regarding the characteristics of storage of these chemicals by chemical group and maximum inventory.19.4.8.1.2Nonradioactive Liquid, Gaseous, and Solid Waste Management and Control Systems19.4.8.1.2.1Liquid Wastes The great majority of chemical processes at the SHINE facility are conducted inside of the RCA. Any wastes created by these processes are disposed of as radioactive waste and shipped off-site. Some lab-scale chemical use occurs outside the RCA. Liquid wastes produced as a result of these activities are treated to ensure they meet the requirements of the Janesville wastewater treatment facility before being discharged to the municipal sewer. Facility sanitary wastewater is also sent to the Janesville wastewater treatment facility. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-62Rev. 019.4.8.1.2.2Gaseous WastesThe SHINE facility generates gaseous effluents resulting from process operations and the ventilation of operating areas. The non-radiological contaminants associated with this discharge are described and assessed in Subsection 19.4.2. The gaseous effluent from ventilation of operating areas includes the following control systems: *The Zone 1 exhaust airstream passes through two stages of HEPA filtration and a single stage activated carbon bed prior to discharge from the stack*The Zone 2 and Zone 3 exhaust airstreams pass through two stages of HEPA filtration prior to discharge from the stack*Additional controls may be implemented as required by local permit conditions. All the gaseous effluents from the main facility building are vented to the atmosphere through the main stack. | ||
19.4.8.1.2.3Solid WastesThe following is a representative list of nonradioactive solid wastes that are anticipated to be generated by the project during construction, operation, and decommissioning: *Wood from crates*Packaging from receiving activities*Spent personal protective equipment (PPE)*Broken mechanical parts | 19.4.8.1.2.3Solid WastesThe following is a representative list of nonradioactive solid wastes that are anticipated to be generated by the project during construction, operation, and decommissioning: *Wood from crates*Packaging from receiving activities*Spent personal protective equipment (PPE)*Broken mechanical parts | ||
*Metal shavings*Piping*Wires | *Metal shavings*Piping*Wires | ||
| Line 1,221: | Line 2,539: | ||
*Paper*Hoses*Empty plastic containers | *Paper*Hoses*Empty plastic containers | ||
*Expired ink cartridgesOther nonradioactive solid wastes are anticipated to be generated in conjunction with routine operations (e.g, office and cleaning supplies, etc.). Solid waste management and control measures for the SHINE facility include waste reduction, recycling and waste minimization practices that are employed during all project phases (construction, operation, decommissioning). Management practices that are used by SHINE include the following:a)Nonradioactive solid wastes (e.g., office waste, recyclables) are collected and stored temporarily on the SHINE site and disposed of or recycled locally.b)Scrap metal, universal wastes (federally designated as universal waste including batteries, pesticides, mercury-containing equipment and bulbs [lamps]), used oil and antifreeze are collected and stored, and recycled or recovered at an off-site permitted recycling or recovery facility, as appropriate. | *Expired ink cartridgesOther nonradioactive solid wastes are anticipated to be generated in conjunction with routine operations (e.g, office and cleaning supplies, etc.). Solid waste management and control measures for the SHINE facility include waste reduction, recycling and waste minimization practices that are employed during all project phases (construction, operation, decommissioning). Management practices that are used by SHINE include the following:a)Nonradioactive solid wastes (e.g., office waste, recyclables) are collected and stored temporarily on the SHINE site and disposed of or recycled locally.b)Scrap metal, universal wastes (federally designated as universal waste including batteries, pesticides, mercury-containing equipment and bulbs [lamps]), used oil and antifreeze are collected and stored, and recycled or recovered at an off-site permitted recycling or recovery facility, as appropriate. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-63Rev. 019.4.8.1.3Nonradioactive Effluents ReleasedA list of chemicals released as air emissions during operation to the on-site and off-site environment are provided in Subsection 19.4.2. This subsection provides information regarding the sources, composition and quantity of the air emissions from the SHINE facility.The SHINE facility releases small amounts of maintenance and lab chemicals to the city sewer from outside the RCA. Administrative controls ensure that these effluents meet the requirements of the Janesville wastewater treatment facility before they are released. Additionally, the facility sanitary wastewater is treated by the Janesville wastewater treatment facility.19.4.8.1.4Chemical Exposure to the Public19.4.8.1.4.1Air EmissionsCalculated chemical exposure to the public is described and discussed in Subsection 19.4.2.1 regarding air emissions from the SHINE facility. Potential air emissions effects to the public are limited to indirect impacts as they are off-site. Consequently, there are no direct impacts to the public from air emissions. To estimate the impacts of non-radiological pollutants from the boiler and heaters, the AERMOD Modeling System is used. The AERMOD system is a state-of-the-science dispersion model system that the USEPA promulgated in 2005 to replace the ISC model. Table 19.4.2-10 shows that the total concentration, with background included, is no more than 32percent of the NAAQS for CO, NO 2, PM10, and SO2. The total concentration for PM2.5 is 68percent and 83percent of the NAAQS for the 24-hr. | ||
and annual average, respectively. However, most of that is consumed by the background concentration.No impacts exceed the primary ambient air quality standards that have been established to protect public health, including the health of sensitive populations such as children, the elderly, and those with respiratory problems. Therefore, pollutant impacts within a reasonable area that could be impacted and at points of the maximum individual exposure are SMALL.19.4.8.1.4.2Liquid EffluentsAs described in Subsection 19.4.8.1.3 the SHINE facility does not result in point source releases to the environment, as wastewater discharges are sent to the City of Janesville for treatment. The RCA, which contains the majority of SHINE processes, is zero discharge. There are no direct or indirect impacts of liquid effluents from the SHINE facility. Therefore, the impact on human health from liquid discharges is SMALL. 19.4.8.1.5Physical Occupational Hazards The exposure characteristics of the workforce for non-radiological hazards will be defined when the operating strategies are finalized. Because occupational hazards occur on-site and during construction, operation and decommissioning of the SHINE facility they are considered direct impacts. No indirect impacts (off-site) are identified. Table 19.4.8.1-3 lists the general types of occupational physical hazards that may be present at the SHINE facility. Occupational physical hazards are addressed and managed to be reduced or eliminated through implementation of safety practices, training and control measures. In summary, occupational hazards are managed Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-64Rev. 0and minimized by compliance with Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations and therefore impacts from physical occupational hazards are SMALL.19.4.8.1.6Chemical Exposure to the WorkforceAs planned, the SHINE facility will not store or use highly hazardous chemicals in quantities above the Threshold Quantities in Appendix A to 29 CFR 1910.119 during construction. During operation, quantities of nitric acid above the Threshold Quantity will be present on-site and therefore, the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.119 Process Safety Management of Highly Hazardous Chemicals apply to the facility. The majority of process chemicals are used in liquid form and contained in tanks, pipes and hot cells, limiting workforce exposure. Because potential chemical exposure to the workforce during operation of the SHINE facility occurs on-site, they are considered direct impacts. No indirect impacts (off-site) are identified. The facility is designed and practices are applied to keep air contaminants below the limits in 29CFR 1910.1000. In summary, occupational hazards are managed and minimized by compliance with OSHA regulations and therefore impacts from chemical occupational hazards are SMALL.19.4.8.1.7Environmental Monitoring ProgramsApplicable regulations and attending administrative codes that prescribe monitoring requirements may include those associated with emergency management, environmental health, drinking water, water and sewage, pollution discharge, air pollution, hazardous waste management and remedial action. The following statutes are included in Wisconsin's Environmental Management Regulations: *Chapter 166Emergency Management - Emergency planning and Community Right-to-Know Act planning, notification and reporting*Chapter 254Environmental Health - Lead, asbestos, radiation protection, recreational sanitation, animal-borne and vector-borne disease control*Chapter 280Pure Drinking Water - Groundwater and water wells*Chapter 281Water and Sewage - General water resource statute | |||
*Chapter 283Pollution Discharge Elimination - Water pollutant discharge systems *Chapter 285Air Pollution - Air pollution statute*Chapter 291Hazardous Waste Management - Hazardous waste statute | *Chapter 283Pollution Discharge Elimination - Water pollutant discharge systems *Chapter 285Air Pollution - Air pollution statute*Chapter 291Hazardous Waste Management - Hazardous waste statute | ||
*Chapter 292Remedial Action - Includes hazardous substance releases and reportingSpecifically, regulations cited Chapters 283, 285, and 291 and attending administrative codes will be operative and SHINE is committed to complying with all applicable regulations and monitoring requirements as determined by permitting process. The SHINE facility generates gaseous effluents resulting from process operations, the ventilation of operating areas and boiler emissions from facility buildings. Specific monitoring requirements in support of required air permits will be determined through the permitting process.19.4.8.1.8Mitigation MeasuresMitigative measures are used to ensure protection of human health including workplace and environmental regulations. SHINE is committed to best management practices during construction, operation, and decommissioning to minimize pollutant releases to on-site and Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical | *Chapter 292Remedial Action - Includes hazardous substance releases and reportingSpecifically, regulations cited Chapters 283, 285, and 291 and attending administrative codes will be operative and SHINE is committed to complying with all applicable regulations and monitoring requirements as determined by permitting process. The SHINE facility generates gaseous effluents resulting from process operations, the ventilation of operating areas and boiler emissions from facility buildings. Specific monitoring requirements in support of required air permits will be determined through the permitting process.19.4.8.1.8Mitigation MeasuresMitigative measures are used to ensure protection of human health including workplace and environmental regulations. SHINE is committed to best management practices during construction, operation, and decommissioning to minimize pollutant releases to on-site and Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-65Rev. 0off-site areas, delivery of all facility wastewater to the Janesville wastewater treatment facility, and air emission controls, as appropriate. The facility is designed such that there is no liquid discharge from the RCA. Required permits will be obtained for effluents and emissions. Furthermore, waste reduction practices are employed including recycling and waste minimization.19.4.8.2Radiological Impacts This subsection describes the public and occupational heath impacts from radioactive material due to normal operational activities at the SHINE facility. | ||
19.4.8.2.1Layout and Location of Radioactive MaterialFigure19.2.1-1 depicts the physical layout of the site with labeled buildings, site features, and designated areas. | 19.4.8.2.1Layout and Location of Radioactive MaterialFigure19.2.1-1 depicts the physical layout of the site with labeled buildings, site features, and designated areas. | ||
Radioactive material is expected within the following buildings:*Production facility building-Receiving area-Rejected material-Receipt inspection | Radioactive material is expected within the following buildings:*Production facility building-Receiving area-Rejected material-Receipt inspection | ||
-Target solution preparation-Target solution cleanup area-Noble gas storage | -Target solution preparation-Target solution cleanup area-Noble gas storage | ||
-Hot cells-Gloveboxes-Irradiation Unit cells | -Hot cells-Gloveboxes-Irradiation Unit cells | ||
-Health physics (hot)-Hot lab-Radioactive waste packaging*Waste staging and shipping building19.4.8.2.2Characteristics of Radiation Sources and Expected Radioactive EffluentsThe three common sources of radiation for operating nuclear facilities and the expected effluents released from the SHINE facility are discussed in this subsection.19.4.8.2.2.1Gaseous Sources of RadiationThe radioactive gaseous effluent exhaust from the vent stack is expected to contain measurable quantities of the noble gases krypton and xenon, in addition to iodine. Some particulate activity (other than iodine) and tritium could also be released in airborne effluents; however, most of the off-site exposure due to airborne effluent releases is expected to be associated with noble gas and radioactive iodine releases. | -Health physics (hot)-Hot lab-Radioactive waste packaging*Waste staging and shipping building19.4.8.2.2Characteristics of Radiation Sources and Expected Radioactive EffluentsThe three common sources of radiation for operating nuclear facilities and the expected effluents | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical | |||
released from the SHINE facility are discussed in this subsection.19.4.8.2.2.1Gaseous Sources of RadiationThe radioactive gaseous effluent exhaust from the vent stack is expected to contain measurable quantities of the noble gases krypton and xenon, in addition to iodine. Some particulate activity (other than iodine) and tritium could also be released in airborne effluents; however, most of the off-site exposure due to airborne effluent releases is expected to be associated with noble gas and radioactive iodine releases. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-66Rev. 0Radioactive gaseous effluents produced in the SHINE facility due to normal operations consist of off-gas from the irradiated target solution. In addition, maintenance operations on the accelerator are expected to result in the release of some tritium gas, which is used as the accelerator target. All gaseous effluents rel eased from the SHINE facility are combined and released through a single vent stack. 19.4.8.2.2.2Liquid Sources of Radiation As stated in Subsection 19.2.5.3.4, the radioactive liquid waste produced due to normal operations at the SHINE facility is solidified and shipped off-site. No radioactive liquid waste is discharged from the SHINE facility. Therefore, there are no liquid sources of radiation released to the environment due to normal operations at the SHINE facility. 19.4.8.2.2.3Fixed Sources of RadiationThere are two buildings that contain fixed sources of radiation that contribute to direct dose: the production facility building, which contains sources created during production operations within the RCA (e.g., TSV irradiation, molybdenum-99 [Mo-99] separation), and the waste staging and shipping building, which contains sources associated with staging of solidified radioactive waste prior to shipment off-site.19.4.8.2.3Baseline Radiation LevelsBaseline radiation levels on-site and in the vicinity of the SHINE site are discussed in Subsection 19.3.8. There are no identified abnormal sources of radiation on-site or within the vicinity of the SHINE site that would cause radiation levels to be any higher than the expected natural background radiation level. Therefore, the annual background dose at the site due to terrestrial and cosmic radiation is approximately 279 millirem per year (mrem/yr) (2.79 millisievert per year [mSv/yr]) (Subsection 19.3.8.2).19.4.8.2.4Calculated Annual Total Effective Dose Equivalent, Annual Average Airborne Radioactivity Concentration, and Annual Average Waterborne Radioactivity ConcentrationThis subsection discusses the calculated annual total effective dose equivalent (TEDE), annual average airborne radioactivity concentration, and annual average waterborne radioactivity concentration at the dose receptor corresponding to the maximally exposed individual (MEI). | |||
The MEI is located at the site boundary where the doses due to normal operations are expected to be maximized. Additionally, TEDE, annual average airborne radioactivity concentration, and annual average waterborne radioactivity concentration to the nearest full-time resident is discussed. The doses to the public calculated in the following subsections are considered direct effects of operation of the SHINE facility. The radiation dose to the public due to transportation of radioactive waste is discussed in Subsection 19.4.10. The dose to the public due to the transportation of radioactive waste is considered an indirect effect of SHINE facility operation. | The MEI is located at the site boundary where the doses due to normal operations are expected to be maximized. Additionally, TEDE, annual average airborne radioactivity concentration, and annual average waterborne radioactivity concentration to the nearest full-time resident is discussed. The doses to the public calculated in the following subsections are considered direct effects of operation of the SHINE facility. The radiation dose to the public due to transportation of radioactive waste is discussed in Subsection 19.4.10. The dose to the public due to the transportation of radioactive waste is considered an indirect effect of SHINE facility operation. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-67Rev. 119.4.8.2.4.1Gaseous EffluentsSources of radioactive gaseous effluents are discussed in Subsection 19.4.8.2.2.1. The effluents, which consist of the noble gases krypton and xenon, in addition to iodine and tritium, are released to the environment through the production facility building vent stack. Prior to release to the environment, gaseous effluents are held up to allow for decay.The methodologies used to calculate the annual TEDE to a maximally exposed member of the public and the nearest full-time resident are discussed here.Annual off-site doses due to the normal operation of the SHINE facility have been calculated using the computer code GENII2 (PNNL, 2012). The GENII2 computer code was developed for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), and is distributed by the Radiation Safety Information Computational Center (RSICC). Annual average relative atmospheric concentration (/Q) values were determined using the methodology in Regulatory Guide 1.111 (NRC, 1977) with the meteorological data in Section 2.3. The limit on calculated dose is the annual limit of 0.1 rem in a year to an individual member of the public as specified in 10 CFR 20.1301. Also, a dose constraint of 10 mrem TEDE per year due to air emissions is specified in 10 CFR 20.1101(d). The calculated dose is compared to the acceptance criteria of the 10 CFR 20.1301 dose limit and the 10 CFR 20.1101(d) dose constraint.The dose analysis using the GENII2 code considered the release of airborne radionuclides and exposure to off-site individuals through direct exposure and potential environmental pathways, such as leafy vegetable ingestion, meat ingestion, and milk ingestion. The analysis considered variations in consumption and other parameters by age group, and considered potential doses in each of the 16 meteorological sectors. The doses from each pathway were summed and compared to the acceptance criteria.Dose due to the deposition and ingestion pathways are less than the dose due to airborne sources of radiation. Annual TEDE due to gaseous effluents released from the SHINE facility at the location of the MEI and nearest full-time resident are listed in Table 19.4.8-5.As discussed in the following Subsections 19.4.8.2.4.2 and 19.4.8.2.4.3, the doses due to liquid effluents and direct dose from fixed radiation sources are negligible compared to the airborne sources of radiation. The results contained in Table 19.4.8-5 represent the annual TEDE to the MEI and nearest full-time resident for the sources of radiation due to normal operations at the SHINE facility.Because the results in Table 19.4.8-5 are within the dose constraints explained earlier in this subsection, the radiological impacts to members of the public due to operation of the SHINE facility are SMALL. | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-67Rev. 119.4.8.2.4.1Gaseous EffluentsSources of radioactive gaseous effluents are discussed in Subsection 19.4.8.2.2.1. The effluents, which consist of the noble gases krypton and xenon, in addition to iodine and tritium, are released to the environment through the production facility building vent stack. Prior to release to the environment, gaseous effluents are held up to allow for decay.The methodologies used to calculate the annual TEDE to a maximally exposed member of the public and the nearest full-time resident are discussed here.Annual off-site doses due to the normal operation of the SHINE facility have been calculated using the computer code GENII2 (PNNL, 2012). The GENII2 computer code was developed for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), and is distributed by the Radiation Safety Information Computational Center (RSICC). Annual average relative atmospheric concentration (/Q) values were determined using the methodology in Regulatory Guide 1.111 (NRC, 1977) with the meteorological data in Section 2.3. The limit on calculated dose is the annual limit of 0.1 rem in a year to an individual member of the public as specified in 10 CFR 20.1301. Also, a dose constraint of 10 mrem TEDE per year due to air emissions is specified in 10 CFR 20.1101(d). The calculated dose is compared to the acceptance criteria of the 10 CFR 20.1301 dose limit and the 10 CFR 20.1101(d) dose constraint.The dose analysis using the GENII2 code considered the release of airborne radionuclides and exposure to off-site individuals through direct exposure and potential environmental pathways, such as leafy vegetable ingestion, meat ingestion, and milk ingestion. The analysis considered variations in consumption and other parameters by age group, and considered potential doses in each of the 16 meteorological sectors. The doses from each pathway were summed and compared to the acceptance criteria.Dose due to the deposition and ingestion pathways are less than the dose due to airborne sources of radiation. Annual TEDE due to gaseous effluents released from the SHINE facility at the location of the MEI and nearest full-time resident are listed in Table 19.4.8-5.As discussed in the following Subsections 19.4.8.2.4.2 and 19.4.8.2.4.3, the doses due to liquid effluents and direct dose from fixed radiation sources are negligible compared to the airborne sources of radiation. The results contained in Table 19.4.8-5 represent the annual TEDE to the MEI and nearest full-time resident for the sources of radiation due to normal operations at the SHINE facility.Because the results in Table 19.4.8-5 are within the dose constraints explained earlier in this subsection, the radiological impacts to members of the public due to operation of the SHINE facility are SMALL. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-68Rev. 019.4.8.2.4.2Liquid EffluentsAs described in Subsection 19.4.8.2.2.2, the SHINE facility does not generate radioactive liquid waste as candidate material for effluent release. As a result, there are no liquid effluent pathways that contribute to waterborne radioactivity concentrations. Because there are no discharges of radioactive liquid effluent at the SHINE site, the annual averaged waterborne radioactivity concentration is not expected to be greater than the baseline concentration.19.4.8.2.4.3Direct DoseFrom Subsection 19.4.8.2.2.3, fixed sources of radiation inside the production facility building are due to the radioactive materials used for solution preparation, Mo-99 production operations (e.g.,TSV irradiation, holding tanks), and the staging of radioactive waste. The source of radiation inside the waste staging and shipping building is solidified radioactive waste. | ||
Both the production facility and the waste staging and shipping building are designed with appropriate shielding to meet the 10 percent of 10 CFR 20.1301 limits on the outer wall of the RCA in the production facility and at the outer wall of the waste staging and shipping building.The direct dose to a member of the public at the boundary of the unrestricted area (the site boundary) is due to gamma radiation penetrating the walls of the production facility and the waste staging and shipping facility. The direct dose is small outside of the buildings, due to site shielding design, and the dose will decrease with increasing distance. Because the nearest site boundary is located at an appreciable distance from both fixed sources, the dose is negligible at the site boundary.19.4.8.2.5Annual Dose to Maximally Exposed Worker Administrative dose limits are occupational radiation exposure limits that radiation workers at SHINE shall not exceed without prior management approval. Table 19.4.8-7 gives SHINE administrative dose limits. 10 CFR Part 20 limits are also provided for reference. | Both the production facility and the waste staging and shipping building are designed with appropriate shielding to meet the 10 percent of 10 CFR 20.1301 limits on the outer wall of the RCA in the production facility and at the outer wall of the waste staging and shipping building.The direct dose to a member of the public at the boundary of the unrestricted area (the site boundary) is due to gamma radiation penetrating the walls of the production facility and the waste staging and shipping facility. The direct dose is small outside of the buildings, due to site shielding design, and the dose will decrease with increasing distance. Because the nearest site boundary is located at an appreciable distance from both fixed sources, the dose is negligible at the site boundary.19.4.8.2.5Annual Dose to Maximally Exposed Worker Administrative dose limits are occupational radiation exposure limits that radiation workers at SHINE shall not exceed without prior management approval. Table 19.4.8-7 gives SHINE administrative dose limits. 10 CFR Part 20 limits are also provided for reference. | ||
19.4.8.2.6Radiation Exposure Mitigation Measures Occupational and public exposures due to operations at the SHINE site are ALARA. This exposure minimization goal is met through both engineered and administrative controls. The following subsections discuss each individually.19.4.8.2.6.1Engineered ControlsThe SHINE facility utilizes the following engineered controls to minimize radiation exposure to the public and workers:*Radiation source identification*Shielding around radiation sources | 19.4.8.2.6Radiation Exposure Mitigation Measures Occupational and public exposures due to operations at the SHINE site are ALARA. This exposure minimization goal is met through both engineered and administrative controls. The following subsections discuss each individually.19.4.8.2.6.1Engineered ControlsThe SHINE facility utilizes the following engineered controls to minimize radiation exposure to the public and workers:*Radiation source identification*Shielding around radiation sources | ||
*Ventilation control*Access control to radiation areas*Contamination control Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical | *Ventilation control*Access control to radiation areas*Contamination control Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-69Rev. 0*Remote operation*Waste minimization19.4.8.2.6.2Administrative ControlsTo minimize radiation exposure to the public and workers, the SHINE facility utilizes administrative controls, which 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 | *General environmental hazards regarding the facility*Waste minimization requirements | ||
*Waste minimization goals | *Waste minimization goals | ||
*Waste minimization accomplishments*Specific environmental issues*Responsibilities for environmental stewardship | *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 activities19.4.8.3Radiological MonitoringRadiological monitoring includes effluent monitoring and environmental monitoring.19.4.8.3.1Radiological Effluent MonitoringThe radiological effluent monitoring program is established to identify and quantify principal radionuclides in effluents (Regulatory Position C.1 of Regulatory Guide 1.21). This can be used to verify that the SHINE facility is performing as expected and within its design parameters so that doses to individual members of the public remain within 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. All effluent pathways that could be a significant release pathway for radioactive material from the SHINE facility include radiological effluent monitoring. 19.4.8.3.1.1Gaseous Effluent MonitoringAll gaseous effluents released from the SHINE facility (i.e., TSV off-gas, PVVS exhaust, and ventilation exhaust) are combined and released through a single vent stack. The airborne effluent exhaust from the vent stack is expected to contain measurable quantities of noble gas radioactivity (i.e., xenon and krypton). There could also be radioactive iodine, radioactive particulates, and tritium in the airborne effluent exhaust. Due to the expectation of having measurable quantities of radioactivity in the airborne effluent and since malfunction of the exhaust carbon filtration system could result in a change in iodine radioactivity releases, the combined exhaust in the vent stack is continuously monitored for gross gamma radioactivity using an off-line gas monitor. There are also grab sampling provisions to routinely collect and analyze gas, particulate, iodine, and tritium samples from the combined exhaust in the vent stack in order to identify radionuclides, identify | *Employee recognition for efforts to improve environmental conditions*Requirements for employees to consider environmental issues in day-to-day activities19.4.8.3Radiological MonitoringRadiological monitoring includes effluent monitoring and environmental monitoring.19.4.8.3.1Radiological Effluent MonitoringThe radiological effluent monitoring program is established to identify and quantify principal radionuclides in effluents (Regulatory Position C.1 of Regulatory Guide 1.21). This can be used to verify that the SHINE facility is performing as expected and within its design parameters so that doses to individual members of the public remain within 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. All effluent pathways that could be a significant release pathway for radioactive material from the SHINE facility include radiological effluent monitoring. 19.4.8.3.1.1Gaseous Effluent MonitoringAll gaseous effluents released from the SHINE facility (i.e., TSV off-gas, PVVS exhaust, and ventilation exhaust) are combined and released through a single vent stack. The airborne effluent exhaust from the vent stack is expected to contain measurable quantities of noble gas radioactivity (i.e., xenon and krypton). There could also be radioactive iodine, radioactive particulates, and tritium in the airborne effluent exhaust. Due to the expectation of having measurable quantities of radioactivity in the airborne effluent and since malfunction of the exhaust carbon filtration system could result in a change in iodine radioactivity releases, the combined exhaust in the vent stack is continuously monitored for gross gamma radioactivity using an off-line gas monitor. There are also grab sampling provisions to routinely collect and analyze gas, particulate, iodine, and tritium samples from the combined exhaust in the vent stack in order to identify radionuclides, identify relati ve concentrations of radionuclides in the airborne effluent, and quantify radionuclide releases. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-70Rev. 019.4.8.3.1.2Liquid Effluent MonitoringThe SHINE facility releases no radioactive liquid effluent due to extensive reuse of process liquids. As such, there are no defined liquid effluent release pathways from the RCA and no requirement for radiation monitoring of liquid effluent release pathways.19.4.8.3.2Radiological Environmental Monitoring The requirement to have a radiological environmental monitoring program is documented in 10CFR 20.1302. The radiological environmental monitoring program 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. Methods for establishing and conducting environmental monitoring are provided in Regulatory Guide 4.1. Regulatory Guide 4.1 refers to NUREG-1301 for detailed guidance for conducting effluent and environmental monitoring. Although Regulatory Guide 4.1 and NUREG-1301 are written for nuclear power plants, due to the similarities between airborne releases of radioactivity from nuclear power plants and those released from the SHINE facility, guidance provided in Regulatory Guide 4.1 and NUREG-1301 was considered when developing radiological environmental monitoring for the SHINE facility. Specifically, guidance provided in Figure 1 of Regulatory Guide 4.1 and Table 3.12-1 of NUREG-1301 was considered when determining which exposure pathways to sample, sample locations, types of samples, and sample frequencies for the SHINE facility. The following radiation exposure pathways are considered for monitoring under the radiological environmental monitoring program: *Waterborne exposure pathway. | ||
*Direct radiation exposure pathway monitored using thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs). *Airborne exposure pathway | *Direct radiation exposure pathway monitored using thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs). *Airborne exposure pathway monitore d using continuous air samples. *Ingestion exposure pathway (monitored only if triggered).19.4.8.3.2.1Waterborne Exposure Pathway (Groundwater Sampling)There is no liquid effluent release pathway from the RCA associated with the SHINE facility and thus surface waters of the rivers in the vicinity of the plant (e.g.,the Rock River and its tributaries) are not expected to accumulate detectable levels of radioactivity. As such, surface water sampling is not included in the radiological environmental monitoring plan. Similarly marine life in the rivers is not expected to accumulate detectable levels of radioactivity and thus sampling of fish or other marine creatures for the ingestion pathway is not included in the radiological environmental monitoring plan. Measured local water table elevations for the site identify the groundwater gradient and indicate that the groundwater flow is to the west and to the south. The nearest drinking water source is a well which is located approximately a third of a mile (0.54 km) to the northwest of the facility. There are four test wells within the property boundary (see Figure 19.3.4-4) for the SHINE facility that were used for monitoring groundwater in support of a hydrological assessment of the site. One test well is located north, one south, one east, and one west of the SHINE facility building. | ||
Although there are no defined liquid effluent release pathways and the groundwater is not Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical | Although there are no defined liquid effluent release pathways and the groundwater is not Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-71Rev. 0expected to be contaminated due to operation of the SHINE facility, in accordance with NUREG-1301 recommendations, the test wells to the west and the south are sampled for the presence of radionuclide contaminants. Sampling is in accordance with the recommendations in Table 3.12-1 of NUREG-1301, i.e., quarterly with gamma isotopic and tritium analysis. The rationale for sampling the test wells to the west and south of the SHINE facility is provided in Table19.4.8-6. 19.4.8.3.2.2Direct Exposure Pathway (Thermoluminescent Dosimeters)TLDs provide indication of direct radiation from contained radiation sources within the SHINE facility building, from radiation sources contained within the waste storage and shipping facility, from radioactivity in the airborne effluent, and from deposition of airborne radioactivity onto the ground. A description of TLD locations and the rationale for TLD locations are provided in Table19.4.8-6. TLD locations are shown on Figure19.4.8-1. Table 3.12-1 of NUREG-1301 recommends 40 TLD locations, i.e., an inner ring and an outer ring of TLDs with one TLD in each ring at each of the 16 meteorological sectors and the balance of TLDs to be located at special interest areas. At least one TLD is to serve as a control, i.e., located a significant distance from the facility such that it represents a background dose. Considering the size of the SHINE facility and the low power level of the SHINE subcritical irradiation units (IUs), a minimum number of TLD locations (i.e., nine) are specified. These are located in order to provide annual direct dose information at on-site locations which are expected to have significant occupancy and at property line locations in the north, south, east, and west directions (to ensure all directions are monitored). These property line locations include the direction of the theoretical MEI and the direction of the nearest occupied structure. In addition, at least one location includes a paired TLD so that data quality can be determined.19.4.8.3.2.3Airborne Exposure Pathway (Airborne Sampling)Airborne effluent releases from the SHINE facility contribute to off-site doses. Effluent streams from the SHINE facility that have the potential to include radioactive iodine are treated (e.g.,using silver-impregnated zeolite and/or carbon filters) to remove the iodine. Some particulate activity (other than iodine) and tritium could also be released in airborne effluents; however, most of the off-site exposure due to airborne effluent releases is associated with noble gas and radioactive iodine releases. Environmental airborne sampling is performed to identify and quantify particulates and radioiodine in airborne effluents. Regulatory Position C.3.b of Regulatory Guide 4.1 indicates that airborne sampling should always be included in the environmental monitoring programs for nuclear power plants since the airborne effluent pathway exists at all sites. Since the SHINE facility includes airborne effluent releases and radioactivity in the airborne effluent can result in measurable off-site doses and since there is a potential for a portion of the dose to be attributable to radioactive iodine and possibly airborne particulate radioactivity releases, the radiological environmental monitoring program includes airborne sampling. The guidance provided in Table 3.12-1 of NUREG-1301 is used to establish locations for airborne sample acquisition, sampling frequency, and type of sample analysis. Continuous air sample locations are specified in accordance with guidance provided in Table 3.12-1 of NUREG-1301. The continuous air monitors (CAM) that are used to obtain continuous air samples include a radioiodine canister for weekly I-131 analysis and a particulate sampler which is analyzed for gross beta radioactivity and for quarterly isotopic analysis. Four CAM locations Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-72Rev. 1are near the facility property line in the north, south, east, and west direction sectors to ensure all directions are monitored. The north and east direction sectors (from the SHINE facility vent stack) have some of the highest calculated annual ground level deposition factor (D/Q) values. | ||
There is also a CAM located a sufficient distance from the SHINE facility to provide background information for airborne activity. Table 3.12-1 of NUREG-1301 suggests an additional CAM location in the vicinity of a community having the highest calculated annual average ground-level D/Q. This CAM requirement is combined with the CAM located at the site boundary in the north direction (refer to Table19.4.8-6). A description of air sample locations and the rationale for air sample locations are provided in Table19.4.8-6. CAM locations are shown on Figure19.4.8-1.19.4.8.3.2.4Ingestion Exposure PathwayNUREG-1301 suggests sampling of various biological media (biota monitoring) as a means to indirectly assess doses due to particulate and iodine ingestion. This type of monitoring may include sampling of soils, broad-leafed plants, fish, meat, or milk. Nuclear power plants have long monitored this pathway and have seen neither appreciable dose nor upward tending. Considering the size of the SHINE facility and the low power level of the SHINE irradiation units, in comparison to nuclear power plants, and that particulate and iodine radionuclides are not normally expected to be present in significant quantities within airborne effluent releases from the SHINE facility, biota monitoring is normally limited to monitoring of the milk pathway, as this pathway is most sensitive for detection of iodine releases. In the event that the results of environmental airborne samples, effluent monitor sample results, or milk sampling results indicate iodine or particulates in quantities large enough to result in a calculated dose greater than that predicted for normal releases (e.g., from GENII models used to show compliance with the 10 CFR 20.1101(d) dose constraint), then a more comprehensive sampling campaign is undertaken.Milk is one of the most important foods contributing to the radiation dose to people if milk animals are pastured in an area near a facility that releases radioactive material. Dairy production takes place approximately one-half mile (0.8 km) to the east of the SHINE facility and goat production takes place at approximately 0.69mi. (1.1km) northeast of the facility. Milk sampling will be performed following guidance (i.e., sampling frequency and type of sample analysis) provided in Table 3.12-1 of NUREG-1301. Cow and goat milk samples would be obtained from the dairy production site and the goat production site, respectively, on a semi-monthly basis (when animals are pastured) and on a monthly basis (at other times). An I-131 analysis and a gamma isotopic analysis would be performed on the samples. Since milk samples are considered a better indicator of radioiodine in the environment than vegetation, as long as milk samples are obtained, it is expected that vegetation sampling (e.g., broad leaf vegetables) would not be included in the exposure pathway sampling (in accordance with guidance provided in Table3.12-1 of NUREG-1301). | There is also a CAM located a sufficient distance from the SHINE facility to provide background information for airborne activity. Table 3.12-1 of NUREG-1301 suggests an additional CAM location in the vicinity of a community having the highest calculated annual average ground-level D/Q. This CAM requirement is combined with the CAM located at the site boundary in the north direction (refer to Table19.4.8-6). A description of air sample locations and the rationale for air sample locations are provided in Table19.4.8-6. CAM locations are shown on Figure19.4.8-1.19.4.8.3.2.4Ingestion Exposure PathwayNUREG-1301 suggests sampling of various biological media (biota monitoring) as a means to indirectly assess doses due to particulate and iodine ingestion. This type of monitoring may include sampling of soils, broad-leafed plants, fish, meat, or milk. Nuclear power plants have long monitored this pathway and have seen neither appreciable dose nor upward tending. Considering the size of the SHINE facility and the low power level of the SHINE irradiation units, in comparison to nuclear power plants, and that particulate and iodine radionuclides are not normally expected to be present in significant quantities within airborne effluent releases from the SHINE facility, biota monitoring is normally limited to monitoring of the milk pathway, as this pathway is most sensitive for detection of iodine releases. In the event that the results of environmental airborne samples, effluent monitor sample results, or milk sampling results indicate iodine or particulates in quantities large enough to result in a calculated dose greater than that predicted for normal releases (e.g., from GENII models used to show compliance with the 10 CFR 20.1101(d) dose constraint), then a more comprehensive sampling campaign is undertaken.Milk is one of the most important foods contributing to the radiation dose to people if milk animals are pastured in an area near a facility that releases radioactive material. Dairy production takes place approximately one-half mile (0.8 km) to the east of the SHINE facility and goat production takes place at approximately 0.69mi. (1.1km) northeast of the facility. Milk sampling will be performed following guidance (i.e., sampling frequency and type of sample analysis) provided in Table 3.12-1 of NUREG-1301. Cow and goat milk samples would be obtained from the dairy production site and the goat production site, respectively, on a semi-monthly basis (when animals are pastured) and on a monthly basis (at other times). An I-131 analysis and a gamma isotopic analysis would be performed on the samples. Since milk samples are considered a better indicator of radioiodine in the environment than vegetation, as long as milk samples are obtained, it is expected that vegetation sampling (e.g., broad leaf vegetables) would not be included in the exposure pathway sampling (in accordance with guidance provided in Table3.12-1 of NUREG-1301). | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-73Rev. 0[Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]Table 19.4.8-1 Summary of Major (a) Chemical Inventory and Quantitya) In excess of 1000 poundsChemicalApproximate Bounding Inventory, lb.Chemical Grouping[Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information] | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical | Nitric Acid 17,600Group 4 - Acids | ||
Organic and Mineral (Large Quantity) Nitric Acid Sulfuric Acid Total 11,600370015,300Stored in mini-bulk plastic tanks Group 5 Bases (Large Quantity)Calcium Hydroxide Caustic (NaOH) | -Organic/Mineral Sulfuric Acid 8100Group 4 - Acids | ||
-Organic/Mineral Calcium Hydroxide4800Group 5 - Bases Caustic (NaOH)1500Group 5 - Basesn-dodecane1600Group 2 - Flammable LiquidsNitrogen20,000 - -Ordinary Portland Cement20,000 - - | |||
Uranyl Sulfate3100 - - | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-74Rev. 0[Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]Table 19.4.8-2 Chemical Storage Area CharacteristicsChemical GroupChemicalApproximate Bounding Inventory of Chemical Reagents, lbs.Storage AreaGroup 2 Flammable Liquids(Large Quantity)n-dodecane1600Stored in accordance with NFPA 30 Requirements.[Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information] [Proprietary Information]Group 4 Acids - | |||
Organic and Mineral (Large Quantity) Nitric Acid Sulfuric Acid Total 11,600370015,300Stored in mini-bulk plastic tanks Group 5 Bases (Large Quantity)Calcium Hydroxide | |||
Caustic (NaOH) | |||
Total4800 1500 6300Stored in dedicated corrosive chemicals cabinet that is coated with corrosion resistant material. | Total4800 1500 6300Stored in dedicated corrosive chemicals cabinet that is coated with corrosion resistant material. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-75Rev. 0Table 19.4.8-3 Potential Occupational HazardsElectricalBattery banks (type unknown) Cable runs Diesel generator Electrical equipment (various) Heaters High voltage | ||
Motors Power tools Pumps Service outlets, fittings Switchgear Transformers Distribution lines\wiring underground wiring Hazardous MaterialsAsphyxiants (inert gas) | |||
Carcinogens (lead shielding) | Carcinogens (lead shielding) | ||
Decontamination materialsFluoridesHydrides LeadOxidizersPoisons (herbicides, insecticides)Thermal Boilers (modular) Bunsen burner/hot plates Electrical wiring Possible exhaust (forklifts) Welding surfaces Welding torch Internal Flooding | Decontamination materialsFluoridesHydrides LeadOxidizersPoisons (herbicides, insecticides)Thermal Boilers (modular) Bunsen burner/hot plates Electrical wiring Possible exhaust (forklifts) Welding surfaces Welding torch Internal Flooding Sources Domestic water Fire suppression piping/process waterLight water poolIonizing Radiation SourcesContamination Neutron beams Radioactive materialRadioactive sources Assay equipmentCriticality eventsSpontaneous CombustionCleaning/decontamination solventsDiesel fuel Grease Nitric acid Paint solvents Open FlameBunsen burnersWelding cutting torches Flammables Cleaning decontamination solvents Hydrogen gasesFlammable liquids Natural gas Paint/paint solvent Propane (forklift) PhysicalSharp edges or pointsPinch points Confined spaceTrippingCombustiblesPaper products (filters) | ||
Wood products (crate/packaging)Plastics (pallets)Chemical ReactionsConcentrationDisassociation ExothermicIncompatible chemical mixingUncontrolled chemical reactionsPyrophoric Material UraniumExplosive Materials Dust (without housekeeping)Explosive gas (hydrogen)Hydrogen (batteries) | Wood products (crate/packaging)Plastics (pallets)Chemical ReactionsConcentrationDisassociation | ||
ExothermicIncompatible chemical mixingUncontrolled chemical reactionsPyrophoric Material UraniumExplosive Materials Dust (without housekeeping)Explosive gas (hydrogen)Hydrogen (batteries) | |||
NitratesPeroxidesPropaneKinetic (Linear and Rotational)Acceleration/deceleration (lifted loads)Bearings (UREX)Belts (fan units) | NitratesPeroxidesPropaneKinetic (Linear and Rotational)Acceleration/deceleration (lifted loads)Bearings (UREX)Belts (fan units) | ||
Carts/dolliesCentrifugal (UREX 3-4000 RPM)Drills (trade shops) | Carts/dolliesCentrifugal (UREX 3-4000 RPM)Drills (trade shops) | ||
FansFork liftsGrinders MotorsPower toolsRail cars (depends on movement option)SawsPotential (Pressure)Autoclaves BoilersCoiled springs (overhead doors)Gas bottles Gas | FansFork liftsGrinders MotorsPower toolsRail cars (depends on movement option)SawsPotential (Pressure)Autoclaves | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical | BoilersCoiled springs (overhead doors)Gas bottles Gas receivers Pressure vessels Pressurized airPotential (Height/Mass)Cranes/hoists Elevated doorsElevated work surfacesElevators LiftLoading dockMezzanines Floor pitsScaffolds and ladders Stacked material | ||
Stairs Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-76Rev. 1Table 19.4.8-4 This table number not used Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-77Rev. 1Table 19.4.8-5 Annual Total Effective Dose Equivalent to the Public at Bounding Dose Receptors (b)Dose ReceptorAnnual TEDE Annual TEDEDose Constraint (a)MEI9.0 mrem(9.0 x 10 | |||
-2 mSv)10 mrem(1.0 x 10 | |||
-1 mSv)Nearest Full-Time Resident6.3 x 10-1 mrem(6.3 x 10 | |||
-3 mSv)a) Dose constraint based on 10 CFR 20.1101(d)b) Values do not include contributions from tritium Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-78Rev. 0Table 19.4.8-6 Environmental Monitoring Locations(Sheet 1 of 2)Monitoring TypeLocationRationaleGroundwater Sampling Locations Test Well SM-GW4A SamplingTest well located directly west of the SHINE facility.The groundwater gradient is to the west and the south and thus any groundwater contamination is likely to flow to the west and to the south. | |||
Test Well SM-GW2A SamplingTest well located directly south of the SHINE facility.The groundwater gradient is to the west and the south and thus any groundwater contamination is likely to flow to the west and to the south. | |||
TLD Locations(a) TLD #1Control TLD at Off-site Location Distance is sufficiently large such that it represents a background dose, i.e., there is no significant dose rate associated with SHINE facility activities or associated with airborne effluents.TLD #2Southeast Corner of Administration BuildingAdministrative Building is expected to be an on-site area with regular occupancy outside the SHINE facility. The southeast corner of the building is closest to the SHINE facility.TLD #3North Side of the support facility buildingThe support facility building is expected to be an on-site area with regular occupancy outside the SHINE facility. The north side of the support facility building is closest to the SHINE facility.TLD #4Operating Area Boundary Fence Directly East of the Waste Staging and Shipping | |||
BuildingTLD is positioned to detect direct radiation from the Waste Staging and Shipping Building.TLD #5Security StationThe Security Station is expected to be normally occupied.TLD #6Property Line to the East of the SHINE facility Vent StackThis location is in the direction of dairy production and the horse pasture. Also the prevailing wind is from the west as indicated by the annual wind rose so this is the location of the MEI. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-79Rev. 0Table 19.4.8-6 Environmental Monitoring Locations(Sheet 2 of 2)a)At least one TLD location includes a paired TLD for data quality determinationMonitoring TypeLocationRationaleTLD #7Property Line to the West of the SHINE facilityThis location ensures all directions are monitored.TLD #8Property Line to the North of the SHINE facility Vent StackThis location is in the direction of Janesville.TLD #9Property Line to the South of the SHINE facility Vent StackThis location is in the direction of the nearest occupied structure. | |||
Air Sampler (CAM) Locations Air Sampler (CAM #1)Off-site LocationControl air sampler located a sufficient distance from the SHINE facility such that airborne samples are unaffected by airborne effluent releases from the facility. | |||
Air Sampler (CAM #2)Close to Property Line, Directly North of the SHINE facility Vent StackThis direction has high D/Q and is in the direction of Janesville. Since the community of Janesville is relatively close to the site boundary, this air sampler location is credited with satisfying two of the conditions for air sample location recommendations in Table 3.12-1 of NUREG-1301. | |||
Air Sampler (CAM #3)Close to Property Line, East of the SHINE facility Vent | |||
StackThis direction has high D/Q and is in the direction of dairy production and the horse pasture. | |||
Air Sampler (CAM #4)Close to Property Line, West of the SHINE facility Vent | |||
StackThis location ensures all directions are monitored. | |||
Air Sampler (CAM #5)Close to Property Line, South of the SHINE facility Vent | |||
StackThis location is in the direction of the nearest occupied structure. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-80Rev. 0Table 19.4.8-7 Administrative Dose LimitsType of Dose10 CFR Part 20 Limit (rem/year) | |||
SHINE Annual Administrative Limit (rem/year)Adult Radiological WorkerThe more limiting of: Total effective dose equivalent to whole body, or Sum of deep-dose equivalent and committed dose equivalent to any organ or tissue other than lens of eye 5500.55Eye dose equivalent to lens of eye 151.5Shallow-dose equivalent to skin of the whole body or any extremity 505Declared Pregnant WorkerDose to embryo/fetus during the entire pregnancy: taken as the sum of the deep-dose equivalent to the woman and the dose to the embryo/fetus from radionuclides in the embryo/fetus and the woman0.5 rem per gestation period0.5 rem per gestation periodIndividual Members of the PublicTotal effective dose equivalent0.10.1 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewWaste ManagementSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-81Rev. 0[Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]19.4.9WASTE MANAGEMENT19.4.9.1Sources and Types of Waste CreatedThe following subsections discuss hazardous, radioactive and mixed wastes associated with the SHINE facility. Nonradioactive wastes are discussed in Subsection 19.4.8.1. | |||
19.4.9.1.1Sources of Hazardous, Radioactive and Mixed WastesThe sources of radioactive liquid, solid, and gaseous waste generated by the operation of the SHINE facility are found in Subsection 19.2.5.1.The only hazardous (or potentially hazardous) materials are [Proprietary Information] and the zeolite beds. Although small quantities of [Proprietary Information] will be used in the sulfate to nitrate conversion process, the [Proprietary Information] sludge is expected to pass TCLP, and is not considered hazardous waste. Waste streams with a hazardous component are mixed low-level waste such as the zeolite beds and are handled as described in Subsection 19.2.5.3.1.19.4.9.1.2Type and Quantity of Hazardous, Radioactive, and Mixed WastesThe type and quantity of radioactive and mixed wastes are provided in Table19.2.5-1. Discussion of nonradiological waste is provided in Subsection 19.4.8.1.19.4.9.2Description of Waste Management SystemsWaste systems designed to collect, store, and process the waste from the SHINE facility are discussed in Subsection 19.2.5.3.19.4.9.3Waste Disposal PlansWaste streams with a hazardous component are mixed low-level waste and are handled as described in Subsection 19.2.5.3.1.The radiological wastes listed in Table 19.2.5-1 are stored on-site for a period of time before they are shipped off-site. The frequency of shipment of each type of waste is provided in Table19.2.5-1. Enough storage capacity is provided on-site to accommodate the amount of waste between shipments to the off-site repositories. How solid and liquid radwaste is handled is discussed in Subsections 19.2.5.3.1 and 19.2.5.3.2. Radioactive waste gases are discussed in Subsections 19.4.8.2.2.1 and 19.4.8.2.4.1.The radioactive wastes will be transported to the destinations listed on Table 19.2.5-1.19.4.9.4Waste-Minimization PlanThe waste minimization plan to reduce the generation of waste from the SHINE facility is discussed in Subsection 19.2.5.6. | 19.4.9.1.1Sources of Hazardous, Radioactive and Mixed WastesThe sources of radioactive liquid, solid, and gaseous waste generated by the operation of the SHINE facility are found in Subsection 19.2.5.1.The only hazardous (or potentially hazardous) materials are [Proprietary Information] and the zeolite beds. Although small quantities of [Proprietary Information] will be used in the sulfate to nitrate conversion process, the [Proprietary Information] sludge is expected to pass TCLP, and is not considered hazardous waste. Waste streams with a hazardous component are mixed low-level waste such as the zeolite beds and are handled as described in Subsection 19.2.5.3.1.19.4.9.1.2Type and Quantity of Hazardous, Radioactive, and Mixed WastesThe type and quantity of radioactive and mixed wastes are provided in Table19.2.5-1. Discussion of nonradiological waste is provided in Subsection 19.4.8.1.19.4.9.2Description of Waste Management SystemsWaste systems designed to collect, store, and process the waste from the SHINE facility are discussed in Subsection 19.2.5.3.19.4.9.3Waste Disposal PlansWaste streams with a hazardous component are mixed low-level waste and are handled as described in Subsection 19.2.5.3.1.The radiological wastes listed in Table 19.2.5-1 are stored on-site for a period of time before they are shipped off-site. The frequency of shipment of each type of waste is provided in Table19.2.5-1. Enough storage capacity is provided on-site to accommodate the amount of waste between shipments to the off-site repositories. How solid and liquid radwaste is handled is discussed in Subsections 19.2.5.3.1 and 19.2.5.3.2. Radioactive waste gases are discussed in Subsections 19.4.8.2.2.1 and 19.4.8.2.4.1.The radioactive wastes will be transported to the destinations listed on Table 19.2.5-1.19.4.9.4Waste-Minimization PlanThe waste minimization plan to reduce the generation of waste from the SHINE facility is discussed in Subsection 19.2.5.6. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewWaste ManagementSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewWaste ManagementSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-82Rev. 019.4.9.5Environmental ImpactsSHINE facility wastes are managed as described in the previous subsections 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. Cumulative impacts are discussed in Subsection 19.4.13.8.2. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-83Rev. 019.4.10TRANSPORTATION19.4.10.1Nuclear Materials TransportedNuclear materials are transported to and from the SHINE facility located in Janesville, Wisconsin. The nuclear material transported to the SHINE facility consists of low enriched uranium (LEU) metal and tritium. The nuclear materials transported from the SHINE facility consist of generated medical isotopes Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133, and the radioactive wastes generated during the production of the medical isotopes. 19.4.10.1.1Transportation Mode and Projected DestinationsThe LEU metal is transported by truck to the SHINE facility from the Y-12 facility located in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. The Y-12 facility is approximately 650 mi. (1046.1 km) by road from Janesville, Wisconsin.The radioactive wastes are transported by truck to various disposal facilities. The highway distances from Janesville, Wisconsin, to the disposal facilities are as follows:*Approximately 1450 mi. (2333.6 km) to the EnergySolutions facility in Clive, Utah.*Approximately 1305 mi. (2100.2 km) to the Waste Control Specialists (WCS) facility in Andrews, Texas.*Approximately 660 mi. (1062.2 km) to the Diversified Scientific Services, Inc. (DSSI) facility in Kingston, Tennessee.The medical isotopes produced at the SHINE facility are transported by air to the various facilities for final processing and distribution to medical facilities. Transportation by truck is used as a back-up in cases where inclement weather does not permit air delivery. The highway distances from Janesville, Wisconsin, to these facilities are as follows:*Approximately 330 mi. (531.1 km) to the Covidien facility in Hazelwood, Missouri.*Approximately 1100 mi. (1770.3 km) to the Lantheus Medical Imaging facility in North Billerica, Massachusetts. *Approximately 975 mi. (1569.1 km) to the Nordion facility in Kanata, Ontario, Canada.19.4.10.1.2Treatment and PackagingThe radioactive wastes generated at the SHINE facility are treated and packaged as discussed in Subsection 19.2.5.3. Solid waste includes used components and equipment. This material is collected, stored in the facility to allow for radioactive decay, and then size-reduced and consolidated for shipment as low specific activity (LSA) material. Higher activity waste is processed and solidified prior to shipment. Liquid waste that cannot be reused is held for radioactive decay and then solidified before shipment.The medical isotopes are extracted from the LEU target solution at the end of each irradiation cycle. The target solution is removed from the TSV and transferred to a hot cell where isotopes are selectively extracted. Purified Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133 are tested by quality control before being packaged for shipment to the various processing facilities. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-84Rev. 0Prior to shipment, all radioactive material is packaged to meet the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) and NRC requirements for the transportation of radioactive materials.19.4.10.1.3Incident-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 medical isotopes and the radioactive wastes (transportation workers and handling workers).The calculation of the incident-free radiological doses is performed using RADCAT/RADTRAN and TRAGIS computer codes. The RADCAT/RADTRAN computer code is used to calculate the doses to the workers and the members of the public using the routes defined by TRAGIS and population data from the USCB. Most of the medical isotopes will be shipped by air, and the doses associated with this transport mode are smaller than the transportation via land routes due to shorter exposure time to the workers and the smaller number of exposed members of the public during air transportation. As described below, transportation scenarios based on land routes are used to conservatively estimate the radiological doses due to medical isotope transport.The TRAGIS computer code is used to determine the highway route distance traveled for a shipment from the SHINE facility to a destination facility. TRAGIS also provides the population density along the route, which is required for calculating the dose to members of the public. However, the version of the TRAGIS computer code used in this analysis (WebTRAGIS 5.0 Beta) did not have the capability to provide population density data. Therefore, the population density data is estimated using the following approach. The state-level mileage distributions for rural, suburban, and urban population density zones are conservatively estimated by superimposing the routes from TRAGIS on the population profile maps (year 2010) from the USCB. The maps that show the routes from TRAGIS and the associated population densities from the USCB are shown in Figures 19.4.10-1 through 19.4.10-4. The summary of the population densities along the transportation routes analyzed are provided in Tables 19.4.10-1 through 19.4.10-4. Using the TRAGIS output, the regions that contain segments of each transportation route are classified as rural, suburban, or urban population zones. In TRAGIS, a population density less than 139 people per square mile is considered a rural population. A population density between 139 and 3326 people per square mile is considered a suburban population. A population density greater than 3326 people per square mile is considered an urban population. The ranges provided on the maps obtained from the USCB do not match these ranges. Therefore, in cases where there are multiple population zones in a region of the transportation route, the population zone with the highest population density is identified and assumed for the region. The TRAGIS Beta release provides a population count of the total exposed population within 800m (243.8ft.) of the route. Adjustment factors are calculated based on the exposed population using the population count from TRAGIS and the exposed population based on the population densities from Figures 19.4.10-1 through 19.4.10-4. Tables 19.4.10-1 through 19.4.10-4 provide the exposed populations along the transportation routes and the associated adjustment factors. The analysis for determining the exposed populations along the transportation routes is performed in a conservative method to ensure the calculated dose values will bound the TRAGIS values once the computer code is updated to internally include the population density data. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-85Rev. 0The doses due to transportation of the radioactive wastes are calculated for shipments to the WCS facility in Andrews, Texas (bounded at 12 shipments/year) and the EnergySolutions facility in Clive, Utah (bounded at 22 shipments/year). The doses due to transportation of radioactive wastes to other disposal facilities, such as the DSSI facility in Kingston, Tennessee, are not calculated because they are bounded by the doses associated with transportation of radioactive wastes to the WCS and EnergySolutions facilities, primarily due to the smaller travel distance which reduces the exposure time to the workers and the members of the public. The doses due to the transportation of the medical isotopes are calculated using scenarios based on truck shipments to the Covidien facility in Hazelwood, Missouri and the Lantheus Medical Imaging facility in North Billerica, Massachusetts. The estimated total number of shipments per year is 468, or nine shipments per week. Most of these shipments will be by air, but to estimate the effect of a combination of shipments by air and ground transportation it is assumed that approximately one quarter of the shipments (two per week) are shipped by truck. This is more truck shipments than is expected, but the use of this larger number of truck shipments conservatively accounts for the dose due to air shipments. Most of the truck shipments would be sent to the closest facility, which is Covidien, because of the short half-life of the medical isotopes. However, shipment by truck of the longer lived isotopes to other facilities may occur. Therefore it is assumed that half of the truck shipments (52 shipments/year) are to Covidien and an equal number of shipments (52 shipments/year) are to the Lantheus Medical Imaging facility. The doses due to the transportation of medical isotopes to other processing facilities, such as the Nordion facility in Kanata, Ontario, Canada, are not calculated because they are bounded by the doses associated with the transportation of medical isotopes to the Lantheus facility, primarily because the transportation route is longer and its path is through areas with a higher population density. The use of these scenarios will bound the shipment by air because the exposed population is smaller and the exposure time for the crew is shorter for each shipment. The dose due to package handling will increase for air shipments, so a conservatively large dose is calculated for the handlers in order to conservatively estimate the dose component for air shipments.The doses associated with the transportation of the LEU metal and tritium gas are much smaller than the doses associated with the transportation of other radioactive materials and are not calculated. The doses associated with the transportation of the LEU metal are much smaller because of the infrequent shipments (less than one per year) and the low activity in each shipment. The doses associated with the transportation of the tritium gas are negligible because, as a beta emitter, the dose rate outside a container of tritium is practically zero, independent of the quantity of tritium.The annual incident-free radiological doses due to transportation of radioactive materials from the SHINE facility are summarized in Table 19.4.10-5. These doses are calculated assuming the dose rates due to the shipping containers are equal to typical dose rates based on reported dose rates from historical shipments of medical isotopes and low-level waste. The dose to the workers due to the transportation of radioactive material from the SHINE facility is 9.63 person-rem/year. The dose to the members of the public due to the transportation of radioactive material from the SHINE facility is 0.350 person-rem/year. As indicated in Subsection 19.4.3.7, the population in the region around the facility is 160,331, and the background dose rate identified in Subsection 19.4.3.8.2 is 620 mrem/yr (6.2 mSv/yr). Therefore, the population dose in the vicinity of the SHINE facility due to background radiation is approximately 1E+05 person-rem/year. Compared to the background dose in the vicinity of the SHINE facility, the effect of incident-free transportation is SMALL. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-86Rev. 019.4.10.2Non-Nuclear Materials TransportedGeneral office supplies and industrial supplies supporting the maintenance and day-to-day operations of the SHINE facility are transported to the site. Office waste is generated at the site and transported from the site by City of Janesville without being treated or packaged. These activities are typical for a general commercial facility within City of Janesville. The associated incident-free transportation activities do not have an adverse impact on the environment, workers, or the members of the public. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-87Rev. 0Table 19.4.10-1 Population Density, Exposed Population, and the Adjustment Factor for Transportation Route to Andrews, Texas StateZoneDistance Traveled (mi.)Distance Traveled (km)PopulationDensity(persons/km 2)Population Along Route SegmentWIRural0.00.06.60E+010.00E+00Suburban3.2 5.11.67E+031.36E+04Urban12.019.33.86E+031.19E+05ILRural94.3151.76.60E+011.60E+04Suburban127.0204.31.67E+035.46E+05Urban86.8139.73.86E+038.63E+05MORural39.263.16.60E+016.66E+03Suburban170.8274.81.67E+037.34E+05Urban80.5129.53.86E+038.00E+05OKRural184.6297.06.60E+013.14E+04Suburban126.8204.01.67E+035.45E+05Urban32.852.83.86E+033.26E+05TXRural238.6383.96.60E+014.05E+04Suburban97.6157.01.67E+034.20E+05Urban10.817.43.86E+031.07E+05Total1305.02099.64.57E+06Population from TRAGIS128,667Adjustment Factor2.82E-02 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-88Rev. 0Table 19.4.10-2 Population Density, Exposed Population, and the Adjustment Factor for Transportation Route to Clive, UtahStateZoneDistance Traveled (mi.)Distance Traveled (km)PopulationDensity(persons/km 2)Population Along Route SegmentWIRural0.00.06.60E+010.00E+00Suburban3.25.11.67E+031.36E+04Urban12.019.33.86E+031.19E+05ILRural36.158.16.60E+016.14E+03Suburban51.783.21.67E+032.22E+05Urban38.361.63.86E+033.80E+05IARural142.8229.86.60E+012.43E+04Suburban44.671.81.67E+031.92E+05Urban117.5189.13.86E+031.17E+06NERural249.6401.66.60E+014.24E+04Suburban165.7266.61.67E+037.12E+05Urban27.844.73.86E+032.76E+05WYRural259.1416.96.60E+014.40E+04Suburban52.183.81.67E+032.24E+05Urban90.4145.53.86E+038.99E+05UTRural59.094.96.60E+011.00E+04Suburban12.119.51.67E+035.21E+04Urban87.9141.43.86E+038.73E+05 Total1449.92332.95.26E+06Population from TRAGIS68,655Adjustment Factor1.31E-02 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-89Rev. 0Table 19.4.10-3 Population Density, Exposed Population, and the Adjustment Factor for Transportation Route to Hazelwood, MissouriStateZoneDistance Traveled (mi.)Distance Traveled (km)Population Density(persons/km 2)Population Along Route SegmentWIRural0.00.06.60E+010.00E+00Suburban3.2 5.11.67E+031.36E+04Urban12.019.33.86E+031.19E+05ILRural94.3151.76.60E+011.60E+04Suburban122.0196.31.67E+035.25E+05Urban85.9138.23.86E+038.54E+05MORural0.00.06.60E+010.00E+00Suburban0.0 0.01.67E+030.00E+00Urban11.518.53.86E+031.14E+05Total328.9529.1 1.64E+06Population from TRAGIS24,272Adjustment Factor 1.48E-02 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-90Rev. 0Table 19.4.10-4 Population Density, Exposed Population, and the Adjustment Factor for Transportation Route to North Billerica, MassachusettsStateZoneDistance Traveled (mi.)Distance Traveled (km)Population Density(persons/km 2)Population Along Route SegmentWIRural0.00.06.60E+010.00E+00Suburban3.25.11.67E+031.36E+04Urban12.019.33.86E+031.19E+05ILRural0.00.06.60E+010.00E+00Suburban30.549.11.67E+031.31E+05Urban87.8141.33.86E+038.73E+05INRural13.321.46.60E+012.26E+03Suburban62.8101.01.67E+032.70E+05Urban70.3113.13.86E+036.99E+05OHRural20.432.86.60E+013.46E+03Suburban139.2224.01.67E+035.99E+05Urban88.3142.13.86E+038.78E+05PARural0.00.06.60E+010.00E+00Suburban13.321.41.67E+035.72E+04Urban33.453.73.86E+033.32E+05NYRural13.321.46.60E+012.26E+03Suburban245.0394.21.67E+031.05E+06Urban119.4192.13.86E+031.19E+06MARural8.914.36.60E+011.51E+03Suburban63.8102.71.67E+032.74E+05Urban76.1122.43.86E+037.56E+05 Total1101.01771.47.25E+06Population from TRAGIS215,374Adjustment Factor2.97E-02 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-91Rev. 0Table 19.4.10-5 Incident-Free Radiological Dose Summary (Person-Rem/Year)Destination FacilityReceptorWCSEnergySolutionsCovidienLantheusTotalWorkers(Transportation)1.44E-012.93E-016.92E-012.31E+003.44E+00Workers(Handling)1.51E-012.77E-012.88E+002.88E+006.19E+00Members of the Public1.48E-021.22E-023.61E-022.87E-013.5E-01 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-92Rev. 019.4.11POSTULATED ACCIDENTSThis subsection identifies the postulated initiating events (IEs) and credible accidents for the SHINE facility that were selected to drive the design of the facility; designated herein as design basis accidents (DBAs). This subsection also describes the maximum hypothetical accident (MHA).The major hazards associated with the SHINE facility are: *Fissile material as either feed or in target solution. *Irradiated fissile solution and corresponding fission products present not only within the TSV but throughout the SHINE facility.*Neutrons produced by the accelerator. | ||
*Radioactive waste.*Production of hydrogen by radiolytic decomposition of irradiated fissile solution.*Failure of tanks and/or vessels with significant quantities of hazardous chemicals.*Exothermic reactions between chemicals leading to damage to tanks or vessels containing significant quantities of hazardous materials.*Mishap during handling of chemicals leads to breach or spill of chemicals from tanks or vessels.*Mishap during handling of chemicals leads to spill of chemicals outside tanks or vessels within the facility.*Mishap during delivery of hazardous chemicals leads to spill of chemicals outside the facility.19.4.11.1Methodology for Identification of Design Basis AccidentsThe methodology for identifying DBAs is described in Chapter 13.The SHINE facility has been divided into two major areas: the Irradiation Facility (IF) and the Radioisotope Production Facility (RPF). The IF consists of the Irradiation Units (IUs) and supporting structures, systems, and components dedicated to the irradiation of target solution. | *Radioactive waste.*Production of hydrogen by radiolytic decomposition of irradiated fissile solution.*Failure of tanks and/or vessels with significant quantities of hazardous chemicals.*Exothermic reactions between chemicals leading to damage to tanks or vessels containing significant quantities of hazardous materials.*Mishap during handling of chemicals leads to breach or spill of chemicals from tanks or vessels.*Mishap during handling of chemicals leads to spill of chemicals outside tanks or vessels within the facility.*Mishap during delivery of hazardous chemicals leads to spill of chemicals outside the facility.19.4.11.1Methodology for Identification of Design Basis AccidentsThe methodology for identifying DBAs is described in Chapter 13.The SHINE facility has been divided into two major areas: the Irradiation Facility (IF) and the Radioisotope Production Facility (RPF). The IF consists of the Irradiation Units (IUs) and supporting structures, systems, and components dedicated to the irradiation of target solution. | ||
This includes the primary cooling systems and the tritium purification system. The RPF includes the isotope extraction and purification, target solution preparation and clean-up, radioactive waste handling and chemical storage systems and areas.According to the Final ISG Augmenting NUREG-1537, the following accident categories, as modified for the SHINE facility, are to be addressed for the IF and RPF:*MHA. | This includes the primary cooling systems and the tritium purification system. The RPF includes the isotope extraction and purification, target solution preparation and clean-up, radioactive waste handling and chemical storage systems and areas.According to the Final ISG Augmenting NUREG-1537, the following accident categories, as modified for the SHINE facility, are to be addressed for the IF and RPF:*MHA. | ||
| Line 1,270: | Line 2,625: | ||
*External events.*Mishandling or malfunction of equipment.*Large undamped power oscillations (fuel temperature/void-reactivity feedback). | *External events.*Mishandling or malfunction of equipment.*Large undamped power oscillations (fuel temperature/void-reactivity feedback). | ||
*Detonation and deflagration.*Unintended exothermic chemical reactions other than detonation.*Facility system interaction events. | *Detonation and deflagration.*Unintended exothermic chemical reactions other than detonation.*Facility system interaction events. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-93Rev. 0*Hazardous chemical releases.*Facility fire (RPF).*Unique facility IEs/DBAs.All IEs and scenarios applicable to the IF are evaluated in Section 13a2. Those applicable to the RPF areas are covered in Section 13b.Representative accident scenarios with bounding consequences for each of the above IEs/scenario categories are to be evaluated quantitatively in Sections 13a2.2, 13b.2, and 13b.3, per the guidance in NUREG-1537 and the Final ISG Augmenting NURE G-1537. The most bounding DBAs with respect to consequences for both the IF and the RPF are analytically evaluated in Subsection19.4.11.3 below. 19.4.11.2Identified Initiating Events and Design Basis AccidentsThis subsection gives a quantitative discussion of the consequences of the MHA. This subsection also briefly discusses IEs and DBAs as well as some of the controls that are being designed to prevent or mitigate the potential consequences to levels that are acceptable (i.e.,within regulatory criteria). These IEs and DBAs are designed to bound the potential accident scenarios in each of the accident categories of interest. Potential radiological consequences of DBAs are discussed qualitatively as a function of the source terms released during the postulated scenarios, and controls that mitigate the consequences. The consequences of the DBAs are bounded by the quantitative analysis performed for the MHA.19.4.11.2.1Maximum Hypothetical AccidentThe MHA is defined to be an event that results in radiological consequences that exceed those of any accident considered to be credible. The MHA therefore bounds the radiological consequences of postulated DBA scenarios at the SHINE facility. The MHA need not be a credible scenario but a failure assumed to establish an outer limit consequence.For the SHINE facility, the MHA is based on events unique to the facility that hypothetically could result in a release of radioactive materials. The SHINE facility is subdivided into two major process areas: the IF and the RPF. Processes in both areas of the facility are generally of low energy (i.e., subcritical, low heat generation). In addition, the facility is being designed to withstand credible external events. Therefore, an internal accident releasing the largest possible quantity of radioactive material is considered to be the initiating event that would result in the maximum bounding radiological consequence. The IF and RPF are designed to function as two independent areas within the facility. Though the IF and RPF have processes and systems that interact with each other, they are physically separated by concrete walls. Design features such as irradiation cell shielding, redundant isolation valves, ventilation dampers, and penetration seals in both areas, ensure that an accident in one area is highly unlikely to affect the other area. In addition, both areas are separated to ensure that a radiological release in one area does not have a significant effect on the other area. Because of this physical separation, it is necessary to analyze both the IF and RPF to determine the MHA. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-94Rev. 0The MHA is used to demonstrate that the maximum consequences of an accident at the SHINE facility are within the acceptable regulatory limits of 10 CFR 20.1301. The MHA assumes a failure that results in a radioactive release with radiological consequences that bound all credible DBAs.Because the SHINE facility is being designed to withstand external events such as tornadoes, seismic events, and man-made external events, scenarios that involve multiple irradiation units are not considered to be credible, and are not analyzed further. In addition, several internal events were eliminated as possible MHAs due to the design of facility. For example, a pipe break containing fissile inventory being transferred from a TSV dump tank to a supercell in the RPF was considered. Because all production piping is located in covered, concrete trenches that are designed to contain any rupture of inventory and drain to sumps that are geometrically designed to prevent an inadvertent criticality, this event was eliminated as a possible MHA. There is no credible internal event that will result in releases from multiple TSVs.A potential MHA considered was a rupture or leakage of the TSV or TSV dump tank resulting in a complete release of the target solution and fission product inventory into one IU cell. This potential MHA assumes zero hours of decay time. This event occurs within the confinement of the IU cell and is assumed to release the entire inventory of one TSV into the IU cell. The calculated radionuclide inventory released from the TSV to the IU cell represents the bounding source term for any other postulated accident in the IF. Any potential loss of TSV inventory within the IU is mitigated by several controls, namely: confinement provided by the IU cell and the RCA ventilation system zone (RVZ)1 (including the presence of bubble-tight dampers to isolate the cells upon detection of above-threshold radiation levels), radiation monitoring (to be interlocked with bubble-tight dampers), shielded pipe penetrations, and TSV off-gas system. Another potential MHA considered was a release of the inventory stored in the noble gas removal system (NGRS) storage tanks. This event occurs within the confinement of the noble gas storage tank room, located in the RPF. The calculated radionuclide inventory released from the NGRS storage tanks represents the bounding source term for any other postulated accident in the RPF.Controls to mitigate the consequences of the MHA in the RPF include: the NGRS room, radiation monitors, RCA ventilation system Zone 1 (RVZ1) (including the presence of bubble-tight dampers to isolate the cells upon detection of above-threshold radiation levels), radiation monitoring (to be interlocked with bubble-tight dampers), and RCA ventilation system Zone 2 (RVZ2).The evaluation of the inventory for the considered MHAs is based on a set of limiting initial conditions that were designed to maximize the potential source terms and to bound credible scenarios. This includes assumptions regarding the total time for irradiation, failure to decay target solution prior to processing, process faults that result in additional target solution cycles, and failure of fission product removal. | ||
The amount of radioactive material released to the environment (i.e., source term) was calculated for both MHAs based on the five factor formula:ST = MAR x DR x ARF x RF x LPF. (Equation 19.4.11-1) | The amount of radioactive material released to the environment (i.e., source term) was calculated for both MHAs based on the five factor formula:ST = MAR x DR x ARF x RF x LPF. (Equation 19.4.11-1) | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-95Rev. 0Where:ST refers to the source termMAR refers to the inventory of material-at-risk from the postulated scenarios. DR represents the fraction of the inventory impacted by the scenario (in the evaluated cases assumed to be 1.0).ARF/RF refer to the airborne release fractions and respirable fractions for the radionuclides assumed to be present in the inventory (based on published ARF/RF in NUREG-6410).LPF refers to the leak-path factor or fraction of the material that is airborne that is assumed to be released to the environment.For the postulated scenarios, the entire inventory of the TSV and the NGRS holding tanks are released to the IU cell and the noble gas storage cell, respectively. ARF x RF for solution spills for particulates from NUREG-6410 were selected. For halogens an ARF x RF of 0.25 was assumed, while an ARF x RF of 1.0 was assumed for noble gases. In-plant transport of the radionuclides was based on the assumptions concerning the functioning of available plant systems. Mitigated consequences are based on the assumption that the radioactive material will be released into the IU cell and that no more than 1 percent of the airborne radioactive material will be released by the IF before the cell is isolated by the RVZ1 isolation bubble-tight dampers. Any radioactive material that is released from the noble gas storage room before it is isolated is assumed to be filtered by the HEPA and charcoal filters. For dose calculations, all releases are assumed to be at ground level. These calculations are based on the 50 th percentile /Q. Doses are calculated using ICRP-30 dose conversion factors, and receptor locations are the closest point on the site boundary and the nearest permanent resident.The total effective dose equivalent (TEDE) and the thyroid doses for the postulated scenarios are:*Rupture or leakage of the TSV or TSV dump tank scenario: TEDE of 1.65E-02 rem at the site boundary and 2.30E-03 rem for the nearest residence.*Release of the inventory stored in the NGRS storage tanks scenario: TEDE of 7.98E-02 rem at the site boundary and 1.12E-02 rem for the nearest residence.Based on the calculated doses, the MHA for the SHINE facility is the release of the inventory stored in the NGRS storage tanks. The dose for the MHA is less than the dose criteria in 10 CFR 20.1301. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-96Rev. 019.4.11.2.2Insertion of Excess ReactivityExcess reactivity insertion in the subcritical assembly system (SCAS) is identified as a potential DBA that needs to be evaluated. This DBA covers events that can lead to an insertion of positive reactivity in the SCAS. Examples include:*Pressurization of target solution fluid. | ||
*Excessive cool down. | *Excessive cool down. | ||
*Target solution injection.*Geometry changes.*Reactivity insertion due to moderator lumping effects. | *Target solution injection.*Geometry changes.*Reactivity insertion due to moderator lumping effects. | ||
*Inadvertent introduction of other materials into the target solution.*Loss of water from the target solution during irradiation.This event is not applicable to the RPF.The SCAS has a TSV reactivity protection system (TRPS). Anticipated protective signals of the TRPS for TSV shutdown and dump valve actuation include a combination of high neutron flux levels, high flux rate, high TSV fill rate, high TSV level, or indication of a loss of cooling to the TSV. Shutdown of the TSV will limit the amount of power and pressure increase allowed in the TSV preventing PSB breach. Any potential releases from such events are further mitigated by the off-gas system, the facility ventilation system, and the passive nature of the confinement provided by the IU cells and facility itself. As such, release of the entire contents of one TSV bounds any radiological release from such a reactivity insertion event and is therefore bounded by the MHA.19.4.11.2.3Reduction or Loss of CoolingThe reduction or loss of cooling event is identified as a potential DBA. This scenario, however, is bounded and covered by the MHA event, since there is little or no consequence from loss of cooling in the IF or RPF.The design of the IF, including the intrinsic properties of the irradiated solution, are such that the reduction or loss of cooling (even without engineering features) will lead to a reduction in the neutron multiplication factor (keff), thus leading to a reduction in the amount of energy (or power) generated under this condition. Furthermore, just like for insertion of excess reactivity, the SCAS has a TRPS trip that serves as a defense-in-depth control to mitigate any potential consequences from this postulated scenario. Indication of a loss of cooling to the TSV results in TRPS shutdown of the TSV. This limits the amount of power and pressure increase allowed in the TSV, preventing PSB breach. Any potential | *Inadvertent introduction of other materials into the target solution.*Loss of water from the target solution during irradiation.This event is not applicable to the RPF.The SCAS has a TSV reactivity protection system (TRPS). Anticipated protective signals of the TRPS for TSV shutdown and dump valve actuation include a combination of high neutron flux levels, high flux rate, high TSV fill rate, high TSV level, or indication of a loss of cooling to the TSV. Shutdown of the TSV will limit the amount of power and pressure increase allowed in the TSV preventing PSB breach. Any potential releases from such events are further mitigated by the off-gas system, the facility ventilation system, and the passive nature of the confinement provided by the IU cells and facility itself. As such, release of the entire contents of one TSV bounds any radiological release from such a reactivity insertion event and is therefore bounded | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical | |||
by the MHA.19.4.11.2.3Reduction or Loss of CoolingThe reduction or loss of cooling event is identified as a potential DBA. This scenario, however, is bounded and covered by the MHA event, since there is little or no consequence from loss of cooling in the IF or RPF.The design of the IF, including the intrinsic properties of the irradiated solution, are such that the reduction or loss of cooling (even without engineering features) will lead to a reduction in the neutron multiplication factor (keff), thus leading to a reduction in the amount of energy (or power) generated under this condition. Furthermore, just like for insertion of excess reactivity, the SCAS has a TRPS trip that serves as a defense-in-depth control to mitigate any potential consequences from this postulated scenario. Indication of a loss of cooling to the TSV results in TRPS shutdown of the TSV. This limits the amount of power and pressure increase allowed in the TSV, preventing PSB breach. Any potential re leases from such events are further mitigated by the off-gas system, the facility ventilation system, and the passive nature of the confinement provided by the IU cells and facility itself. Finally, given the low decay heat production, the light water pool serves as a passive heat sink that prevents the temperature of the target solution from rising to any significant degree. As such, release of the entire contents of one TSV bounds any radiological release from a reduction or loss of cooling event and is therefore bounded by the MHA. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-97Rev. 019.4.11.2.4Mishandling or Malfunction of Target SolutionThe following events are identified as potential DBAs representing the mishandling or malfunction of target solution:*Loss of PSB in the IF.-Covers target solution spills and leaks (bounded by release of entire TSV contents).-Vessel/line failures in the RPF (to be covered under mishandling or malfunction of equipment).*Inadvertent criticality in the IF.-Covers IEs associated with failure to control pH in the target solution.-Failure to control target solution temperature and pressure is covered under the reactivity insertion DBA.*Inadvertent criticality in the RPF.-Covers IEs associated with failure to control pH or temperature in the target solution.Loss of PSB and an inadvertent nuclear criticality are prevented and/or mitigated by the design of robust and criticality safe geometry tanks, piping, and valves, along with the design of spill pits or berms around tanks containing significant quantities of fissile material. The TSV where irradiation operations take place is designed with features and safety controls such as dump valves to limit the duration of an inadvertent criticality. Furthermore, administrative controls on the concentration of fissile material in the TSV or tanks are implemented to prevent the occurrence of an inadvertent criticality within the facility. Tanks containing significant quantities of fissile material are seismically qualified to survive site-specific design basis seismic events. | |||
Any potential releases of radioac tive material, from either a loss of PSB or an inadvertent criticality, are mitigated by the off-gas system, the facility ventilation system, and the passive nature of the confinement provided by the IU cells and the facility itself. An inadvertent criticality is likely to generate source terms and doses that are equivalent to an insertion of excess reactivity. This is because these events would be limited to a single or small number of pulses. Thus, this event would be bounded by the MHA. | |||
19.4.11.2.5Loss of Normal Electrical Power The loss of normal electrical power affects both the IF and RPF, and has been identified as a potential DBA. | 19.4.11.2.5Loss of Normal Electrical Power The loss of normal electrical power affects both the IF and RPF, and has been identified as a potential DBA. | ||
A loss of normal electric power causes a shutdown of the TSV and thus reduces significantly the power and heat that could be generated. After shutdown of the TSV, decay heat levels are low enough to allow cooling to ambient, thus a loss of electric power does not cause a breach of the PSB. The loss of power also could lead to an initiating event that could result in various potential accident conditions, including the loss of ventilation and off-gas system, which in turn could lead to a deflagration event from the build-up of hydrogen on the top of the TSV cavity or in the off-gas Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical | A loss of normal electric power causes a shutdown of the TSV and thus reduces significantly the power and heat that could be generated. After shutdown of the TSV, decay heat levels are low enough to allow cooling to ambient, thus a loss of electric power does not cause a breach of the PSB. The loss of power also could lead to an initiating event that could result in various potential accident conditions, including the loss of ventilation and off-gas system, which in turn could lead to a deflagration event from the build-up of hydrogen on the top of the TSV cavity or in the off-gas Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-98Rev. 0system itself. This scenario is covered separately under detonation or deflagration due to the generation of hydrogen. 19.4.11.2.6External Events The following potential external events have been identified as DBAs for the SHINE facility: *Seismic event affecting the IF and RPF.*Tornado or high-winds affecting the IF and RPF.*Small aircraft crash into the IF or RPF.The facility structure, including the SCAS and critical process equipment (including tanks containing potentially significant quantities of fissile material) in the IF and RPF, are designed to survive the above external events. 19.4.11.2.7Mishandling or Malfunction of Equipment The potential DBAs that could be initiated by the mishandling or malfunction of equipment include:*Failure of the off-gas system leading to release of noble gases and halogens.*Loss of pressure boundary in PSB (covered under mishandling target solution).*Vessel/line failures in the RPF (e.g., Mo-99 extraction feed or raffinate tanks).The SHINE facility is designed with multiple engineering features and controls to prevent or mitigate the potential consequences from such mishandling or malfunction of equipment. Critical equipment are designed robustly with significant redundancy or fail safe features to prevent or mitigate the consequences from these events.The consequences from these scenarios are bounded by the release of the entire contents of one TSV and are therefore bounded by the MHA. For this DBA, the worst case condition is the loss of the PSB or a spill of radioactive material from tanks in the RPF.19.4.11.2.8Large Undamped Power OscillationsLarge undamped power oscillations are identified as potential DBAs to be considered. The TSV is designed for subcritical operation, low power density, and large negative temperature and void coefficients, resulting in a stable TSV with only self-limiting power oscillations. The low power density and subcritical operating conditions of the TSV will prevent the occurrence of any large undamped power oscillation. The source term and potential consequences from this type of event would be, however, bounded by the excess reactivity insertion scenario (see Subsection 19.4.11.2.2). 19.4.11.2.9Detonation and Deflagration Events (Due to Hydrogen Generation) | ||
The potential for detonation and deflagration due to hydrogen accumulation in the PSB (including in the cavity of the TSV or off-gas system) is identified as a potential DBA. Hydrogen accumulation in the RPF is not expected to exceed the lower explosive limit (LEL) or lower flammability limit (LFL). | The potential for detonation and deflagration due to hydrogen accumulation in the PSB (including in the cavity of the TSV or off-gas system) is identified as a potential DBA. Hydrogen accumulation in the RPF is not expected to exceed the lower explosive limit (LEL) or lower flammability limit (LFL). | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-99Rev. 0During operation and post TSV shutdown, the TSV solution generates hydrogen and oxygen. Analysis has shown that buildup of gas to a level that could cause a detonation or deflagration is possible. The off-gas system is engineered to prevent such an event. However, the failure of the off-gas system, combined with a buildup of hydrogen and oxygen in the TSV and an ignition | ||
source, could lead to a breach of the PSB. Many design fe atures and controls are designed to prevent or mitigate such events, including the design of a reliable and robust off-gas system that is interlocked upon failure of the TSV off-gas blower to immediately shutdown the irradiation operations and thus limit the amount of hydrogen being produced. The off-gas system is also designed to structurally survive a wide range of deflagration events (pressure pulses). Upon a deflagration, any releases of radioactive material are confined within the IU cell and are further mitigated by the confinement capability of the IU cell and by the facility ventilation systems. The consequences from this DBA are bounded by the release of the entire contents of one TSV and are therefore bounded by the MHA. 19.4.11.2.10Unintended Exothermic Chemical Reactions Other than DetonationA few potential exothermic chemical reactions were identified that, under very unlikely or incredible conditions, might challenge the PSB integrity. Exothermic reactions are more likely to result in fires. Detonations, deflagrations, or fires due to exothermic reactions other than hydrogen-related in the IF are not considered to be possible given the design of the process. There is the possibility under uncontrolled conditions that during solvent extraction a runaway tributyl phosphate (TBP)/nitric acid reaction could occur due to a number of unexpected events, such as the inadvertent heating of a tank. The design of the solvent extraction process, including the control of the fissile material concentration (protected through administrative controls), the minimization of dissolved solids, and the concentration of nitric acid is such that the maximum temperature achieved during this operation is significantly lower than that of the minimum initiation temperature for a runaway reaction (on the order of 130 oC [266 oF]). The most likely and bounding scenarios resulting from potential exothermic reactions are fires which could impact the RPF. RPF fires, bounding all exothermic chemical reactions that may take place in the area, are covered under facility fire events (see Subsection 19.4.11.2.12). 19.4.11.2.11Facility System Interaction EventsFacility system interaction events have been identified as DBAs that could result in radiological releases from various parts of the facility or multiple areas. The IF and the RPF include the following systems: target solution preparation, TSV, TSV dump tank, TSV off-gas system, molybdenum extraction, and UREX processing systems. System interactions have the potential to cause damage that may lead to the release of these radioactive materials. NUREG/CR-3922 defines a system interaction as "-an event in one system, train, component or structure propagates through unanticipated or inconspicuous dependencies to cause an action or inaction in other systems, trains, components or structures." | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-100Rev. 0There are three categories of system interactions between systems located within the IF and the RPF that are considered in this analysis. The three types of interactions include: 1) functional interactions, 2) spatial interactions, and 3) human-intervention interactions.At the SHINE facility, there are a number of shared system interactions that need to be considered in the context of functional system interactions. The shared systems that are considered:*Electrical power including the uninterruptable power supply system. | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-100Rev. 0There are three categories of system interactions between systems located within the IF and the RPF that are considered in this analysis. The three types of interactions include: 1) functional interactions, 2) spatial interactions, and 3) human-intervention interactions.At the SHINE facility, there are a number of shared system interactions that need to be considered in the context of functional system interactions. The shared systems that are considered:*Electrical power including the uninterruptable power supply system. | ||
*Radioisotope process facility cooling system (RPCS). | *Radioisotope process facility cooling system (RPCS). | ||
| Line 1,292: | Line 2,652: | ||
*Internal flooding scenarios. | *Internal flooding scenarios. | ||
*Pipe break scenarios (see Subsection 19.4.11.2.4).For each of the scenarios listed above, except for loss of ventilation and internal flooding, the consequences are discussed in the referenced subsections. The MHA bounds all of these scenarios as discussed in each subsection. Loss of ventilation does not initiate an accident that could result in a release of radioactive material or hazardous chemicals nor are the ventilation systems used to mitigate the consequences of an accident. Upon release of radioactive materials within the facility, the ventilation system is shut down and bubble-tight dampers are closed to isolate the impacted areas of the facility. Internal flooding as a result of the rupture of water lines in the facility or the inadvertent actuation of a fire suppression system would not result in the release of radioactive material to the environment. All water is collected and sampled for radioactive contamination. If radioactive material contamination is found, the water is treated as radioactive waste.19.4.11.2.12Facility Fire (RPF) | *Pipe break scenarios (see Subsection 19.4.11.2.4).For each of the scenarios listed above, except for loss of ventilation and internal flooding, the consequences are discussed in the referenced subsections. The MHA bounds all of these scenarios as discussed in each subsection. Loss of ventilation does not initiate an accident that could result in a release of radioactive material or hazardous chemicals nor are the ventilation systems used to mitigate the consequences of an accident. Upon release of radioactive materials within the facility, the ventilation system is shut down and bubble-tight dampers are closed to isolate the impacted areas of the facility. Internal flooding as a result of the rupture of water lines in the facility or the inadvertent actuation of a fire suppression system would not result in the release of radioactive material to the environment. All water is collected and sampled for radioactive contamination. If radioactive material contamination is found, the water is treated as radioactive waste.19.4.11.2.12Facility Fire (RPF) | ||
A fire in the RPF is identified as a possible DBA. Events that could lead to a fire in the RPF may be precipitated by failure of electrical or mechanical equipment or human error involving a loss of control of combustible materials or ignition sources or both. Facility fires are not expected to directly release significant amounts of radioactive material; however fires can lead to the release of radioactive material where fire damage to process equipment results in a loss of confinement through damage to system integrity, spurious equipment operation, or loss of equipment control. Fire damage to equipment typically results from direct exposure of equipment to the fire or exposure of equipment to elevated temperatures caused by the fire. Widespread fire damage to Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-101Rev. 1process equipment that could lead to a radiological release is most likely inside a confined enclosure such as a hot cell, glove box, or tank enclosure. Small spaces such as these provide the confinement of the products of combustion, which can lead to development of a damaging fire environment. Development of damaging fire environment in the general area of the RPF is much less likely due to the large volume of the area. Direct fire damage to important equipment which could lead to a significant radiological release is not likely because redundant control or power circuits are separated by distance to prevent such damage from a single fire, accordingly the DBA is considered to be a fire in an enclosure that may lead to the development of a damaging fire environment. The design basis fire accident is postulated to occur in an RPF supercell where it contributes to the release of the contents of the Mo extraction feed tank. Fire damage to the tank, associated valves, or process piping could lead to a release of Mo-99 eluate into the supercell enclosure. Release of this material into the enclosure could lead to an airborne release of radiological material into the cell enclosure and ultimately migration into the RCA ventilation system. The potential release would be mitigated by closure of the bubble-tight dampers in the RCA ventilation system in response to a smoke alarm signal or detection of the radioactive material by the radiation monitoring system. Isolation of the ventilation system would prevent significant release to the environment. Radiological release of this DBA is bounded by the MHA and contained by the facility and RCA ventilation system. Postulated fire strengths are insufficient to breach the credited facility barrier walls or components. The effects of this DBA and any associated radiological release will be contained by the facility construction and RCA ventilation system components.19.4.11.2.13Hazardous Chemical Releases The consequence of chemical releases are evaluated using dispersion models and/or computer codes that conform to NUREG/CR-6410 methodologies.Typical computer codes to model chemical releases and determine the chemical dose (orconcentration) are the ALOHA and EPICode; both computer codes are widely used for supporting accident analysis and emergency response evaluations. Both codes have been used and accepted by government agencies such as DOE. Verification and validation for both codes have been performed for modeling chemical hazards for the SHINE facility. Because ALOHA can readily model only about half of these chemicals, the EPICode was selected to perform chemical dose calculations in this subsection. Both computer codes give comparable results for the hazardous chemicals that they have in common and both codes implement release and dispersion models that are | A fire in the RPF is identified as a possible DBA. Events that could lead to a fire in the RPF may be precipitated by failure of electrical or mechanical equipment or human error involving a loss of control of combustible materials or ignition sources or both. Facility fires are not expected to directly release significant amounts of radioactive material; however fires can lead to the release of radioactive material where fire damage to process equipment results in a loss of confinement through damage to system integrity, spurious equipment operation, or loss of equipment control. Fire damage to equipment typically results from direct exposure of equipment to the fire or exposure of equipment to elevated temperatures caused by the fire. Widespread fire damage to Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-101Rev. 1process equipment that could lead to a radiological release is most likely inside a confined enclosure such as a hot cell, glove box, or tank enclosure. Small spaces such as these provide the confinement of the products of combustion, which can lead to development of a damaging fire environment. Development of damaging fire environment in the general area of the RPF is much less likely due to the large volume of the area. Direct fire damage to important equipment which could lead to a significant radiological release is not likely because redundant control or power circuits are separated by distance to prevent such damage from a single fire, accordingly the DBA is considered to be a fire in an enclosure that may lead to the development of a damaging fire environment. The design basis fire accident is postulated to occur in an RPF supercell where it contributes to the release of the contents of the Mo extraction feed tank. Fire damage to the tank, associated valves, or process piping could lead to a release of Mo-99 eluate into the supercell enclosure. Release of this material into the enclosure could lead to an airborne release of radiological material into the cell enclosure and ultimately migration into the RCA ventilation system. The potential release would be mitigated by closure of the bubble-tight dampers in the RCA ventilation system in response to a smoke alarm signal or detection of the radioactive material by the radiation monitoring system. Isolation of the ventilation system would prevent significant release to the environment. Radiological release of this DBA is bounded by the MHA and contained by the facility and RCA ventilation system. Postulated fire strengths are insufficient to breach the credited facility barrier walls or components. The effects of this DBA and any associated radiological release will be contained by the facility construction and RCA ventilation system components.19.4.11.2.13Hazardous Chemical Releases The consequence of chemical releases are evaluated using dispersion models and/or computer codes that conform to NUREG/CR-6410 methodologies.Typical computer codes to model chemical releases and determine the chemical dose (orconcentration) are the ALOHA and EPICode; both computer codes are widely used for supporting accident analysis and emergency response evaluations. Both codes have been used and accepted by government agencies such as DOE. Verification and validation for both codes have been performed for modeling chemical hazards for the SHINE facility. Because ALOHA can readily model only about half of these chemicals, the EPICode was selected to perform chemical dose calculations in this subsection. Both computer codes give comparable results for the hazardous chemicals that they have in common and both codes implement release and dispersion models that are consist ent with the guidance in NUREG/CR-6410.In running EPICode, no credit is taken for depletion or plate out of chemicals within the facility or during transport to the site boundary or nearest population location. All dispersion calculations performed are done assuming neutral meteorological conditions (i.e., Stability Class D) and 4.1m/s wind speed. These represent 50 th percentile meteorological conditions at the site. Ambient temperature was assumed to be 75 oF, no deposition of airborne material was assumed, and a receptor height of 1.5 m was used to simulate the height of an individual. Concentrations are plume centerline values. Releases were conservatively modeled as ground non-buoyant. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-102Rev. 1Chemical dose or concentrations were determined for the 11 chemicals at the site boundary and the nearest residence (249 and 788m, respectively). Table 19.4.11-1 summarizes the results of the source term and concentration calculations for the 11 chemicals. The material-at-risk (MAR) represents the inventory of hazardous material that is at risk from the postulated scenario. The MAR for most of the chemicals represents the amount of material in storage. In some cases, the MAR represents the total facility inventory. For other chemicals, the quantity assumed to be released is reduced to account for separate storage locations, or to account for normal industrial chemicals not interacting with licensed materials or affecting the safety of licensed materials. The 11 chemicals were selected for evaluation based on the combination of anticipated bounding facility inventory amounts and high toxicity characteristics (lowest PAC values). The acceptance limits were those identified in NUREG/CR-6410 and correspond to Protective Action Criteria (PAC) values corresponding to Acute Exposure Guideline Levels (AEGLs), Emergency Response Planning Guideline (ERPG), or Temporary Emergency Exposure Limits (TEEL) values for such chemicals.The results from the analysis indicate that the chemical dose or concentration for the MEI and the nearest residence is below the PAC-1, PAC-2, and PAC-3 levels (equivalent to ERPG-1, ERPG-2, and ERPG-3). These concentrations are conservatively calculated, and are based on the assumption that the entire inventory of liquid hazardous chemicals evaporates from a | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-102Rev. 1Chemical dose or concentrations were determined for the 11 chemicals at the site boundary and the nearest residence (249 and 788m, respectively). Table 19.4.11-1 summarizes the results of the source term and concentration calculations for the 11 chemicals. The material-at-risk (MAR) represents the inventory of hazardous material that is at risk from the postulated scenario. The MAR for most of the chemicals represents the amount of material in storage. In some cases, the MAR represents the total facility inventory. For other chemicals, the quantity assumed to be released is reduced to account for separate storage locations, or to account for normal industrial chemicals not interacting with licensed materials or affecting the safety of licensed materials. The 11 chemicals were selected for evaluation based on the combination of anticipated bounding facility inventory amounts and high toxicity characteristics (lowest PAC values). The acceptance limits were those identified in NUREG/CR-6410 and correspond to Protective Action Criteria (PAC) values corresponding to Acute Exposure Guideline Levels (AEGLs), Emergency Response Planning Guideline (ERPG), or Temporary Emergency Exposure Limits (TEEL) values for such chemicals.The results from the analysis indicate that the chemical dose or concentration for the MEI and the nearest residence is below the PAC-1, PAC-2, and PAC-3 levels (equivalent to ERPG-1, ERPG-2, and ERPG-3). These concentrations are conservatively calculated, and are based on the assumption that the entire inventory of liquid hazardous chemicals evaporates from a 100ft 2 pool, over a duration calculated by EPICode. Solid powder material release durations were assumed to be onehour to correspond with ERPG exposure times. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-103Rev. 1[Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]Table 19.4.11-1 SHINE Hazardous (Toxic) Chemical Source Terms and ConcentrationsHazardous Chemical/Release | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-103Rev. 1[Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]Table 19.4.11-1 SHINE Hazardous (Toxic) Chemical Source Terms and ConcentrationsHazardous Chemical/Release Mechanism MAR(lb)ARF/RFSource Term*(lb)PAC-1PAC-2PAC-3 SiteBoundaryConcentration(249 m)Nearest Residence Concentration (788 m)Nitric Acid, 12M, associated with licensed materials (Evaporating Liquid)7211.07210.53 ppm24 ppm92 ppm0.090 ppm0.012 ppmSulfuric Acid (Evaporating Liquid)7,7701.07,7700.20 mg/m 38.7mg/m3160 mg/m34.7E-07 mg/m 36.3E-08 mg/m 3Calcium Hydroxide (Dispersed Solid)3,1820.0013.182 15 mg/m3240 mg/m31,500 mg/m 30.16 mg/m 30.020 mg/m 3Caustic Soda (Dispersed Solid)1,4880.0011.4880.5 mg/m35 mg/m350 mg/m30.073 mg/m 30.010 mg/m 3[Proprietary Information] | ||
(Dispersed Solid)4,1040.0014.104[ProprietaryInformation][Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information]0.20 mg/ | (Dispersed Solid)4,1040.0014.104[ProprietaryInformation][Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information]0.20 mg/m 30.026 mg/m 3Ammonium Hydroxide(Dispersed Solid)590.0010.05961 ppm330 ppm2300 ppm2.0E-03 ppm2.6E-04 ppm[Proprietary Information] | ||
(Dispersed Solid)6060.0010.606[ProprietaryInformation][Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information]0.03 mg/ | (Dispersed Solid)6060.0010.606[ProprietaryInformation][Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information]0.03 mg/m 33.9E-03 mg/m 3Dodecane associated with licensed materials (Evaporating Liquid)3041.03040.0028 ppm0.031 ppm7.9 ppm4.4E-04 ppm5.9E-05 ppmPotassium Permanganate (Dispersed Solid)660.0010.0668.6 mg/m314 mg/m378 mg/m33.3E-03 mg/m 34.2E-04 mg/m 3Tributyl Phosphate (Dispersed Solid)3330.0010.3330.6 mg/m33.5 mg/m3125 mg/m31.5E-03 ppm2.0E-04 ppmUranyl Nitrate (Dispersed Solid) | ||
(Likely in solution at SHINE)4800.0010.4800.99 mg/ | (Likely in solution at SHINE)4800.0010.4800.99 mg/m 35.5 mg/m333 mg/m30.024 mg/m 33.1E-03 mg/m 3 | ||
(8-km) radius. The percentages of each minority category within the county and state are also presented as the basis for determining which block groups meet the criteria.None of the 48 census block groups within the 5-mi. (8-km) radius meet the NRC quantitative method for identifying a minority population. Generally, Hispanic or Latino, Black or African American, and Two or More Races (i.e. multiracial) classifications represent the predominant minority populations in the block groups within 5mi. (8-km) of the SHINE site; however, no block group contains a minority population (individual or aggregate) that either exceeds 50percent or significantly exceeds the comparative geographic areas. Overall, the percentage of minority groups in the 5-mi. (8-km) area of analysis is less than comparative figures for Rock County and Wisconsin. The aggregate minority population in the 5-mi. (8-km) study area is 11.1percent, compared to 15.5 percent in the county and 16.7 in the state. The aggregate minority population includes all minority populations, as defined by NRC (NRC, 2009) (seeSubsection19.4.12.1).Only a small percentage of the study area population is American Indian and Alaska native (0.3percent) in the study area, and there is no American Indian reservation within 5mi. (8km) of the SHINE site (Bureau of Indian Affairs, 2012). | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewEnvironmental JusticeSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-104Rev. 019.4.12ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICEOn February 11, 1994, President Clinton signed Executive Order 12898 Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations. Executive Order 12898 directs federal executive agencies to consider environmental justice under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). This Executive Order ensures that minority and/or low-income populations do not bear a disproportionate share of adverse health or environmental consequences of the building of the SHINE production facility.19.4.12.1Methodology Guidance for addressing environmental justice (EJ) is provided by the Council on Environmental Quality's Environmental Justice Guidance under the National Environmental Policy Act; NRC Policy Statement on the Treatment of Environmental Justice Matters in NRC Licensing Actions; and NRC Office Instruction No. LIC 203, Revision 2, Procedural Guidance for Preparing Environmental Assessments and Considering Environmental Issues. The NRC defines a "minority" by race and ethnicity, as classified by the USCB (NRC, 2009). Specifically, a minority is an individual whose race is: Black or African American; American Indian or Alaska Native; Asian; Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander; Some Other Race (not mentioned above); Two or More Races (i.e., multiracial); or whose ethnicity is Hispanic or Latino of any race. Determination of low-income populations is based on poverty thresholds as defined by the USCB.The geographic area of analysis is the 5-mi. (8-km) area around the SHINE site. The method to identify the locations of minority and low-income populations of the geographic area of analysis is the "block group" method recommended by the NRC. The block group is the smallest geographical unit for which the USCB tabulates data required for EJ analysis (NRC, 2004). The 2010 census data, along with geographic information system (GIS) software, are used to determine the minority characteristics of resident populations by block group. If any part of a block group is located within 5 mi. (8km) of the SHINE site, the entire block group is included in the analysis. A total of 48block groups meet this criteria and are evaluated as part of this analysis (Table 19.4.12-1).The following methodology is used to identify populations that may be the subject of EJ considerations.19.4.12.1.1Minority Populations NRC guidance requires analysis of individual race and ethnicity classifications as well as the aggregate of all minority populations (NRC, 2009). Based on NRC guidance, a minority population exists if either of the following two conditions exist:*The minority population of the block group of the impacted area (block group) exceeds 50percent of the total population of the block group.*The minority population percentage of the block group significantly (20 percentage points) exceeds the geographic area chosen for comparative analysis (NRC, 2004).For the 48 block groups within the geographic area of analysis (5-mi. [8-km] radius), the percentage of each block group's minority population in all of the minority classifications is calculated. If any block group has a minority percentage that exceeds 50 percent, then the block group is identified as containing a minority population. If any block group has a minority Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewEnvironmental JusticeSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-105Rev. 0percentage exceeding the corresponding minority percentage for Rock County and the State of Wisconsin by more than 20 percentage points, then a minority population is determined to exist in that block group.19.4.12.1.2Low-Income Populations NRC guidance defines low-income households as th ose with incomes that are less than the poverty level (NRC, 2004). A block group is considered low-income if either of the following two conditions is met:*The low-income population of the block group of the impacted area (block group) exceeds 50percent of the total number of households in the block group*The low-income population percentage of the block group significantly (20percentage points) exceeds the geographic area chosen for comparative analysisThe number of low-income households in each census block group is divided by the total households for that block group to obtain the percentage of low-income households per block group. If any block group has a low-income percentage exceeding 50 percent, then the block group is identified as containing a low-income population. If any block group has a minority percentage exceeding the corresponding percentage for Rock County and the State of Wisconsin by more than 20 percentage points, then a low-income population is determined to exist.19.4.12.2Assessment of Disproportionate Impacts19.4.12.2.1Minority Populations Table 19.4.12-1 presents the results of the analysis for minority populations. The table displays the percentage of minority populations in each block group and the totals for the complete 5-mi. | ||
(8-km) radius. The percentages of each minority category within the county and state are also presented as the basis for determining which block groups meet the criteria. | |||
None of the 48 census block groups within the 5-mi. (8-km) radius meet the NRC quantitative method for identifying a minority population. Generally, Hispanic or Latino, Black or African American, and Two or More Races (i.e. multiracial) classifications represent the predominant minority populations in the block groups within 5mi. (8-km) of the SHINE site; however, no block group contains a minority population (individual or aggregate) that either exceeds 50percent or significantly exceeds the comparative geographic areas. Overall, the percentage of minority groups in the 5-mi. (8-km) area of analysis is less than comparative figures for Rock County and Wisconsin. The aggregate minority population in the 5-mi. (8-km) study area is 11.1percent, compared to 15.5 percent in the county and 16.7 in the state. The aggregate minority population includes all minority populations, as defined by NRC (NRC, 2009) (seeSubsection19.4.12.1).Only a small percentage of the study area population is American Indian and Alaska native (0.3percent) in the study area, and there is no American Indian reservation within 5mi. (8km) of the SHINE site (Bureau of Indian Affairs, 2012). | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewEnvironmental JusticeSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-106Rev. 0There is one property in the immediate vicinity of the SHINE site that appears to be a location for regular congregation of minorities. A relatively small Hispanic church congregation uses a building located on US 51 to the south of the SHINE site. The church, called Iglesia Hispania Pentecostale, is not located within a minority block group.Within the 5-mi. (8-km) radius of the SHINE facility, there is an absence of populations indentified as minority that qualify as EJ populations. Therefore, the potential for a disproportionately high impact to these populations is SMALL.19.4.12.2.2Low-Income Populations Table 19.4.12-1 presents the results of the analysis for low-income populations. The table displays the percentage of low-income households in each block group, the total for the 5-mi. | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewEnvironmental JusticeSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-106Rev. 0There is one property in the immediate vicinity of the SHINE site that appears to be a location for regular congregation of minorities. A relatively small Hispanic church congregation uses a building located on US 51 to the south of the SHINE site. The church, called Iglesia Hispania Pentecostale, is not located within a minority block group.Within the 5-mi. (8-km) radius of the SHINE facility, there is an absence of populations indentified as minority that qualify as EJ populations. Therefore, the potential for a disproportionately high impact to these populations is SMALL.19.4.12.2.2Low-Income Populations Table 19.4.12-1 presents the results of the analysis for low-income populations. The table displays the percentage of low-income households in each block group, the total for the 5-mi. | ||
(8-km) radius, and the percentage of low-income households within the county and state. The table also highlights the block groups that meet the NRC criteria for low-income populations. | (8-km) radius, and the percentage of low-income households within the county and state. The table also highlights the block groups that meet the NRC criteria for low-income populations. | ||
| Line 1,305: | Line 2,667: | ||
However, it is not anticipated that construction activity will be heavy on Sundays when the most Hispanic minority persons would be expected to visit the church. Additionally, because dust control measures are used and because noise attenuates to acceptable levels near the site boundary (see Subsection 19.4.2), the potential impacts to minority populations are SMALL.19.4.12.3.2Low-Income Populations As described in Subsection19.4.12.2.2, the Janesville Terrace Mobile Home Park is located to the north of the SHINE site and may include low-income households. Plant construction may result in construction related noise, exposure to fugitive dust, exhaust emissions, vibrations, and generation of construction-related wastes. These are potential impacts that would impact the general population, but have no disproportionate impact on low-income populations. Mitigation measures include implementing best management practices for controlling fugitive dust and proper maintenance of construction equipment for controlling emissions; recycling of construction waste, to the extent possible; and, minimizing land disturbance, removing construction debris in a timely manner, and adding landscape enhancements. Additionally, noise levels attenuate to acceptable levels near the site boundary (see Subsection19.4.2). Therefore, human health and environmental impacts on low-income populations are SMALL. | However, it is not anticipated that construction activity will be heavy on Sundays when the most Hispanic minority persons would be expected to visit the church. Additionally, because dust control measures are used and because noise attenuates to acceptable levels near the site boundary (see Subsection 19.4.2), the potential impacts to minority populations are SMALL.19.4.12.3.2Low-Income Populations As described in Subsection19.4.12.2.2, the Janesville Terrace Mobile Home Park is located to the north of the SHINE site and may include low-income households. Plant construction may result in construction related noise, exposure to fugitive dust, exhaust emissions, vibrations, and generation of construction-related wastes. These are potential impacts that would impact the general population, but have no disproportionate impact on low-income populations. Mitigation measures include implementing best management practices for controlling fugitive dust and proper maintenance of construction equipment for controlling emissions; recycling of construction waste, to the extent possible; and, minimizing land disturbance, removing construction debris in a timely manner, and adding landscape enhancements. Additionally, noise levels attenuate to acceptable levels near the site boundary (see Subsection19.4.2). Therefore, human health and environmental impacts on low-income populations are SMALL. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewEnvironmental JusticeSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-108Rev. 019.4.12.4Mitigation MeasuresMitigation measures to reduce or minimize adverse impacts on EJ populations are not required; any measures as described in Subsections 19.4.12.2 and 19.4.12.3 are used to minimize potentially adverse impacts of construction affecting the general population, which are expected to be SMALL. | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewEnvironmental JusticeSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-108Rev. 019.4.12.4Mitigation MeasuresMitigation measures to reduce or minimize adverse impacts on EJ populations are not required; any measures as described in Subsections 19.4.12.2 and 19.4.12.3 are used to minimize potentially adverse impacts of construction affecting the general population, which are expected to be SMALL. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewEnvironmental JusticeSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-109Rev. 0Table 19.4.12-1 Minority and Low-Income Population Statistics for Block Groups within a 5-Mi. Radius of the SHINESite(Sheet 1 of 2)Block GroupCensus TractLow-Income Population (%)Minority Population (%)(a)Black or African American American Indian and Alaska Native Asian Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander Some Other Race Two or More RacesHispanic or LatinoAggregate1129.05.10.10.30.00.02.18.816.5124.80.60.30.50.00.01.52.15.0 223.10.90.61.50.00.00.91.55.5 3235.02.60.41.10.00.12.26.112. | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewEnvironmental JusticeSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-109Rev. 0Table 19.4.12-1 Minority and Low-Income Population Statistics for Block Groups within a 5-Mi. Radius of the SHINESite(Sheet 1 of 2)Block GroupCensus TractLow-Income Population (%)Minority Population (%) | ||
(a)Black or | |||
African American American Indian and Alaska Native Asian Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander Some Other Race Two or More RacesHispanic or LatinoAggregate1129.05.10.10.30.00.02.18.816.5124.80.60.30.50.00.01.52.15.0 223.10.90.61.50.00.00.91.55.5 | |||
3235.02.60.41.10.00.12.26.112.5 1356.67.50.31.60.00.02.711.623.8 2348.17.60.65.00.00.23.313.630.43316.14.20.47.20.00.72.05.920.3 1427.85.10.13.30.00.03.69.521.7 2417.82.30.02.00.00.14.37.015.7 3418.20.80.30.30.00.00.72.95.0 4431.01.80.42.90.00.51.914.421.9 154.51.00.41.00.40.00.63.16.4 2510.10.90.70.30.00.03.62.78.1 350.02.30.02.20.20.02.87.014.5 4521.01.30.91.00.10.02.03.89.2 558.01.30.40.70.00.10.910.113.5 167.02.40.20.30.40.22.03.69.2 2619.82.80.30.40.00.03.96.013.4 285.90.20.20.40.00.00.33.64.8 383.71.60.20.50.00.30.95.28.7 483.13.70.50.30.10.02.57.314.4 191.40.80.00.40.00.00.84.36.3 299.01.30.20.50.10.00.52.55.2 1107.42.70.71.00.00.11.76.512.7 21016.91.60.30.60.00.21.111.215.1 1117.01.70.11.10.00.11.23.07.3 2119.91.30.11.50.10.02.23.99.1 31122.66.90.10.80.00.02.79.519.9 4117.30.90.30.60.00.01.82.96.5 51126.32.80.21.20.00.01.111.516.7 112.0110.83.30.20.80.00.02.13.49.9 212.012.71.10.10.30.00.00.72.64.8 312.014.30.40.40.80.00.01.51.84.9 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewEnvironmental JusticeSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-110Rev. 0Table 19.4.12-1 Minority and Low-Income Population Statistics for Block Groups within a 5-Mi. Radius of the SHINESite(Sheet 2 of 2)Block GroupCensus TractLow-Income Population (%)Minority Population (%) | |||
(a)Black or African American American Indian and Alaska Native Asian Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander Some Other Race Two or More RacesHispanic or LatinoAggregate113.020.02.30.11.00.10.10.72.16.4213.029.51.50.10.70.00.00.62.85.6 313.026.33.40.00.90.00.00.72.77.7 413.028.60.50.00.00.00.31.01.13.0 513.023.71.20.10.50.00.01.02.04.7 1144.11.00.51.20.00.20.91.04.9 21419.03.80.20.10.00.20.910.615.8 31413.23.10.31.60.20.01.410.917.6 4145.51.50.20.60.00.01.04.17.4 2220.01.10.60.40.00.32.02.06.5 1249.03.70.11.80.00.01.33.210.0 22411.83.30.20.90.00.00.85.110.1 32420.72.60.40.30.10.02.23.39.0 126.0121.814.10.11.20.00.21.911.028.3 126.0214.73.90.11.70.00.10.84.511.2Total, 5-Mi. Radius12.72.70.31.10.00.11.65.411.1Comparative PopulationsRockCountyState ofWisconsin11.44.80.21.00.00.11.77.615.511.26.20.92.30.00.11.45.916.7a) Shaded block groups meet the NRC qualitative method for identifying low-income populations. | |||
==References:== | ==References:== | ||
USCB, 2010c; USCB, 2006-2010. | USCB, 2010c; USCB, 2006-2010. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-111Rev. 019.4.13CUMULATIVE EFFECTSThis subsection discusses the cumulative impacts to the region's environment that could result from construction and operation of the SHINE facility. A cumulative impac t is defined in Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations (40 CFR 1508.7) as an "impact on the environment which results from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency (federal or non-federal) or person undertakes such other actions." To guide its assessment of the environmental impacts of a proposed action, the NRC has established a standard of significance for impacts based on guidance developed by the CEQ (40CFR1508.27). To address cumulative impacts, the existing environment in the region surrounding the SHINE site was considered in conjunction with the environmental impacts as presented in Section19.4 for constructing and operating a new facility at the SHINE site. These combined impacts are defined by the CEQ as "cumulative" in 40CFR1508.7 and may include individually minor but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time.Cumulative effects analysis encompasses a consideration of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future (Federal, non-Federal, and private) actions that could have meaningful cumulative impacts together with the proposed action. Past construction and operational impacts of existing industrial uses and developments are part of the existing baseline conditions in the region and are therefore, intrinsically integrated as part of the cumulative effects analysis. The cumulative effects analysis therefore, focuses on the additive impacts from the existing baseline conditions, the effects of a new facility, and other identified present and reasonably foreseeable future actions. Table 19.4.13-1 provides a listing of all projects identified as potentially contributing to cumulative impacts. To identify other actions SHINE considered:*Information about current or planned local economic development programs or projects (e.g., commercial, industrial, and/or residential); and *Information about current or planned infrastructure improvements (e.g., transportation, electric and water utility).As described in NRC Memo ML100621017, actions that are not reasonably foreseeable are those that are based on mere speculation or conjecture, or those that have only been discussed on a conceptual basis. These can include projects that have not yet been approved by the proper authorities or have not yet submitted license/permit applications. Present and future projects that were considered for cumulative effects analysis but did not meet the criteria established for reasonable foreseeability were not retained. Projects and other actions retained for the cumulative effects analysis are identified in Table 19.4.13-2 and Figure 19.4.13-1.Cumulative impacts of the new facility and other identified present and reasonably foreseeable future actions are assessed for the following resources: land use and visual resources; air quality and noise; geologic environment; water resources (hydrology, water use, water quality); ecological resources (terrestrial and aquatic communities); historic and cultural resources; the socioeconomic environment; human health; and environmental justice. According to the CEQ's Considering Cumulative Effects Under the National Environmental Policy Act (CEQ, 1997), the Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-112Rev. 0establishment of an appropriate geographic area of analysis is an important step in performing the cumulative effects analysis. The geographic areas for analysis were selected based on the environmental effects that may occur to each of the affected resources under consideration and are the same as those used for each resource category in Section 19.4. The sensitivity of cumulative effects is resource-based, and an appropriate context of analysis was selected for each of the resources described below.19.4.13.1Land Use and Visual ResourcesThe description of the affected environment in Subsection 19.3.1 serves as a baseline for the land use and visual resources cu mulative impact assessment. The geographic area of analysis for evaluation of cumulative effects on land use and visual resources is the same as that used in Subsection 19.4.1 and includes the 91.27 ac. (36.94 ha) within the site boundary and the 5mi. | ||
(8km) region surrounding the site. As discussed in Subsection 19.4.1.1, construction and operation impacts from the SHINE facility on | (8km) region surrounding the site. As discussed in Subsection 19.4.1.1, construction and operation impacts from the SHINE facility on la nd use are SMALL. Impacts from construction and operation to visual resources are SMALL, as discussed in Subsection 19.4.1.2.Table 19.4.13-2 identifies recent past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the geographic extent of analysis that can be assessed to determine cumulative effects on land use and visual resources. Relevant "other actions" that are considered in this cumulative effects analysis are limited to the utility line extensions, proposed facility, TIF District No. 35 Project Plan, an agricultural storage facility immediately south of the SHINE site, the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, and an Alliant Energy power generation facility. The storage facility is a recent past disturbance; however it has on-going affects to land use and visual resources. The utility line extensions, proposed facility, and TIF No. 35 Project Plan are all future actions. The airport, Glen Erin Golf Course and power generation facilities are existing facilities ("present actions") and on-going actions.19.4.13.1.1Land Use Resources The City of Janesville plans to install a water main and sanitary sewer main along the northern boundary of the SHINE site as part of the overall TIF District No. 35 development activities. Based on the SHINE facility site layout, the expected route of the water main and sewer main connects directly to the facility (Figure 19.2.1-1). Installation of the City's water and sewer mains disturbs a 50-ft. (15-m) wide corridor (one corridor for both water and sewer) with the pipelines centered in the middle of the co rridor. Similarly, installation of the water and sewer connections from the City's mains to the SHINE facility disturbs a 50-ft. (15-m) wide corridor (one corridor for both water and sewer) with the pipelines centered in the middle of the corridor. The corridors temporarily disturb 0.62ac. (0.25ha) immediately adjacent to the northern boundary of the site. Lands disturbed by this corridor include undeveloped cultivated crop lands and prime farmland, which comprise the majority of the land cover within the site and region. In 2004, the City of Janesville purchased 224 ac. (91ha) of land located south of SH11 and west of County Truck Highway G with the intention of creating a TIF district. The parcel is vacant industrial land in agricultural use in an industrially-zoned area on the City's southeast side. The parcel is unimproved and has been used for agricultural crop production for decades. The land has since been zoned for light industrial use and is "shovel ready" certified. Land cover in this parcel consists entirely of cultivated crops and includes prime farmland. The region surrounding the SHINE site includes over 25,000 ac. (10,000 ha) of cultivated crop land and approximately 42,000 ac. (17,000 ha) of prime farmland or farmland of statewide importance Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-113Rev. 0(seeSubsection19.3.1.1). Consequently, the utilization of the 224 ac. (91ha) included in the TIF District No. 35 Project Plan would have a minimal change in the availability of these resources in the region. Immediately adjacent to the southern border of the SHINE site are two large warehouses that support local agriculture operations and provide storage for large farming equipment. The warehouse facility has resulted in the conversion of prime farmland and the land surrounding the site. This development represents a recent ground disturbance that has impacted the overall land use and potential crop production for the region. As described in Subsection 19.3.1.1.4, the potential relative value of the farmland for the 91.27ac. (36.94 ha) comprising the SHINE site is 13,771 Bu. of grain corn or 3947Bu. of soybeans, while the 10-year production estimate average for Rock County, Wisconsin, is 22,075,540Bu. of grain corn and 3,786,415Bu. of soybeans. The minor loss of on-site agricultural lands, including prime farmland and farmland of state wide importance, and the subsequent loss of potential crop production to industrial facilities is a minor impact when compared to the amount of agricultural land, land designated as prime farmland or farmland of state wide importance, and potential crop production remaining within the region (see Table19.4.1-1 and Subsection 19.3.1.1.4). Therefore, cumulative impacts to land use resources, including agricultural resources, are SMALL.19.4.13.1.2Visual ResourcesThe immediate location of the SHINE site and TIF District No. 35 is composed entirely of land used for agricultural purposes and has no existing architectural features, established structures, or natural-built barriers, screens, or buffers. Consequently, the SHINE facility and any light industrial structure built at the TIF District No. 35 location alters the on-site condition and partially obstructs views of the existing landscape. However, the visual setting of the site is generally flat and uniform in landform with low vegetation diversity and a low visual quality rating (see Subsection19.3.1.3).The viewshed to the west of the site across US51 is a light industrial development landscape that consists of the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport and its associated facilities, which includes the airport control tower and several large warehouses and hangers. The viewshed to the south of the site includes the two large warehouses immediately adjacent to the southern border of the site that support local agricultural operations and provide storage for large farming equipment. Additionally, the viewshed to the south includes several stacks associated with an Alliant Energy coal-fired power generation facility. While a portion of the plant is non-operational, the stacks are still visible as part of the viewshed. Together with the buildings and structures to the south and west, the facilities located at the SHINE and TIF District No. 35 sites do not significantly alter the visual setting. Therefore, cumulative impacts to visual resources are SMALL.19.4.13.2Air Quality and Noise 19.4.13.2.1Air QualityThe description of the affected environment in Subsection 19.3.2 serves as a baseline for the air quality cumulative impact assessment. Table 19.4.13-2 identifies recent past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the geographic extent of analysis that can be Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-114Rev. 0assessed to determine cumulative effects on air quality. Relevant "other actions" that are considered in this cumulative effects analysis include the TIF District No. 35 Project Plan (Rock County), the Alliant Energy - WP&L Turtle Generating Facility, NorthStar Medical Isotopes facility (Rock County), United Ethanol (Rock County), Generac Power Systems (Jefferson County), Kraft Foods Global (Dane County), and University of Wisconsin Madison (Dane County). With the exception of the TIF District No. 35 Project Plan and NorthStar Medical facility, which are future actions, all of the projects are present and on-going actions. The geographic area of analysis for evaluation of cumulative effects on air quality is the same as that used in Subsection 19.4.2 and includes Rock County and the four surrounding counties in Wisconsin: Green, Dane, Jefferson, and Walworth. As described in Subsection19.4.2.1.1, air emission impacts from construction are SMALL as emissions are controlled at the source where practicable; maintained within established regulatory limits designed to minimize impacts; and located a significant distance from the public. Operations of the facility have a SMALL impact on air quality, as discussed in Subsection19.4.2.1.2. Criteria PollutantsAir emission impacts as a result of concurrent construction activities are expected at both the SHINE and NorthStar Medical facilities. In addition, construction at the TIF District No. 35 site could overlap with construction activities at either of these facilities. Construction activity at NorthStar is expected to begin in 2013, with completion slated for mid-2014 (NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, 2012). Depending on the actual completion date for NorthStar, this construction schedule may overlap with the proposed construction schedule for SHINE, which is scheduled to begin in 2015. Implementation of mitigation measures described in Subsection19.4.2.1.1 minimizes impacts to local ambient air quality and the nuisance impacts to the public in proximity to the project. Impacts to air quality from construction activities are expected to be minor, localized, and short-term; therefore, overlapping construction schedules are not expected to contribute significantly to cumulative effects.The proposed NorthStar facility will produce small air emissions from operation of the building's heating system and from the use of chemicals to dissolve Mo-99 targets (DOE, 2012). Gaseous effluents at the SHINE facility are a result of isotope production and fuel combustion, as discussed in Subsection19.4.2.1.2. The SHINE facility does not result in exceedances of federal or state criteria air quality criteria. Operations emissions from both facilities are subject to permitting by the WDNR and controlled at the source using appropriate emissions control systems. In addition, the electricity demand of the SHINE and NorthStar facilities may result in an increase in regional electricity demand. However, this increase is not expected to exceed supply or the ability to deliver it and would not substantially increase air emissions for the region.Existing permitted emissions facilities are considered part of the baseline air quality. Given its proximity to the SHINE site, it is notable that the Alliant Energy - WP&L Turtle Generating Facility recently received an Air Pollution Control Operation Permit (WDNR,2011b). New construction-related emissions permits identified through the WDNR permit application website are all small-scaled and are not expected to have a significant impact on air quality in the region. | ||
United Ethanol, an ethanol production facility in Rock County, has one active Construction Permit that was issued in May, 2012 for upgrades to the existing facility. In Jefferson County, Generac Power Systems has an active operating permit renewed to 2015 and is planning modifications to one of their venting stacks, which was issued a Construction Permit exemption in April, 2012. In Chapter 19 - Environmental | United Ethanol, an ethanol production facility in Rock County, has one active Construction Permit that was issued in May, 2012 for upgrades to the existing facility. In Jefferson County, Generac Power Systems has an active operating permit renewed to 2015 and is planning modifications to one of their venting stacks, which was issued a Construction Permit exemption in April, 2012. In Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-115Rev. 0Dane County, Kraft Foods Global was issued a Construction Permit in June, 2012 to construct and operate three natural gas or distillate fuel fired boilers. The University of Wisconsin (West Campus) cogeneration facility is planning to add a four-cell cooling tower associated with the chiller plant expansion (exempted from obtaining a Construction Permit in August, 2012). The University of Wisconsin (Charter Street) was issued a Construction Permit in February, 2012 to construct boilers and emergency equipment. The University of Wisconsin is also planning to replace a coal-fired boiler with a natural gas boiler, which will reduce overall emissions (University of Wisconsin, 2009). It is expected that each of these projects will operate in such a manner as to not violate the established permit levels or federal and state criteria. Additionally, permitting reviews performed by the WDNR are conducted to ensure that new permits do not result in regional air quality degradation. Therefore, the cumulative impacts of criteria pollutants to air quality are SMALL.Greenhouse Gas EmissionsThe cumulative impacts of a single or combination of GHG emission sources must be placed in geographic context, considering the following factors:*The environmental impact should be assessed on a global rather than local or regional basis.*The effect is not sensitive to the location of the emission release point.*The magnitudes of individual GHG sources related to human activity, no matter how large compared to other sources, are small when compared to the total mass of GHGs in the | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | |||
atmosphere.*The total number and variety of GHG sources is extremely large and the sources are ubiquitous.GHG emissions associated with building, operating, and decommissioning the new facility are discussed in Subsection 19.4.2.1.2.3. As noted in Subsection 19.4.3.2.5, SHINE will develop a comprehensive program to avoid and control GHG emissions associated with the facility.Evaluation of cumulative impacts of GHG emissions requires the use of a global climate model. A synthesis of the results of numerous climate modeling studies are presented in the report from Karl, et al. (Karl, et al., 2009). The cumulative impacts of global GHG emissions as presented in the report are the appropriate basis for evaluation of cumulative impacts with regards to the SHINE facility. The report concludes that climate changes are underway in the United States as part of the global climate and that these changes are projected to grow. While noticeable, none of the changes will result in a destabilization of the global climate. In 2010 the EPA issued the CO2 Tailoring Rule (75 Federal Register [FR] 31514), which stated that GHG emissions will be factors in PSD and TitleV permitting and reporting. This revised permitting criterion indicates the need to regulate CO 2 and other GHGs from major emission sources. GHG emissions from individual stationary sources and, cumulatively, from multiple sources can contribute to national and global climate change. Given the relative ly low emissions from the SHINE facility in comparison to total global emissions, cumulative impacts of the proposed facility are SMALL. Furthermore, the cumulative impacts of GHG emissions would still be the same at the national and global scale without the GHG emissions of the proposed SHINE facility. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-116Rev. 019.4.13.2.2NoiseThe description of the affected environment in Subsection 19.3.2 serves as a baseline for the noise cumulative impact assessment. The geographic area of analysis for evaluation of cumulative effects from noise emissions includes the 91.27 ac. (36.94 ha) within the site boundary and the 1 mi. (1.6 km) area surrounding the site. This area was selected as it encompasses the nearest noise receptors to the SHINE site identified in Subsection19.4.3.6.1 and is a distance over which noise generated at the SHINE site would attenuate to negligible levels. Noise impacts resulting from construction and operation of the SHINE facility are discussed in Subsections19.4.2.2.1 and 19.4.2.2.2 and are SMALL.Table 19.4.13-2 identifies recent past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the geographic extent of analysis that can be assessed to determine cumulative effects on noise. | |||
Relevant "other actions" that are considered in this cumulative effects analysis are limited to the proposed facility, TIF District No. 35 Project Plan, and the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport. The proposed facility and TIF District No. 35 Project Plan are future actions and the airport is a current and on-going action.During the construction periods for the SHINE (including the off-site utility extension) and TIF District No. 35 facilities, additional impacts to noise are expected in the immediate area around each site. Noise levels from construction equipment are expected to attenuate rapidly with distance, and therefore, do not significantly impact nearby sensitive noise receptors. Noise levels are also impacted by increases in traffic volume during both construction and operation; however they are not expected to be significantly higher than current traffic levels. External noise emission from the SHINE facility during operation is primarily limited by the walls and other physical barriers of the facility itself. Noise generated at the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport contributes to the existing baseline noise levels of the region. The airport currently operates approximately 140 flights per day. | Relevant "other actions" that are considered in this cumulative effects analysis are limited to the proposed facility, TIF District No. 35 Project Plan, and the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport. The proposed facility and TIF District No. 35 Project Plan are future actions and the airport is a current and on-going action.During the construction periods for the SHINE (including the off-site utility extension) and TIF District No. 35 facilities, additional impacts to noise are expected in the immediate area around each site. Noise levels from construction equipment are expected to attenuate rapidly with distance, and therefore, do not significantly impact nearby sensitive noise receptors. Noise levels are also impacted by increases in traffic volume during both construction and operation; however they are not expected to be significantly higher than current traffic levels. External noise emission from the SHINE facility during operation is primarily limited by the walls and other physical barriers of the facility itself. Noise generated at the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport contributes to the existing baseline noise levels of the region. The airport currently operates approximately 140 flights per day. | ||
Additional flight operations may increase due to the demand to transport materials to and from the SHINE and NorthStar facilities; however these increases are not anticipated to cause an appreciable increase in noise above the current operations. Therefore, cumulative impacts to noise in the region are SMALL.19.4.13.3Geologic Environment The description of the affected environment in Subsection19.3.3 serves as a baseline for the geologic environment cumulative impact assessment. The geographic area of analysis for evaluation of cumulative effects on geologic resources is the same as that used in Subsection19.4.3 and includes the 91.27ac. (36.94ha) within the site boundary and the 5mi. (8km) region surrounding the site. As discussed in Subsection19.4.3, construction and operation impacts from the SHINE site on the geologic environment are SMALL.Table 19.4.13-2 identifies recent past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the geographic extent of analysis that can be assessed to determine cumulative effects on the geologic environment. Relevant "other actions" that are considered in this cumulative effects analysis are limited to the utility line extensions, the proposed facility, and the TIF District No.35 Project Plan, all of which are future actions. No present or on-going actions were identified that are relevant to this analysis. | Additional flight operations may increase due to the demand to transport materials to and from the SHINE and NorthStar facilities; however these increases are not anticipated to cause an appreciable increase in noise above the current operations. Therefore, cumulative impacts to noise in the region are SMALL.19.4.13.3Geologic Environment The description of the affected environment in Subsection19.3.3 serves as a baseline for the geologic environment cumulative impact assessment. The geographic area of analysis for evaluation of cumulative effects on geologic resources is the same as that used in Subsection19.4.3 and includes the 91.27ac. (36.94ha) within the site boundary and the 5mi. (8km) region surrounding the site. As discussed in Subsection19.4.3, construction and operation impacts from the SHINE site on the geologic environment are SMALL.Table 19.4.13-2 identifies recent past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the geographic extent of analysis that can be assessed to determine cumulative effects on the geologic environment. Relevant "other actions" that are considered in this cumulative effects analysis are limited to the utility line extensions, the proposed facility, and the TIF District No.35 Project Plan, all of which are future actions. No present or on-going actions were identified that are relevant to this analysis. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-117Rev. 0Impacts to the geologic environment from other actions are minor. The proximity of the utility line extensions and TIF District No.35 project to the SHINE site results in impacts to the same geologic resources as those affected by the SHINE facility. However, there are no sensitive geologic resources in the region surrounding the SHINE site. Impacts from these identified projects are expected to be localized and minor. Therefore, cumulative impacts are SMALL.19.4.13.4Water Resources The description of the affected environment in Subsection19.3.4 serves as a baseline for the water resources cumulative impact assessment. The geographic area of analysis for evaluation of cumulative effects on water resources is the same as that used in Subsection19.4.4 and includes the 91.27ac. (36.94ha) within the site boundary and the 5mi. (8km) region surrounding the site. As discussed in Subsection19.4.4.1, construction impacts to water resources are SMALL. Impacts from operation of the facility are discussed in Subsection19.4.4.2 and are SMALL.Table19.4.13-2 identifies recent past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the geographic extent of analysis that can be assessed to determine cumulative effects on water resources. Relevant "other actions" that are considered in this cumulative effects analysis are limited to the utility line extensions planned in support of the SHINE facilit y, proposed facility, TIF District No. 35 Project Plan, Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, and Glen Erin Golf Course. The utility lines, proposed facility, and TIF development are all future actions. Present and on-going actions include the airport and golf course.19.4.13.4.1HydrologyThere are no surface water resources located on either the SHINE or TIF District No. 35 sites; therefore there are no direct impacts as a result of alteration of streams or water bodies. The nearest water bodies are the nearby unnamed tributary to Rock River, located 1.6mi (2.6km) south of the SHINE site, and the Rock River, located 1.9 mi. (3.1 km) southwest of the SHINE site. Construction of the SHINE facility and at the TIF District No. 35 location represents potential sources of pollution associated with runoff from construction sites. It is anticipated that at both sites BMP are used in accordance with the SWPPP, as required by the WDNR, to prevent sediment runoff and subsequent siltation in receiving streams during construction.During operations, potential impacts associated with hydrology are related to stormwater management as agricultural lands at the site are converted to urban development. Currently, sheet flow runoff at the SHINE site location follows natural drainage patterns and discharges to a ditch along US51. The planned SHINE facility collects runoff from the developed parts to be directed through a vegetated on-site detention swale before being discharged through an outfall control structure to the ditch along US51 (Subsection19.4.5). Future facilities at the TIF District No. 35 may include a storm sewer collection system that includes underground piping, surface detention area, and safety fencing (City of Janesville, 2012b). Additionally, when combined with the distance to the nearest off-site water bodies, runoff and siltation to the receiving streams is minimized. Cumulative hydrologic impacts are therefore, SMALL.19.4.13.4.2Water Use All public water supplies in Rock County, including the City of Janesville are derived from groundwater. No public water supplies are provided by surface water within the region. In Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-118Rev. 0addition to the SHINE facility, the only other future demand on the groundwater supply in Janesville is the potential TIF District No. 35 development. Approval of the TIF District No. 35 Project Plan indicates that the City of Janesville has the capacity to serve the future development with both public water supply and wastewater treatment. According to the City of Janesville, the water main and sewer main infrastructure will have more than enough capacity to support the SHINE facility; therefore no upgrades to the City water supply system and sanitary sewer system are anticipated (Subsection 19.4.7). Therefore, cumulative impacts from water use are SMALL.19.4.13.4.3Water QualityExisting stormwater pollutant sources within the region around the SHINE site include urban developments, which are associated with pollutants such as phosphorous and chloride. Phosphorous has been identified as a general pollutant of concern across Wisconsin due to the impacts associated with nutrient build up in lakes. Phosphorous is also a potential pollutant associated with fertilizer application on agricultural lands. Fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides also are generally applied on golf courses. Chloride is another typical pollutant associated with development, particularly resulting from winter applications of salt on roadways and sidewalks for de-icing. Chloride is not readily adsorbed on soil particles or taken up by vegetation.The TIF District No. 35 Project Plan is the only other potential future project within the region of the SHINE site that has the potential to contribute to cumulative impacts on water quality as it is in the same subwatershed as the SHINE site. Other notable developed uses within the same subwatershed that may be the source of pollutant loading include the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport and the Glen Erin Golf Club. However, runoff from the SHINE site is detained in grassed detention areas and because of the high infiltration rates of the soil, is not conveyed to downstream areas within any organized stream channel. Similarly, no organized stream channel is evident near the SHINE site on either the airport or the golf course. Designs for development of the TIF District No. 35 site are expected to incorporate similar detention basins and best management practices as required by Wisconsin DNR and local regulations. Therefore, in consideration of the SHINE site design, future designs for detention associated with the TIF development site, high infiltration rates, and the absence of an organized stream channel near the SHINE site, cumulative impacts on surface water resources are SMALL.The SHINE facility is 91.27ac. (36.94ha) in size, and 53.75ac. (21.75ha) are expected to remain in use for the production of agricultural row crops or be returned to pre-settlement conditions. The removal of 38.52ac. (15.58ha) from row crop production results in a proportional reduction in the amount of agricultural chemicals (fertilizers, etc.) applied on the site, and less potential impact to groundwater quality from pollutant loading. If the remaining 53.75 ac (21.75 ha) were returned to pre-settlement conditions it would result in an even greater reduction in the use of agriculture chemicals. Similarly, the TIF development reduces the area of active agricultural lands and reduces the amount of agricultural chemical application. Consequently, less pollutant loading to groundwater would occur from agricultural practices. No other cumulative impacts to groundwater quality are expected. Therefore, cumulative impacts to groundwater resources are SMALL.19.4.13.5Ecological ResourcesThe description of the affected environment in Subsection19.3.5 serves as a baseline for the ecological resources cumulative impact assessment. The geographic area of analysis for evaluation of cumulative effects on ecological resources is the same as that used in Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-119Rev. 0Subsection19.4.5 and includes the 91.27 ac. (36.94 ha) within the site boundary and the 5mi. (8km) region surrounding the site. As discussed in Subsection19.4.5.1, impacts from construction on terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems, including protected species, are SMALL. Subsection 19.4.5.2 demonstrates that the potential impacts from operation of the SHINE facility on terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems, including protected species, are SMALL.Table19.4.13-2 identifies recent past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the geographic extent of analysis that can be assessed to determine cumulative effects on ecological resources. Relevant "other actions" that are considered in this cumulative effects analysis are limited to the utility line extensions, the proposed facility, and the TIF District No. 35 Project Plan, all of which are future actions. No present or on-going actions were identified that are relevant to this analysis.Terrestrial community resources could be affected by the planned utility line extensions by the City of Janesville and the TIF District No. 35 Project Plan. The proximity of the utility line extensions and TIF District No. 35 project to the SHINE site indicates that the ecological resources at these locations are likely similar. All projects include disturbance of cultivated crop lands and prime farmland. As described in Subsection19.4.5.1.3, plant communities in the region include cultivated crops (corn, soybean, winter wheat) and opportunistic weedy species. There are no federal or state-listed threatened, endangered, or special concern plant species observed or in the proximity of the site. Faunal resources in this area are limited due to the agricultural nature of the land. Field investigations identified bird and mammal species occurring in the region, however there were no state or federally listed species. Therefore, cumulative impacts to terrestrial ecological resources are SMALL.Aquatic community resources that could be affected by the proposed facility and TIF District No.35 Project Plan include the unnamed tributary to Rock River and the Rock River. The unnamed tributary, a small intermittent stream, is 1.6mi. (2.6km) south of the SHINE site and the Rock River is 1.9mi. (3.1km) southwest of the site. There are no wetlands within the SHINE site and dewatering of groundwater in excavations is not anticipated. BMPs will be used in | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | |||
accordance with the SWPPP, as required by the WDNR, to prevent sediment runoff and subsequent siltation in receiving streams during construction. Because of the distance to the off-site streams and the implementation of BMPs on-site during construction, cumulative impacts to aquatic resources are SMALL.19.4.13.6Historical and Cultural ResourcesThe description of the affected environment in Subsection19.3.6 serves as a baseline for the historical and cultural resources cumulative impact assessment. The geographic area of analysis for evaluation of cumulative effects on historical and cultural resources is the same as that used in Section 19.4.6 and includes the 91.27 ac. (36.94ha) within the site boundary and the 10mi. (16km) region surrounding the site. As discussed in Subsection19.4.6.1, impacts from construction and operation of the SHINE facility are SMALL.Table19.4.13-2 identifies recent past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the geographic extent of analysis that can be assessed to determine cumulative effects on historical and cultural resources. Relevant "other actions" that are considered in this cumulative effects analysis are limited to the utility line extensions, the proposed facility, the TIF District No.35 Project Plan, and NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, all of which are future actions. No present or on-going actions were identified that are relevant to this analysis. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-120Rev. 0The utility line extensions and TIF District No. 35 are in the same cultural context as the SHINE site. Based on the absence of archaeological sites found on the SHINE site and the immediate project area (Subsection19.3.6) it is expected that the potential for undiscovered historic properties (archaeology or historic architecture) occurring on the TIF District No. 35 project area is also low. Furthermore, there have been no Native American traditional properties identified within the region of the SHINE site. It is expected that site development practices at the TIF District No. 35 project include appropriate reviews by the WHS such that potential impacts to historic resources are either avoided or mitigated. Impacts to cultural resources were evaluated in the Environmental Assessment for NorthStar and it was determined that no cultural resources will be impacted by the project (DOE, 2012). Therefore, cumulative impacts to historic and cultural resources are SMALL.19.4.13.7Socioeconomic Environment The description of the affected environment in Subsection19.3.7 serves as a baseline for the socioeconomic cumulative impact assessment. The geographic area of analysis for evaluation of cumulative effects on socioeconomic resources is the same as that used in Subsection19.4.7 and includes the 91.27 ac. (36.94 ha) within the site boundary and the surrounding Rock County. As discussed in Subsection19.4.7.1, impacts from construction and operation of the SHINE facility have a SMALL impact on socioeconomic conditions. Impacts to transportation in Rock County associated with the development of the SHINE site are discussed in Subsection19.4.7.2 and are SMALL.Table 19.4.13-2 identifies recent past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the geographic extent of analysis that can be assessed to determine cumulative effects on the socioeconomic environment. Relevant "other actions" that are considered in this cumulative effects analysis are limited to the associated ut ility line extensions, the proposed SHINE facility, the TIF District No. 35 Project Plan, and NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, all of which are future actions. No present or on-going actions were identified that are relevant to this analysis.The TIF District No. 35 Project Plan approved in August, 2011, established TIF District No. 35 adjacent to the northern boundary of the SHINE site. In February, 2012, the Project Plan was amended to expand the district boundary to include the SHINE site. Prior to the inclusion of the SHINE site, the 226 ac. (91ha) district was created to facilitate development of a new industrial park. The district is zoned for light industrial uses and has the potential to be subdivided into 16parcels ranging from 10.99 to 18.86 ac. (4.45 to 7.6ha) in size. Wisconsin's Tax Increment District Law allows the City of Janesville to retain the property taxes levied against projected improved property value within TIF District No. 35 to pay for improvement costs that are incurred to attract new industrial development. The Project Plan proposes extension of utilities to the district and construction of an extension of Progress Drive from the north. Construction of additional utility and roadway extensions is expected to be phased to meet the needs of specific development projects.19.4.13.7.1Water Supply and Water Treatment As described in Subsection 19.4.13.2, the City of Janesville plans to install a water main and sanitary sewer main along the northern boundary of the SHINE site. The City has indicated that the water main and sewer main have more than enough capacity to support the facility and construction related population increase. Therefore, the City's water supply system and sanitary sewer system are not expected to require any upgrades. Development of the TIF District No.35 Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-121Rev. 0immediately north of the SHINE site will likely place additional demands on the City's water supply and water treatment system. The project plan for the TIF District No. 35 states that improvements to utilities will be made as needed to facilitate development and expansion (City of Janesville, 2012b). As new streets are constructed to provide access to new sites, sewer and water utilities are expected to be installed within the rights-of-way to minimize impacts. Therefore, cumulative effects to water supply and water treatment are SMALL.19.4.13.7.2Tax BaseThe development of TIF District No.35 facilitates industrial expansion, increases property values, and creates new jobs in the City of Janesville. These jobs support the diversification of the local economy and the increased manufacturing and warehousing/distribution payrolls and have a positive multiplier effect in the trade and service sectors. However, as discussed in Subsection19.4.7.1, the overall tax revenues from the SHINE and TIF District No.35 projects are positive, and relatively small in comparison to the established tax bases. Therefore, cumulative effects to the tax bases are SMALL.19.4.13.7.3Labor Force and PopulationThe NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes facility is planned to be constructed in neighboring Beloit in Rock County, WI. NorthStar plans to break ground in 2013, with production beginning in 2016, and is expected to create more than 150 jobs by 2016 (NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, 2012 and Beloit Daily News, 2011). The NorthStar facility is smaller in land area (33ac. [13ha]) and facility footprint (82,000 square ft. [7618square m]) compared to that of the SHINE facility. No workforce breakdown is available for the NorthStar facility. However, it is possible that the demand for workers may overlap between the two facilities for several labor categories. However, given the large workforce availability within the region, no significant labor category shortfalls are expected. The presence of the Blackhawk Technical College and the University of Wisconsin, Madison will help to ensure the availability of a workforce well trained for the required positions. In consideration of the availability and composition of the existing workforce, the cumulative effects on population growth are SMALL.19.4.13.7.4TransportationAs described in Subsection19.4.7.2, no modifications to the local traffic infrastructure are necessary as a result of construction-related traffic at the SHINE site. If construction activities at the TIF District No. 35 site are concurrent with those at SHINE, it is not expected to result in a significant impact on local traffic patterns or infrastructure. The other future development project in the area, NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, is located in the neighboring City of Beloit and therefore does not contribute to cumulative impacts due to the distance between facilities. | |||
Mitigation measures described in Subsection19.4.7.2.1 alleviate impacts on traffic patterns due to operation of the SHINE facility. It is anticipated that any impacts from operation of the TIF District No.35 or NorthStar facilities can be mitigated in a similar fashion. Therefore, cumulative effects to transportation infrastructure and traffic patterns are SMALL.19.4.13.7.5Summary of Socioeconomic Cumulative ImpactsIn summary, cumulative impacts from other actions identified in Table19.4.13-1 on aspects of socioeconomics, including water/wastewater systems, population growth, local tax base, the labor force, and transportation are SMALL. | Mitigation measures described in Subsection19.4.7.2.1 alleviate impacts on traffic patterns due to operation of the SHINE facility. It is anticipated that any impacts from operation of the TIF District No.35 or NorthStar facilities can be mitigated in a similar fashion. Therefore, cumulative effects to transportation infrastructure and traffic patterns are SMALL.19.4.13.7.5Summary of Socioeconomic Cumulative ImpactsIn summary, cumulative impacts from other actions identified in Table19.4.13-1 on aspects of socioeconomics, including water/wastewater systems, population growth, local tax base, the labor force, and transportation are SMALL. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-122Rev. 019.4.13.8Human HealthThe geographic area of analysis for evaluation of cumulative effects on human health is the same as that used in Subsection19.4.8 and includes the 91.27ac. (36.94 ha) within the site boundary and the 5 mi. (8 km) region surrounding the site. As discussed in Subsections19.4.8.1 and 19.4.8.2, impacts from operation of the SHINE facility has a SMALL impact on human health.Table19.4.13-2 identifies recent past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the geographic extent of analysis that can be assessed to determine cumulative effects on human health. Relevant "other actions" that are considered in this cumulative effects analysis are limited to the proposed facility, NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, and the two medical facilities located in Janesville: Mercy Clinic South and Mercy Hospital. The proposed SHINE and NorthStar facilities are future actions, whereas the hospital facilities are present and on-going.19.4.13.8.1Non-Radiological ImpactsConstruction of the SHINE and NorthStar facilities includes potential hazards to workers typical of any construction site. Normal construction safety practices will be employed to promote worker safety and reduce the likelihood of worker injury during construction. Since the Mercy Clinic South and Mercy Hospital are already operating, they have no associated construction | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | impacts.Potential non-radiological public and occupational hazards pertaining to the operation of the SHINE and NorthStar facilities are associated with emissions, discharges, and waste associated with processes within the facility as well as accidental spills/releases. The great majority of chemical processes at the SHINE facility are conducted inside of the RCA. Any wastes created by these processes are disposed of as radioactive waste and shipped off-site. Some lab-scale chemical use occurs outside the RCA. Liquid wastes produced as a result of these activities are treated to ensure they meet the requirements of the Janesville wastewater treatment facility before being discharged to the municipal sewer. Additionally, the facility sanitary wastewater is treated by the Janesville wastewater treatment facility.Control systems are in place for the SHINE facility and presumably for other permitted projects in accordance with WDNR and local requirements to minimize potential exposure to the public and include conveyance of all wastewater to appropriate approved wastewater treatment facilities, implementation of Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure Plans, and air emission controls, as appropriate. Therefore, cumulative impacts to non-radiological health are SMALL.19.4.13.8.2Radiological ImpactsThe proposed SHINE facility releases small quantities of radionuclides to the environment. Gaseous effluent activity releases and liquid effluent activity releases are discussed in Subsections 19.4.8.2.4.1 and 19.4.8.2.4.2, respectively. Direct dose to a member of the public at the site boundary is due to gamma radiation penetrating the walls of the production facility and the waste staging and shipping facility. As a result of site shielding design, the direct dose outside of the buildings is small and decreases with increasing distance. The nearest site boundary is located at an appreciable distance from the two fixed sources of radiation (production facility building and waste staging and shipping building); therefore the dose is negligible at the site boundary. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-125Rev. 0Table 19.4.13-1 Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Projects and Other Actions Considered in the Cumulative Effects Analysis(Sheet 1 of 3)Project | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-123Rev. 0There are no nuclear fuel cycle facilities located within the 5 mi. (8 km) region around the SHINE site. However, Interstate 39/90 is approximately 2 mi. (3.2 km) from the site boundary, which may result in some radiation exposure from the transportation of radioactive material along the highway. The SHINE site is surrounded by railroads on all sides except for the southeast, so additional doses of radiation may result from transportation of radioactive materials along the | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental | railroads. The NorthStar facility is not projecting to have any radioactive emissions related to the operation of the facility. The facility is designed to control the amount of radioactive material released to a negligible amount. Operations emissions are not expected to violate any federal or state criteria or trigger the need for a PSD or Title V operating permit. Additionally, liquid waste generated during operations will be collected, temporarily stored on-site, and sent off-site for treatment and disposal per WDNR regulations. No public dose from air emissi ons or wastewater from the NorthStar facility is expected. Mercy Clinic South and Mercy Hospital provide imaging services to patients that include radiation oncology and nuclear medicine. Doses of radiological exposure to the public from these facilities are negligible. Therefore, cumulative impacts to radiological health are SMALL.As described in Subsection 19.4.10, the effect of transportation of radioactive material from the SHINE facility on the public is SMALL compared to the background radiological dose in the vicinity of the SHINE facility. Transportation workers will receive a larger dose due to the number of shipments originating at the SHINE facility. The shipment of radioactive material for the SHINE and NorthStar facilities contributes to the cumulative impact of radioactive material production, storage, utilization and disposal for all facilities in the United States that utilize radioactive material. The cumulative impacts of the transportation of radioactive materials for the existing facilities in the region, including the Mercy medical facilities, are SMALL and the impacts from the addition of the SHINE facility do not change that conclusion. Therefore, cumulative effects on transportation of nuclear material from the addition of the SHINE facility are SMALL.19.4.13.9Environmental JusticeThe geographic area of analysis for evaluation of cumulative effects on environmental justice is the same as that used in Subsection19.4.12 and includes the 91.27ac. (36.94ha) within the site boundary and the 5 mi. (8km) region surrounding the site. As discussed in Subsection19.4.12, construction and operation impacts to environmental justice in the region are SMALL.Table 19.4.13-2 identifies recent past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the geographic extent of analysis that can be assessed to determine cumulative effects on environmental justice. Relevant "other actions" that are considered in this cumulative effects analysis are limited to the utility line extensions, the proposed facility, and the TIF District No. 35 Project Plan, all of which are future actions. No present or on-going actions were identified that are relevant to this analysis.Disproportionate impacts on low-income or minority populations from other actions are not expected. The proximity of the utility line extensions and TIF District No. 35 project to the SHINE site indicates that the populations of concern at these locations will be the same and that the cumulative impacts on environmental justice are SMALL. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-124Rev. 019.4.13.10ConclusionTable19.4.13-3 summarizes the cumulative impacts in all resource areas. In conclusion, there are no significant cumulative adverse environmental impacts from the construction and operation of the SHINE site when considered together with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects in the area. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-125Rev. 0Table 19.4.13-1 Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Projects and Other Actions Considered in the Cumulative Effects Analysis(Sheet 1 of 3) | |||
Project Name Summary of ProjectLocationPotentially Affected Resource(s)Retained for Cumulative Effects AnalysisBasisUtility ProjectsUtility line extensionInstallation of water and sewer lines Adjacent to SHINE siteLand Use; Geology; Noise, Water; Ecology; Historical and Cultural; Socioeconomics; Environmental JusticeYPart of overall development of TIF District No. 35; SHINE to tie into line extension.Water and Sewer System ImprovementsImprovements throughout the City of JanesvilleRock County, WILand Use; Water; SocioeconomicsNConstruction activities limited to previously disturbed/ developed landsEnergy ProjectsAlliant Energy Generation FacilityExisting power | |||
generation facilityRock County, WIAir Quality, Visual ResourcesYExisting operating facility. Stacks visible in site | |||
viewshedUniversity of Wisconsin Charter StreetReplacement of coal boilers with natural gas | |||
boilersDane County, WIAir QualityYPlanned rebuild of current facilities with new construction permittedWest Campus CogenerationConstruction of new cooling towers for chiller plant expansionDane County, WIAir Quality YExisting facility with new construction permittedNew ConstructionFuture UrbanizationConstruction of housing, commercial buildings, roads, bridges, rail, and other utility facilities, as described in local land use planning documents.Throughout the regionLand Use; Visual; Geology; Air Quality; Noise; Water; Ecology; Historical and Cultural; Socioeconomics; Environmental JusticeNAll future actions with timeline uncertain. Not in immediate proximity to SHINE site Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-126Rev. 0Table 19.4.13-1 Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Projects and Other Actions Considered in the Cumulative Effects Analysis (Sheet 2 of 3)Project NameSummary of ProjectLocationPotentially Affected Resource(s) | |||
Retained for Cumulative Effects AnalysisBasisJanesville Innovation CenterProvides support and assistance for small businesses and start-upsRock County, WISocioeconomicsNConstruction activities limited to previously disturbed/ developed landsNorthStar Medical Radioisotopes Medical radioisotope production facility Rock County, WIAir Quality; Historical and Cultural; Socioeconomics; Human HealthYConstruction planned to start in 2013TIF District No. 35 Project PlanParcel zoned for industrial use as a TIF districtAdjacent to SHINE site, Rock County, WILand Use; Geology; Noise, Ecology; Historical and Cultural; Socioeconomics; Environmental JusticeYApproved by City of JanesvilleManufacturing FacilitiesGenerac Power SystemsModifications to venting stack at generator manufacturing location Jefferson County, WIAir QualityYExisting operation with new construction permittedKraft Foods GlobalNew boiler construction at a processing location for prepared foodsDane County, WIAir QualityYExisting operation with new construction permittedUnited EthanolFacility upgrades at an ethanol production plantRock County, WIAir QualityYExisting operation with new construction permittedTraffic ProjectsInterstate 39/90 CorridorExpansion and improvementsDane and Rock Counties, WILand Use; Water Resources; Air Quality; Noise; SocioeconomicsNTimeframe uncertain Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-127Rev. 0Table 19.4.13-1 Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Projects and Other Actions Considered in the Cumulative Effects Analysis (Sheet 3 of 3)Project NameSummary of ProjectLocationPotentially Affected Resource(s) | |||
Retained for Cumulative Effects AnalysisBasisPalmer Drive Bridge Railing replacementRock County, WILand Use; Water Resources; Air Quality; Noise; Socioeconomics NConstruction activities limited to previously disturbed/ developed landsRoad Improvement ProjectsCurb, gutter and sidewalk replacement; manhole rehabilitation and replacement; street resurfacingRock County, WILand Use; Water Resources; Air Quality; Noise; SocioeconomicsNConstruction activities limited to previously disturbed/ developed landsSouthern Wisconsin Regional AirportPublic airport Rock County, WIVisual Resources; Noise; WaterYExisting facility. OperationalWIS 26 CorridorRoad expansionRock County, WILand Use; Water Resources; Air Quality; Noise; SocioeconomicsNTimeframe uncertainUS 14 Corridor StudyRoad expansion studyDane and Rock Counties, WILand Use; Water Resources; Air Quality; Noise; SocioeconomicsNTimeframe uncertainUS 14/WIS 11 Corridor | |||
StudyRoad expansion studyRock and Walworth Counties, WILand Use; Water Resources; Air Quality; Noise; SocioeconomicsNTimeframe uncertainRadiological SourcesMercy Clinic SouthMedical services facilityRock County, WIHuman HealthYOperationalMercy HospitalMedical services facilityRock County, WIHuman HealthYOperationalOther Projects/ ActionsGlen Erin Golf Course7000-yd. public golf courseRock County, WIWater QualityYExisting facility. Operational Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-128Rev. 0Table 19.4.13-2 Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Projects and Other Actions Retained for the Cumulative Effects Analysis(Sheet 1 of 2)Project NameSummary of ProjectLocationStatusUtility ProjectsUtility line extensionInstallation of water and sewer lines0.1 mi. north of siteTimeframe dependent on SHINE facility construction Energy ProjectsAlliant Energy Generation FacilityExisting power generation facility3.2 mi south of siteExisting operating facility, stacks visible in site viewshed(WDNR, 2011b)University of Wisconsin Charter StReplacement of coal boilers with natural gas boilers36.4 mi. northwest of | |||
siteUnder construction (WDNR, 2011c; WDNR, 2012c) | |||
West Campus CogenerationConstruction of new cooling towers for chiller plant expansion37.1 mi. northwest of | |||
siteExisting operation with new construction permitted(WDNR, 2010a)New ConstructionTIF District No. 35 Project PlanParcel zoned for industrial use as a TIF district0.9 mi. north of siteApproved by City of Janesville (City of Janesville, 2012b) | |||
NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes Medical radioisotope facility 7.7 mi. south of siteConstruction planned to start in 2013 (NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, 2012)Transportation ProjectsSouthern Wisconsin Regional AirportPublic airport 1.0 mi southwest of siteOperational (AirNav, 2013)Manufacturing FacilitiesGenerac Power SystemsModifications to venting stack at generator manufacturing location21.8 mi. northeast of siteExisting operation with new construction permitted(WDNR, 2010b)Kraft Foods GlobalNew boiler construction at a processing location for prepared foods37.5 mi. northwest of siteExisting operation with new construction permitted(WDNR, 2012e)United EthanolFacility upgrades at an ethanol production plant11.2 mi. northeast of siteExisting operation with new construction permitted(WDNR, 2012d) | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-129Rev. 0Table 19.4.13-2 Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Projects and Other Actions Retained for the Cumulative Effects Analysis(Sheet 2 of 2)Project NameSummary of ProjectLocationStatusRadiological SourcesMercy Clinic SouthMedical services facility1.8 mi. north of siteOperational (Mercy Health System, 2012a)Mercy HospitalMedical services facility4.4 mi. north of siteOperational (Mercy Health System, 2012b)Other Projects/ ActionsGlen Erin Golf Course7000-yd. public golf course1.6 mi southwest of siteOperational (Wisconsin Golf Courses, 2013) | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-130Rev. 0Table 19.4.13-3 Cumulative Impacts on Environmental Resources, Including the Impacts of the Proposed ProjectResource CategoryCumulative Impact LevelLand Use and Visual Resources Land UseSMALL Visual ResourcesSMALL Air Quality and Noise Air QualitySMALL NoiseSMALL Geologic EnvironmentSMALLWater Resources HydrologySMALL Water UseSMALL Water QualitySMALL Ecological Resources Terrestrial EcosystemsSMALL Aquatic EcosystemsSMALL SocioeconomicsSMALLHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSMALLHuman Health Nonradiological HealthSMALL Radiological HealthSMALL Environmental JusticeSMALLTransportationSMALL Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTable of ContentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-iRev. 0SECTION 19.5ALTERNATIVESTable of Contents SectionTitlePage19.5ALTERNATIVES..........................................................................................19.5-119.5.1NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE.....................................................................19.5-119.5.2REASONABLE ALTERNATIVES..............................................................19.5-219.5.3COST-BENEFIT OF THE ALTERNATIVES..............................................19.5-7219.5.4COMPARISON OF THE POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS......19.5-93 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-iiRev. 0List of Tables NumberTitle19.5.2-1Sensitive Features in the Chippewa Falls Site Area19.5.2-2Potential Land Use and Natural Habitat Impacts at the Chippewa Falls Site (USGS, 2006)19.5.2-3Plant Species Oberved at the Chippewa Falls Site19.5.2-4Endangered Resources Known or Likely to Occur in the Chippewa Falls Site Area19.5.2-5Annual Average Hourly Traffic Counts in the Chippewa Falls Site Area19.5.2-6Minority and Poverty Populations within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Chippewa Falls Site19.5.2-8Sensitive Features in the Stevens Point Site Area 19.5.2-9Potential Land Use and Natural Habitat Impacts at the Stevens Point Site (USGS, 2006)19.5.2-10Plant Species Observed at the Stevens Point Site 19.5.2-11Endangered Resources Known or Likely to Occur in the Stevens Point Site Area19.5.2-12Annual Average Hourly Traffic Counts in the Stevens Point Site Area19.5.2-13Minority and Poverty Populations within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Stevens Point Site19.5.2-14Potentially Significant Projects Identified within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Stevens Point Site Vicinity19.5.4-1Comparison of Construction Impacts for the SHINE Site and Alternative Sites 19.5.4-2Comparison of Operation Impacts for the SHINE Site and Alternative Sites19.5.4-3Comparison of Construction Impacts for the SHINE Technology and Alternative Technologies19.5.4-4Comparison of Operation Impacts for the SHINE Technology and Alternative Technologies Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of FiguresSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-iiiRev. 0List of Figures NumberTitle19.5.2-1Locations of States Considered for Potential Sites (Black Dots) Relative to Potential Customers (Yellow Stars)19.5.2-2Locations of Communities in Wisconsin Considered for Potential Sites (Black Dots) Relative to Potential Future Customers (Yellow Stars)19.5.2-3Locations of Potential Sites19.5.2-4Conceptual Layout of the Chippewa Falls Site19.5.2-5Sensitive Features Near the Chippewa Falls Site19.5.2-6Census Block Groups with Above Average Low Income Population within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Chippewa Falls Site 19.5.2-7Conceptual Layout of the Stevens Point Site19.5.2-8Sensitive Features Near the Stevens Point Site19.5.2-9Census Block Groups with Above Average Low Income Population within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Stevens Point Site Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-ivRev. 0Acronyms and AbbreviationsAcronym/Abbreviation Definition10 CFR 20Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 20oCdegrees Celsius oFdegrees Fahrenheitac.acreADAMSAgencywide Documents Access and Management SystemAHRaqueous homogeneous reactor B&W TSGBabcock & Wilcox Technical Services Group, Inc.CFRCode of Federal Regulations Cicurie CLSCanadian Light Sourcecmcentimetercm/scentimeters per second CPConstruction PermitDOEU.S. Department of EnergyERPEnvironmental Repair Program ft.feetGEHGE Hitachi Nuclear EnergyGISGeographic Information System gpmgallons per minutehahectareHEUhighly enriched uranium HIhealth imaging Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-vRev. 0I-131iodine-131 in.inchISGInterim Staff Guidance kmkilometer kWkilowattLliterL/minliters per minute LEUlow enriched uranium LUSTleaking underground storage tank mmeterMHAMaximum Hypothetical Accident mi.mileMo-98molybdenum-98 Mo-99molybdenum-99 Mo-100molybdenum-100MURRUniversity of Miss ouri Research Reactor MWmegawattNAAQSNational Ambient Air quality Standards NMNuclear MonitorNorthStarNorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, LLC NOxnitrogen oxides NRCU.S. Nuclear Regulator Commission NRCSNatural Resource Conservation Service NRHPNational Register of Historic PlacesAcronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-viRev. 0OLOperating License PMparticulate matter SHINESHINE Medical Technologies SO2sulfur dioxideSPCCSpill Prevention, Control, and CountermeasureSPTStandard Penetration Test sq.squareSWRASouthern Wisconsin Regional AirportTc-99mtechnetium-99m TIFTax Increment Financing UMUniversity of Missouri | |||
-ColumbiaUSCBU.S. Census BureauUSEPAU.S. Environmental Protection Agency USFWSU.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceUSGSU.S. Geological Survey UWUniversity of Wisconsin | |||
-MadisonWBNWisconsin BrokerNETWDNRWisconsin Department of Natural ResourcesWDORWisconsin Department of Revenue WDOTWisconsin Department of TransportationWDPIWisconsin Department of Public InstructionWGNHSWisconsin Geological and Natural History SurveyWNNWorld Nuclear NewsAcronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-viiRev. 0Xe-133xenon-133Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewNo-Action AlternativeSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-1Rev. 0CHAPTER 1919.5ALTERNATIVES19.5.1NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVEThis section defines the No-Action Alternative and describes the consequences of adopting the No-Action Alternative.The proposed federal action is the issuance of a Construction Permit (CP) and Operating License (OL) that would allow SHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. (SHINE) to construct and operate a medical SHINE facility to produce molybdenum | |||
-99 (Mo-99), iodine-131 (I-131), and xenon-133 (Xe-133). Under the No-Action Alternative, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) would not issue the CP and OL, and the construction and operation of the SHINE facility would not occur. In accordance with the Final Interim Staff Guidance (ISG) Augmenting NUREG-1537, Chapter 19, the environmental consequences of the No-Action Alternative are assumed to be the status quo. If the SHINE facility were not constructed and operated, the environmental consequences discussed in Section 19.4 would be avoided. The consequences that would be avoided include adverse impacts such as changes in land use; however, as discussed in Section 19.4, the severity of all of the adverse impacts is considered to be SMALL. Because the adverse impacts are not significant, the benefit of avoiding those impacts would also not be significant. In addition, as discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, construction and operation of the SHINE facility produces socioeconomic benefits, such as increases in tax revenues to local jurisdictions. If the SHINE facility were not constructed and operated, these beneficial socioeconomic impacts would not be realized.In addition to the beneficial socioeconomic impacts discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, the SHINE facility benefits the health of people who need diagnostic tests that require technetium-99m (Tc-99m) and other isotopes. The facility is expected to satisfy approximately half of the annual demand for Tc-99m in the United States, and to provide a more reliable supply of this isotope than currently exists. This represents a significant health benefit. The facility will also produce I-131 and Xe-133, which will have additional health benefits. If the SHINE facility were not constructed and operated, these health benefits would not be realized.The SHINE facility also produces significant programmatic benefits that would not be realized under the No-Action Alternative. These programmatic benefits are summarized in the following paragraphs.As discussed in Subsection 19.1.1, there is currently no commercial production of Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133 in the United States. Reactors outside the United States supply these isotopes. Two of these reactors are more than 50 years old (NRCL, 2009), and both have experienced supply disruptions related to maintenance problems. In addition to age-related maintenance problems, the reliability of the medical isotope supply is further jeopardized by increasing demand, both domestically and globally; by the increasing difficulty of transporting medical isotopes across international borders; and by the short half-life of these medical isotopes. Because of these supply reliability concerns, the U.S. government has a policy to encourage the domestic production of medical isotopes. The SHINE facility makes a significant contribution toward advancing this policy. Under the No-Action Alternative, this benefit would not be realized, in direct Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-2Rev. 0contradiction of the stated policy of the U.S. government to encourage the domestic production of medical isotopes.The SHINE facility also helps achieve U.S. government nonproliferation objectives. Currently, most medical isotopes are produced by irradiating highly enriched uranium (HEU) targets in non-power reactors fueled with low enriched uranium (LEU).The United States currently exports HEU for medical SHINE. Congress passed the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (U.S. Government, 1992), which includes a nonproliferation objective to phase out exports of HEU for medical SHINE. Based on this, the U.S. government is encouraging medical SHINE without the use of HEU. The SHINE facility uses LEU to produce medical isotopes, thereby avoiding the use of HEU, reducing the need to ship HEU abroad, and helping to accomplish the nonproliferation objective. Under the No-Action Alternative, this benefit would not be realized.19.5.2REASONABLE ALTERNATIVES This section discusses alternatives to the proposed project as required by the NRC Final ISG Augmenting NUREG-1537. The fo llowing types of alter natives are discussed:*Alternative sites *Alternative technologiesBoth beneficial and adverse impacts are described for the associated environmental resource areas for alternative sites and alternative technologies. The analyses include direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts. Impacts are analyzed in proportion to their significance.It should be noted that alternative siting within each site is not discussed, because the alternative sites are relatively small and no reasonable arrangement of the SHINE facility components within the site boundaries would avoid or significantly reduce the expected environmental impacts. Modification of existing facilities (versus construction of an entirely new facility) is not discussed, because the SHINE facility is intended to be a new stand-alone facility employing a technology that has not previously been used anywhere in the world. Finally, alternative transportation methods are not discussed, because there are no reasonable alternatives considering the nature of the products that need to be transported from the SHINE facility. Due to the short half-life of Mo-99 (2.75 days), this isotope is normally shipped from the facility to the processing facility by air. Among the other possible products, I-131 has a half-life of 8.0 days, and Xe-133 has a half-life of 5.2 days. Due to their longer half-lives, these isotopes could be shipped by either truck or air. However, since the I-131 and Xe-133 would likely be shipped with the Mo-99 shipments, air shipment is the most reasonable method. (Knolls, 2002)19.5.2.1ALTERNATIVE SITES19.5.2.1.1Identification of Reasonable Alternatives This subsection discusses the identification of reasonable siting alternatives for the SHINE facility. The following information is provided:*Process used to determine reasonable alternatives to the proposed site.*All alternative sites considered. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-3Rev. 0*Alternative sites that were eliminated from further study.*Description of reasonable alternative sites.*Discussion of any alternative sites considered that would reduce or avoid adverse effects.The region considered for potential sites was based on SHINE's mission to serve the need for medical isotopes in the United States. In a market where the primary product decays at a rate of 1 percent per hour, being in close proximity to customers is of utmost importance, since minimizing product travel time is key.When determining potential customers, SHINE considered two scenarios: the near-term scenario, in which SHINE sells Mo-99 and other medical isotopes as an active pharmaceutical ingredient to packagers; and a possible long-term scenario, in which SHINE expands to also package and distribute the isotopes itself. The second, long-term scenario is outside the scope of this license application, but was considered in identifying and evaluating potential sites.In the near-term scenario, SHINE identified three likely customers: Nordion (Ottawa, Canada), Covidien (St. Louis, Missouri), and Lantheus Medical Imaging (Billerica, Massachusetts). A production site central to these locations minimizes product losses due to decay during shipment.In addition to these three customers, in the long-term scenario SHINE would be selling directly to consumers. As the hospitals and radiopharmacies that use medical isotopes are located throughout the country, the center of the United States was particularly appealing. Locating on either coast would result in fewer patients being served and therefore reduced social and economic benefits. In general, the Midwest provides a good balance between proximity to currently anticipated customers and customers anticipated in an expansion scenario.Given the Midwest as a starting point, SHINE proceeded to contact state economic development offices. States to be contacted were chosen based on their location and perceived potential ability to provide financial incentives to the project. SHINE contacted economic development offices in Wisconsin, Minnesota, Ohio, Michigan, and Louisiana. Although Louisiana is not considered part of the Midwest, the potential for high financial incentives prompted SHINE to request information.No response was received from Ohio or Michigan; therefore, they were eliminated from consideration. A preliminary check of the seismic conditions in Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Louisiana indicated no major fault lines in any of these states, thereby not eliminating any of them from consideration due to seismic activity. After careful analysis of the proposals from Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Louisiana, Wisconsin was chosen for its superior financial incentive package. Of the three states, Wisconsin also has the benefit of being most centrally located with respect to SHINE's three prospective customers (as seen in Figure 19.5.2-1), and being the home state of several project partners, including the University of Wisconsin-Madison (UW), the Morgridge Institute for Research, and Phoenix Nuclear Labs. Thereby, the states of Minnesota and Louisiana were eliminated from further consideration.After narrowing the search to the state of Wisconsin, SHINE identified four communities that met certain basic requirements for the SHINE plant. In the initial consideration process, the communities were required to have build-to-suit land available for development with good access to an interstate highway, and an airport capable of handling aircraft necessary for isotope Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-4Rev. 0distribution within approximately 10 minutes of the potential site. The four communities identified in Wisconsin that met these requirements were:*Madison*Chippewa Falls *Janesville *Stevens Point Madison was eliminated from consideration early in the study due to lack of community and local government support. The location of the remaining communities is shown in Figure 19.5.2-2. An approximate parcel size appropriate for the facility was determined and the search for parcels within each of the three remaining communities was limited to sites of comparable size. Each of these communities identified a potential site and prepared an incentive proposal detailing the advantages of their site. The location of the potential sites is shown in Figure 19.5.2-3. SHINE then proceeded to compare these sites on the basis of the following criteria:*Local government and community support. | |||
*Financial incentives. | *Financial incentives. | ||
*Size and shape of the proposed parcel.*Access to a skilled workforce.*Proximity to potential future customers. | *Size and shape of the proposed parcel.*Access to a skilled workforce.*Proximity to potential future customers. | ||
*Proximity to airport.*Proximity to an interstate highway.*Anticipated depth to groundwater table. | *Proximity to airport.*Proximity to an interstate highway.*Anticipated depth to groundwater table. | ||
*Seismic characteristics.*Presence of endangered resources and wetlands.*Presence of historic and archaeological resources.The assessments of these criteria with respect to the potential sites are discussed as follows:Local government and community supportLocal government and community support will be essential to SHINE successfully completing its mission and, therefore, were very important factors in the site selection process. All three communities showed very high interest in the project and were extremely cooperative.Financial incentivesFinancial incentives will also be key to SHINE's success and were thus key to the site selection process. All three communities were competitive with respect to economic incentives, though Janesville and Stevens Point had a slight economic advantage over Chippewa Falls. | *Seismic characteristics.*Presence of endangered resources and wetlands.*Presence of historic and archaeological resources.The assessments of these criteria with respect to the potential sites are discussed as follows:Local government and community supportLocal government and community support will be essential to SHINE successfully completing its mission and, therefore, were very important factors in the site selection process. All three communities showed very high interest in the project and were extremely cooperative. | ||
Size and shape of the proposed parcelA greater distance from the facility to the site boundary was considered beneficial, as a greater distance decreases likelihood of adverse impact to the public. The Janesville site, being 90 acres (ac.) (36.4 hectares [ha]) in size and roughly square, had the largest minimum distance to the site boundary at approximately 1000 feet (ft.) (304.8 meters [m]) in all directions. Stevens Point Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Financial incentivesFinancial incentives will also be key to SHINE's success and were thus key to the site selection process. All three communities were competitive with respect to economic incentives, though Janesville and Stevens Point had a slight economic advantage over Chippewa Falls. | ||
Size and shape of the proposed parcelA greater distance from the facility to the site boundary was considered beneficial, as a greater distance decreases likelihood of adverse impact to the public. The Janesville site, being 90 acres (ac.) (36.4 hectares [ha]) in size and roughly square, had the largest minimum distance to the site boundary at approximately 1000 feet (ft.) (304.8 meters [m]) in all directions. Stevens Point Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-5Rev. 0proposed an 80 ac. (32.4 ha), square site, roughly on par with the Janesville site minimum distance at just a little under 1000 ft. (304.8 m) in all directions. The Chippewa Falls site, being slightly less than 80 ac. (32.4 ha) and oblong in shape, had a considerably smaller minimum distance to the site boundary in some directions.Access to a skilled workforceTwo factors were considered when determining access to a skilled workforce: proximity to large cities and the potential cooperation with local universities or technical colleges willing to help train the production facility workforce. With respect to larger cities, Janesville has the advantage of being near Madison, Milwaukee, and Chicago. Chippewa Falls is fairly close to Minneapolis/St. Paul, while Stevens Point is a bit more remote. Janesville and Stevens Point both have access to universities or technical colleges willing to help train SHINE's workforce: Blackhawk Technical College and UW-Stevens Point, respectively. Workforce training was not offered by local officials at Chippewa Falls.Proximity to potential customersOf the three potential locations in Wisconsin, medical isotopes shipped from Janesville had the shortest overall distance to travel to each of SHINE's customers by air. | |||
Proximity to airportAs discussed earlier, efficient product transportation is extremely important in the medical isotope business. The closer the site was to the local airport, the better from this perspective. The Janesville site is directly across from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (SWAR), requiring SHINE's product to travel less than 0.5 mile (mi.) (0.8 kilometer [km]). The Stevens Point site was approximately 4 mi. (6.4 km) from the Stevens Point Municipal Airport. The Chippewa Falls site was approximately 10 mi. (16.1 km) from the Chippewa Valley Regional Airport. The perceived disadvantage of a higher risk of an airplane crash with increased proximity to the airport (no formal analysis was done on the risk of a crash at the alternative sites) is mitigated through design of the facility.In the case of local airport closure, it is likely that SHINE's product would be transported by truck to the nearest secondary airport. The Janesville site is approximately 1 hour from Dane County Regional Airport in Madison, and within 2 hours of both O'Hare International Airport in Chicago and Mitchell International Airport in Milwaukee. The Chippewa Falls site is within 2hours of Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport. The Stevens Point site is more than 2hours from all of these airports.Proximity to an interstate highwayIn the case of a local airport closure, SHINE would intend to ship its product by truck either to thenext closest airport or, depending on the circumstances, directly to the customer. To facilitate ease of transport by truck, close proximity to an interstate highway is desired.The Janesville site is approximately 3 mi. (4.8 km) by road from I-39/90. The Stevens Point site is less than 2 mi. (3.2 km) by road from I-39, and the Chippewa Falls site is approximately 18 mi. | Proximity to airportAs discussed earlier, efficient product transportation is extremely important in the medical isotope business. The closer the site was to the local airport, the better from this perspective. The Janesville site is directly across from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (SWAR), requiring SHINE's product to travel less than 0.5 mile (mi.) (0.8 kilometer [km]). The Stevens Point site was approximately 4 mi. (6.4 km) from the Stevens Point Municipal Airport. The Chippewa Falls site was approximately 10 mi. (16.1 km) from the Chippewa Valley Regional Airport. The perceived disadvantage of a higher risk of an airplane crash with increased proximity to the airport (no formal analysis was done on the risk of a crash at the alternative sites) is mitigated through design of the facility.In the case of local airport closure, it is likely that SHINE's product would be transported by truck to the nearest secondary airport. The Janesville site is approximately 1 hour from Dane County Regional Airport in Madison, and within 2 hours of both O'Hare International Airport in Chicago and Mitchell International Airport in Milwaukee. The Chippewa Falls site is within 2hours of Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport. The Stevens Point site is more than 2hours from all of these airports.Proximity to an interstate highwayIn the case of a local airport closure, SHINE would intend to ship its product by truck either to thenext closest airport or, depending on the circumstances, directly to the customer. To facilitate ease of transport by truck, close proximity to an interstate highway is desired.The Janesville site is approximately 3 mi. (4.8 km) by road from I-39/90. The Stevens Point site is less than 2 mi. (3.2 km) by road from I-39, and the Chippewa Falls site is approximately 18 mi. | ||
(29.0 km) from I-94. | (29.0 km) from I-94. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-6Rev. 0Anticipated depth to groundwaterRough approximations of groundwater depth from U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) historical data were taken into consideration. In general, deeper groundwater was considered to be beneficial as deeper groundwater is less likely to impact the facility and vice versa.The Janesville site is located in Rock County, Wisconsin. Historical wells in counties adjacent to Rock County are between 70 and 100 ft. (21.3 and 30.5 m) deep. Recent measurements down to 30 ft. (9.1 m) found no water and the nearby river elevation is approximately 70 ft. (21.3 m) lower than site elevation. Using this information, groundwater depth at the Janesville site was estimated at greater than 30 ft. (9.1 m). Since then, boreholes and wells drilled on-site have found groundwater at between 55 and 65 ft. (16.8 and 19.8 m) below grade.Using similar estimation methods, groundwater depth at the Chippewa Falls site was estimated to be at 20 to 30 ft. (6.1 to 9.1 m). Records of an on-site borehole subsequently showed groundwater at approximately 50 ft. (15.2 m) below grade. Groundwater depth at the Stevens Point site was estimated to be at 10 ft. (3.0 m) or less. Since then, boreholes and wells drilled on-site at Stevens Point have found groundwater at about 8 to 11 ft. (2.4 to 3.4 m) below grade. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Seismic characteristicsA preliminary check of the seismic characteristics of each site was made to determine if there were any major advantages or disadvantages between the three. The Janesville site was deemed slightly more likely to have a very weak shaking event than the other two sites; however, both Chippewa Falls and Stevens Point were predicted to be located on glacial sands that might have higher amplification factors than the ground at Janesville. Overall, Janesville was rated slightly preferable from a seismic perspective. Since that time, a geotechnical investigation of the Janesville site has shown glacial deposits at the Janesville site as well.Presence of endangered resources and wetlandsAn Endangered Resources Review by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) was requested for all three sites. Because of the Janesville site's current condition as an active agricultural field far from any wetlands, water or buffer areas, it was determined to be an unsuitable habitat for endangered resources likely to be in the area. No conservation or compliance actions were recommended for the site.Although the Chippewa Falls site was not found to provide suitable habitat for the four Threatened or Special Concern species identified in its vicinity, strict erosion and siltation controls during the entire construction period were recommended to avoid indirect impact to sensitive aquatic species that could be present in the nearby Lake Wissota or Chippewa River. It was also recommended that the small wetland community on the eastern edge of the project site be protected as much as possible to avoid impacting any rare or declining species it may contain.Like Chippewa Falls, the Stevens Point site was determined to be unlikely to provide suitable habitat for the four Threatened or Special Concern species recorded within the vicinity of the project site. No impacts were expected and no conservation or compliance actions were recommended. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-7Rev. 0Input from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) was also requested for all three sites. No federally-listed, proposed, or candidate species are expected within the project area at either the Janesville or Chippewa Falls sites and neither site contains critical habitat.A portion of the Stevens Point site was found to be within the high potential range of the Karner blue butterfly (Lycaeides melissa samuelis), a federally-listed endangered species in Wisconsin. A survey for wild lupine (Lupinus perennis), the host plant of the Karner blue butterfly, was recommended. It was also recommended that any disturbance of migratory bird nesting places occur before May 1 or after August 30 to minimize impacts to migratory birds. As the Stevens Point site is mostly wooded and the trees would need to be cleared for the SHINE project, it is likely that some migratory bird nesting places would be disturbed. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Presence of historic and archaeological resourcesThere was no indication that significant archaeological sites or other cultural resources had been reported on or near any of the sites; however, at the time of the potential site evaluations, none of the sites had been surveyed. Since that time a Phase I archaeaological survey of the Janesville site has been completed. The survey did not identify any pre-contact or historic Euro-American archaeological sites. No additional field work is recommended. No surveys are planned for Stevens Point or Chippewa Falls. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-8Rev. 0SummaryEach potential site was given a score based on the factors discussed above. These scores are summarized below:In consideration of these factors, the Janesville site was selected as the proposed site for the SHINE facility. The Chippewa Falls site and the Stevens Point site were both considered to be viable and were identified as reasonable alternatives. As shown in the summary above, the Janesville site had scores equal to or better than the Chippewa Falls and Stevens Point sites on factors related to environmental impacts. The impact evaluations discussed in Subsection 19.5.2.1.2 subsequently confirmed that neither of the alternative sites would reduce nor avoid adverse effects as compared with the Janesville site.19.5.2.1.2Evaluation of Reasonable AlternativesAs discussed in the previous subsection, the Chippewa Falls site and the Stevens Point site are both considered to be viable sites and reasonable alternatives. This subsection describes the alternative sites in more detail, evaluates the major direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental impacts associated with the sites, and describes potential impact mitigation measures that would reduce or minimize adverse impacts.Information on the Chippewa Falls and Stevens Point sites was obtained through field reconnaissance in the site areas, contacts with appropriate government agencies (federal, state, and local), examination of published maps and aerial photographs, and analysis of digitized Geographic Information System (GIS) mapping data. In order to evaluate the environmental impacts of constructing and operating the SHINE facility, the facility design described in Section19.2 and the construction and operation practices described in Section 19.4 were (Max Score)Janesville StevensPointChippewaFallsLocal government and community support(10)101010Financial Incentives(10)998Minimum distance to site boundary(5)554Access to a skilled workforce(5)433 Proximity to potential future customers(5)543Proximity to airport(5)533Proximity to interstate highway(5)453 Anticipated depth to groundwater table(5)524Seismic characteristics(5) 4(a)33Presence of endangered resources and wetlands(5)522Presence of historic and archaeological resources (5)555Total:65615148a) Based on the geotechnical investigation conducted after site selection was completed, this score would be reduced by one point. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-9Rev. 0applied to each site. This allowed for a comprehensive and qualitatively-consistent assessment of environmental impacts. The potential impact of facility construction and operation on each resource category specified in the Final ISG Augmenting NUREG-1537 was assigned a significance level according to the criteria established in 10 CFR 51, Appendix B, Table B-1, Footnote 3, as follows:SMALL - Environmental effects are not detectable or are so minor that they will neither destabilize nor noticeably alter any important attribute of the resource. | |||
MODERATE - Environmental effects are sufficient to alter noticeably, but not to destabilize, any important attribute of the resource.LARGE - Environmental effects are clearly noticeable and are sufficient to destabilize any important attributes of the resource.For some analyses, it was determined that the additional impact criteria established by the NRC in NUREG-1437 were appropriate, and those criteria were used to assign a significance level to certain impacts, as noted in the subsections below.In addition to the direct and indirect impacts of the SHINE facility itself, related cumulative impacts from other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future federal and non-federal projects and activities in the area around each site were considered. The specific environmental resources that could be impacted by the incremental effects of the SHINE facility together with other projects in the vicinity were identified, and the cumulative impacts were assessed.The following subsections summarize the evaluation of each alternative site. | MODERATE - Environmental effects are sufficient to alter noticeably, but not to destabilize, any important attribute of the resource.LARGE - Environmental effects are clearly noticeable and are sufficient to destabilize any important attributes of the resource.For some analyses, it was determined that the additional impact criteria established by the NRC in NUREG-1437 were appropriate, and those criteria were used to assign a significance level to certain impacts, as noted in the subsections below.In addition to the direct and indirect impacts of the SHINE facility itself, related cumulative impacts from other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future federal and non-federal projects and activities in the area around each site were considered. The specific environmental resources that could be impacted by the incremental effects of the SHINE facility together with other projects in the vicinity were identified, and the cumulative impacts were assessed.The following subsections summarize the evaluation of each alternative site. | ||
19.5.2.1.2.1Chippewa Falls Site19.5.2.1.2.1.1DescriptionThe Chippewa Falls site is located in the Wissota Lake Business Park, near the northern edge of the corporate boundaries of the City of Chippewa Falls in Chippewa County, Wisconsin. The site is bordered to the west by Commerce Parkway, to the north by County Highway S, and to the east by State Highway 178. The southern boundary of the site is not defined by any observable landmarks; it is located in a fallow agricultural field at the edge of property that has been platted but not yet developed for the Lake Wissota Business Park. The site boundaries were determined by the City of Chippewa Falls when they recommended the site to SHINE.The terrain across the site is flat with little noticeable relief other than a gentle slope to the southwest. No residences or other structures are located within the site boundaries. Most of the site is cultivated cropland used for growing corn and soybeans. An abandoned railroad right of way (with the tracks removed) cuts diagonally through the southern portion of the site. South of this right-of-way is a fallow agricultural field, some of which has been graded for use by the Business Park.Figure 19.5.2-4 shows a conceptual layout of the SHINE facility on the Chippewa Falls site, including the area that would be developed with permanent facility structures, the area that would be temporarily disturbed for construction laydown and parking, and the remaining area within the site boundaries. The area developed with permanent structures occupies part of the abandoned Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | 19.5.2.1.2.1Chippewa Falls Site19.5.2.1.2.1.1DescriptionThe Chippewa Falls site is located in the Wissota Lake Business Park, near the northern edge of the corporate boundaries of the City of Chippewa Falls in Chippewa County, Wisconsin. The site is bordered to the west by Commerce Parkway, to the north by County Highway S, and to the east by State Highway 178. The southern boundary of the site is not defined by any observable landmarks; it is located in a fallow agricultural field at the edge of property that has been platted but not yet developed for the Lake Wissota Business Park. The site boundaries were determined by the City of Chippewa Falls when they recommended the site to SHINE.The terrain across the site is flat with little noticeable relief other than a gentle slope to the southwest. No residences or other structures are located within the site boundaries. Most of the site is cultivated cropland used for growing corn and soybeans. An abandoned railroad right of way (with the tracks removed) cuts diagonally through the southern portion of the site. South of this right-of-way is a fallow agricultural field, some of which has been graded for use by the Business Park.Figure 19.5.2-4 shows a conceptual layout of the SHINE facility on the Chippewa Falls site, including the area that would be developed with permanent facility structures, the area that would be temporarily disturbed for construction laydown and parking, and the remaining area within the site boundaries. The area developed with permanent structures occupies part of the abandoned Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-10Rev. 0railroad right-of-way, part of the cropland to the north, and part of the fallow field to the south, while the area temporarily disturbed for construction laydown and parking is located entirely in the cropland. The production facility building, which is the only part of the facility that contains safety-related equipment, is located near the center of the site, positioned so as to maximize the distance to the site boundaries in all directions.The area within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the site is a mixture of agricultural land and suburban-type residential and commercial development. The nearest occupied residence is a house located on County Highway S less than 0.1 mi. (0.16 km) northwest of the northern site boundary. Another house is located on County Highway S slightly more than 0.1 mi. (0.16 km) northeast of the site boundary. Several commercial buildings are located along Commerce Parkway less than 0.1 mi. (0.16 km) west of the western site boundary. The nearest residential concentration is a subdivision located on the north side of County Highway I approximately 0.7 mi. (1.0 km) southwest of the southern site boundary. Other residential concentrations are located within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the site boundaries to the west, north, and east.In addition to residences, several other sensitive features are located within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the site boundaries. These include a hospital, a nursing home, a child day care facility, an adult day care facility, several medical clinics, and two colleges. Table 19.5.2-1 lists the distance to each of these sensitive features from the nearest site boundary and the center point of the safety-related area in the production facility building. Table 19.5.2-1 also lists the distance to the nearest public park, public school, and listed historical property, all of which are more than 1 mi. (1.6 km) from the site boundaries. Figure 19.5.2-5 shows the location of the sensitive features identified within 1 mi. (1.6 km).U.S. Highway 53, which is located about 5 mi. (8.0 km) west of the site at its nearest point, provides long-distance road access to the site area. The exit nearest to the site is Exit 99 (County Highway S), which is approximately 5 mi. (8.0 km) west of the site. State Highway 178, which borders the site to the east, also provides access to the site area. U.S. Highway 53 and State Highway 178 are well-maintained multi-lane divided highways. The other roads in the immediate site area are well-maintained two- or four-lane roads with paved shoulders. Chippewa Valley Regional Airport is located approximately 8 mi. (12.8 km) southwest of the site. Aircraft using this airport would be the primary means of transporting isotopes produced by the SHINE facility.An overhead electrical line and underground natural gas pipeline are located along Commerce Parkway at the western edge of the site. An underground municipal water supply pipeline and sanitary sewer pipeline are located approximately 0.2 mi. (3.2 km) south of the site. It is assumed that if this site were developed, the City of Chippewa Falls would extend the sewer and water utilities to the site boundary.19.5.2.1.2.1.2Land Use and Visual Resources ImpactsExisting land use on the Chippewa Falls site is predominantly agricultural, with approximately the northern two-thirds of the site planted in cultivated crops. The abandoned railroad right of way that cuts through the site and the land south of the right-of-way are primarily fallow. Virtually the Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-11Rev. 0entire site is composed of soils classified as prime farmland. No recreational use of the site or the immediate vicinity was identified.No residences or other structures are located within the site boundaries. The site is zoned for Light Industrial use, as are the adjacent parts of the Wissota Lake Business Park (City of Chippewa Falls, 2011). The City of Chippewa Falls has indicated that a Special Use Permit would probably need to be obtained in order to construct the SHINE facility. A public hearing before the City Council could be required as part of the Special Use Permit application process.The acreage of each major land use category found within the areas affected by the conceptual facility layout was estimated based on USGS land use/land cover GIS mapping data (USGS, 2006). Table 19.5.2-2 summarizes the acreages in the major land use categories and compares those quantities with the total acreages found within a 5 mi. (8.0 km) radius of the site. It can be seen that the acreage of each land use category potentially affected by the facility layout is less than 1 percent of the total acreage of that category found within 5 mi. (8.0 km). There is no reason to believe that construction of the SHINE facility would destabilize any important land use resources. Construction would change much of the site from predominantly agricultural use to industrial use, which would noticeably alter the existing land use resources of the site. However, this alteration is consistent with the existing zoning of the site and the intended land use in the Wissota Lake Business Park. Therefore, the land use impact due to project construction would be SMALL. | ||
During operation of the SHINE facility, land use impacts would be reduced. No new land use impacts would occur beyond those described above for project construction, and some areas that were temporarily disturbed for construction laydown and parking might be returned to agricultural use. Therefore, the land use impact due to operation of the SHINE facility would be SMALL.Visual resources in the vicinity of the site could be affected by the visual intrusion of industrial structures and equipment. During project construction, dust could create additional visual intrusions. Given that the site area currently includes some rural and residential scenery, in addition to institutional, commercial, and industrial scenery, project construction and operation would alter the existing visual conditions somewhat. However, the severity of visual impacts on the human population would depend primarily on the visibility of the | During operation of the SHINE facility, land use impacts would be reduced. No new land use impacts would occur beyond those described above for project construction, and some areas that were temporarily disturbed for construction laydown and parking might be returned to agricultural use. Therefore, the land use impact due to operation of the SHINE facility would be SMALL.Visual resources in the vicinity of the site could be affected by the visual intrusion of industrial structures and equipment. During project construction, dust could create additional visual intrusions. Given that the site area currently includes some rural and residential scenery, in addition to institutional, commercial, and industrial scenery, project construction and operation would alter the existing visual conditions somewhat. However, the severity of visual impacts on the human population would depend primarily on the visibility of the proj ect facilities from sensitive viewing areas.Field reconnaissance and examination of aerial photographs indicate that more than 100 residences are located within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the site boundaries. As discussed in Subsection 19.5.2.1.2.1.1, the area within 1 mi. (1.6 km) also includes several other sensitive viewing areas, including a hospital, a nursing home, a child day care facility, an adult day care facility, several medical clinics, and two colleges. Although trees and existing buildings would block the view from some of these locations, many would be expected to have at least a partial view of the SHINE facility during construction and operation. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-12Rev. 0NUREG-1437 establishes the following criteria for judging the severity of aesthetic impacts:SMALL - No complaints from affected public about a changed sense of place or a diminution in enjoyment of the physical environment, and no measurable impact on socioeconomic institutions and processes.MODERATE - Some complaints from affected public about a changed sense of place or a diminution in enjoyment of the physical environment, and measurable impacts that do not alter the continued functioning of socioeconomic institutions and processes.LARGE - Continuing and widely shared opposition to the project based on a perceived degradation of the area's sense of place or diminution in enjoyment of the physical environment, and measurable social impacts that perturb the continued functioning of community institutions and processes.Considering that the SHINE facility would noticeably alter the appearance of the project site and be at least partially visible from numerous sensitive viewing areas, it is possible that project construction would generate some public complaints related to a changed sense of place and diminished enjoyment of the physical environment. However, it is not likely that there would be "continuing and widely shared opposition" to the project or that there would be "measurable social impacts that perturb the continued functioning of community institutions and processes." Therefore, the visual resources impact associated with project construction would be MODERATE.Project operation would not result in significant further alteration of aesthetic conditions, and it does not seem likely that there would be continued public complaints related to diminished enjoyment of the physical environment. Therefore, the visual resources impact associated with project operation would be SMALL.As shown in Figure 19.5.2-4, the conceptual layout of the Chippewa Falls si te includes provisions to plant trees along the boundaries of the site that border public roads. These provisions would partially mitigate the visual impact of the project, especially during project operation, and this mitigation is considered in the impact assessment discussed above. No other feasible mitigation measures for land use or visual impacts have been identified.19.5.2.1.2.1.3Air Quality and Noise ImpactsThe Chippewa Falls site is located in Chippewa County, Wisconsin, which is part of the Southeast Wisconsin - La Crosse (West Central Wisconsin) Interstate Air Quality Control Region (WDNR, 2012a). The ambient air quality in Chippewa County currently is in attainment with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for all criteria pollutants (ozone, particulate matter, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, and lead) (USEPA, 2012a). The nearest county out of attainment with the NAAQS is Dakota County, Minnesota, which is non-attainment for lead (USEPA, 2012b). Dakota County is located in the Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan area, approximately 75 mi. (120 km) west of the Chippewa Falls site. The nearest Wisconsin county out of attainment is Sheboygan County, Wisconsin, which is non-attainment for ozone (USEPA, 2012a). Sheboygan County is located along the western shore of Lake Michigan, approximately 190 mi. (306 km) southeast of the Chippewa Falls site. At these distances and beyond, air pollution emissions from the Chippewa Falls site would not be expected to have any noticeable effect on non-attainment areas. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-13Rev. 0The air quality impacts of constructing and operating the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be very similar to the impacts discussed for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.2. Potential air pollution emissions during construction would include dust from earthmoving and material handling activities, and exhaust emissions from construction equipment and vehicles. In general, these emissions would be the same as the emissions associated with any large construction project. Emission-specific control measures, such as watering areas of disturbed soil, would be implemented to limit air quality impacts and ensure compliance with applicable federal and state regulations. Therefore, air quality impacts associated with facility construction would be SMALL.During facility operation, the SHINE process would emit small quantities of nitrogen oxides. Natural gas firing to heat buildings and occasional testing of the standby diesel generator would emit nitrogen oxides and very small quantities of particulate matter and sulfur dioxide. Standard emission control measures, such as proper mixing of fuels and combustion air, would be implemented to limit air quality impacts. Emissions during facility operation would be governed by applicable air permits, which would ensure compliance with the NAAQS and other applicable regulatory requirements. Therefore, air quality impacts associated with facility operation would be SMALL.As discussed above, standard emission control measures would be implemented to limit air quality impacts during construction and operation. These measures would ensure that impacts on air quality would be SMALL, and there would be no need for any other air quality impact mitigation measures.Noise emissions during construction at the Chippewa Falls site would be very similar to the emissions discussed for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.2. Based on the depth to bedrock at the Chippewa Falls site (see Subsection 19.5.2.1.2.1.4), blasting and pile driving would not be required for excavation or installation of foundations. The primary source of noise during construction would be the operation of heavy equipment. This noise would be noticeable in the immediate construction area, but it generally would be expected to attenuate to acceptable levels before reaching sensitive receptors. However, vehicular traffic due to construction workers commuting to and from the site and deliveries of equipment and supplies to the site would increase noise levels in the immediate vicinity of several sensitive receptors. It is expected that most project-related traffic would move on Commerce Parkway, County Highway S, and/or County Highway I, and all of these roads have sensitive receptors (residences, medical clinics, day care facilities, a hospital, etc. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | ) in close proximity. It is likely that increased traffic noise would be noticeable at some of these receptors; therefore, noise impacts associated with project construction would be MODERATE.During operation, project-related traffic would be greatly reduced, and there would be no use of heavy construction equipment on the site. As discussed in Subsection 19.4.2, no significant sources of noise have been identified for project operation. Therefore, noise impacts associated with operation would be SMALL.As shown in Figure 19.5.2-4, the conceptual layout of the Chippewa Falls si te includes provisions to plant trees along the facility access road and the boundaries of the site that border public roads. The layout also would accommodate a low earthen berm around the permanent project facilities. These provisions would be expected to achieve some attenuation of operational noise, and this mitigation is considered in the impact assessment discussed above. No other feasible mitigation measures for noise impacts have been identified. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-14Rev. 019.5.2.1.2.1.4Geology, Soils, and Seismology ImpactsThe majority of the surface soils at the Chippewa Falls site consist of Sattre loam derived from glacial outwash materials. The upper 30 inches (in.) (76.2 centimeters [cm]) of the soil horizon is a mixture of sand, silt, and clay with roughly equal proportions of each. Below 30 in. (76.2 cm), sand becomes the predominant constituent (approximately 90 percent) with a substantial increase in the hydraulic conductivity (approximately 0.015 centimeters per second [cm/s]). Soils at the site are generally well-drained and not susceptible to ponding or flooding. Erosion potential of the surficial soils is expected to be slight to moderate. (UW, 1964; NRCS, 2012)Subsoil information obtained from one boring drilled at the site (American Engineering Testing, 2011) and records of two water wells drilled within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the site (WGNHS, 2004) corroborate the soils information provided above. The on-site boring log (American Engineering Testing, 2011) also shows an apparently man-made layer of fill material, approximately 3 ft. (0.9m) thick, at the surface. The fill material was identified as a mixture of sand, gravel, and clay. | |||
It is not known how much of the site is covered by this fill material. Bedrock lies directly beneath the glacial outwash materials and primarily consists of granite (Mudrey, et al., 1982). Karst conditions are not expected in the bedrock (WGNHS, 2012). The single soil boring drilled at the site (American Engineering Testing, 2011) did not encounter bedrock at 82 ft. (25.0 m) below grade, the maximum depth of the boring. Driller's records (WGNHS, 2004) for the two water wells within 1 mi. (1.6 km) show sand and gravel to depths of 50 ft. and 61 ft (15.2 and 18.6 m). The wells were completed within the sand and gravel aquifer, and therefore do not indicate the depth of bedrock. However, a report by the UW (1983) indicates the thickness of unconsolidated materials (soils) as between 100 ft. and 200 ft. (30.5 and 61.0m), which indicates that the depth to bedrock is 100 ft. to 200 ft. (30.5 and 61.0 m) below grade elevation. As described in Subsection 19.4.3, the maximum depth of excavation required for the SHINE facility is 39 ft. (11.9 m) below grade. Therefore, blasting would not be required for installation of foundations or other construction activities.The USGS National Seismic Hazard Maps database (USGS, 2012a) indicates the following peak ground accelerations for the Chippewa Falls site area:*10-percent probability of exceedance in a 50-year period:0.78 percent of gravity.*2-percent probability of exceedance in a 50-year period:2.13 percent of gravity.Based on these values, seismicity in the site area is considered to be minimal. In addition, no significant historical earthquakes have been recorded in the site area or anywhere in Wisconsin (USGS, 2012b), and no Quaternary faults (age less than 1.6 x 106 years) are known to be present in the site area or anywhere in Wisconsin (USGS, 2012c).The Chippewa Falls site is flat and does not contain landslide hazards. Because the site soils are primarily granular (sand with very little silt and clay) below the upper 30 in. (76.2 cm) of the soil profile, and no underground mining activity has been identified in the site area, land subsidence is not anticipated due to either consolidation of the site soils or local loss of support resulting from underground mining. In addition, no potential for shrink/swell action in response to changes in the moisture content of the soil as related to the stability of shallow foundations is anticipated. Potential for frost heave beneath shallow foundations should also be minimal. | It is not known how much of the site is covered by this fill material. Bedrock lies directly beneath the glacial outwash materials and primarily consists of granite (Mudrey, et al., 1982). Karst conditions are not expected in the bedrock (WGNHS, 2012). The single soil boring drilled at the site (American Engineering Testing, 2011) did not encounter bedrock at 82 ft. (25.0 m) below grade, the maximum depth of the boring. Driller's records (WGNHS, 2004) for the two water wells within 1 mi. (1.6 km) show sand and gravel to depths of 50 ft. and 61 ft (15.2 and 18.6 m). The wells were completed within the sand and gravel aquifer, and therefore do not indicate the depth of bedrock. However, a report by the UW (1983) indicates the thickness of unconsolidated materials (soils) as between 100 ft. and 200 ft. (30.5 and 61.0m), which indicates that the depth to bedrock is 100 ft. to 200 ft. (30.5 and 61.0 m) below grade elevation. As described in Subsection 19.4.3, the maximum depth of excavation required for the SHINE facility is 39 ft. (11.9 m) below grade. Therefore, blasting would not be required for installation of foundations or other construction activities.The USGS National Seismic Hazard Maps database (USGS, 2012a) indicates the following peak ground accelerations for the Chippewa Falls site area:*10-percent probability of exceedance in a 50-year period:0.78 percent of gravity.*2-percent probability of exceedance in a 50-year period:2.13 percent of gravity.Based on these values, seismicity in the site area is considered to be minimal. In addition, no significant historical earthquakes have been recorded in the site area or anywhere in Wisconsin (USGS, 2012b), and no Quaternary faults (age less than 1.6 x 106 years) are known to be present in the site area or anywhere in Wisconsin (USGS, 2012c).The Chippewa Falls site is flat and does not contain landslide hazards. Because the site soils are primarily granular (sand with very little silt and clay) below the upper 30 in. (76.2 cm) of the soil profile, and no underground mining activity has been identified in the site area, land subsidence is not anticipated due to either consolidation of the site soils or local loss of support resulting from underground mining. In addition, no potential for shrink/swell action in response to changes in the moisture content of the soil as related to the stability of shallow foundations is anticipated. Potential for frost heave beneath shallow foundations should also be minimal. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-15Rev. 0Standard Penetration Test (SPT) blow counts obtained during drilling of the one soil boring on the site indicate that the sand deposits are generally medium dense and not subject to substantial settlement under typical loads applied by shallow foundations. As described in Subsection 19.4.3, the main building for the SHINE facility has a concrete foundation at 39 ft. (11.9 m) below grade, and it should be possible to design this foundation without the need for piles or drilled piers. Due to the low seismicity of the site area and relatively high SPT blow counts, the potential for earthquake induced liquefaction of subsoil below the groundwater table does not need to be considered. Based on the information summarized above, the geology, soils, and seismology of the Chippewa Falls site would not be expected to have any significant impacts on the SHINE facility. Similarly, construction and operation of the SHINE facility would not be expected to have any significant impacts on the geology, soils, and seismology of the Chippewa Falls site. There is no indication that any rare or unique rock, mineral, or energy assets are present that could be impacted by development at the site. Mining of sand is being conducted in several locations around Chippewa County (where the Chippewa Falls site is located) for use in hydraulic fracturing associated with natural gas production (USGS, 2012c). It is not known whether the type and gradation of the sand at the site is suitable for use in hydraulic fracturing. However, suitable sand deposits appear to be common in Chippewa County and therefore cannot be considered rare or unique. There is no indication that any contaminated soils are present that could be exposed by development at the site. A USGS map of contaminated sites in Chippewa County shows a few closed leaking underground storage tank (LUST) and Environmental Repair Program (ERP) locations in the site area, but investigation and cleanup activities at these locations have been completed and approved by the state (USGS, 2012d). There is no reason to believe that any LUST or ERP concerns extend to the site.Considering the information presented above, geology, soils, and seismology impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL. There would be no need for impact mitigation measures.19.5.2.1.2.1.5Water Resources ImpactsNo streams or other surface water bodies have been identified within the boundaries of the Chippewa Falls site. Therefore, construction of the SHINE facility would have no direct impacts on surface water. The only surface water features identified in close proximity to the site are drainage ditches along the roads that border the site. These drainage ditches would receive rainfall runoff from the construction site, and they potentially could experience indirect impacts, such as increased runoff volumes or degradation of water quality due to sedimentation. | ||
However, potential impacts would be minimized by implementing best management practices, such as soil erosion and sediment control measures; runoff detention ponds; provisions to allow infiltration of rainfall; stormwater pollution prevention plans; and Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) plans. Therefore, surface water impacts associated with facility construction would be SMALL.The City of Chippewa Falls municipal water supply system would provide all water required for operation of the SHINE facility. A 16-inch water main currently serves the Wissota Lake Business Park, and this main would be expected to have more than enough capacity to satisfy the needs Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | However, potential impacts would be minimized by implementing best management practices, such as soil erosion and sediment control measures; runoff detention ponds; provisions to allow infiltration of rainfall; stormwater pollution prevention plans; and Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) plans. Therefore, surface water impacts associated with facility construction would be SMALL.The City of Chippewa Falls municipal water supply system would provide all water required for operation of the SHINE facility. A 16-inch water main currently serves the Wissota Lake Business Park, and this main would be expected to have more than enough capacity to satisfy the needs Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-16Rev. 0of the SHINE facility. The facility would have no need to withdraw surface water or ground water. Best management practices would continue to be used during facility operation to minimize potential impacts on the drainage ditches that receive rainfall runoff from the site. Wastewater other than uncontaminated runoff would be discharged to the City of Chippewa Falls sanitary sewer system after being treated as described in Subsection 19.4.4. Wastewater discharges would comply with state and local pretreatment requirements. Therefore, surface water impacts associated with facility operation would be SMALL.A soil boring drilled at the Chippewa Falls site in 2011 found ground water at a depth of 50 ft. (15.2 m) below the grade elevation (American Engineering Testing, 2011). As described in Subsection 19.4.3, the maximum depth of excavation required for the SHINE facility is 39 ft. (11.9 m) below grade. Although there could be some seasonal variation in the depth to ground water, it is not likely that significant dewatering of excavations would be required. Because the SHINE facility would not withdraw ground water during construction or operation, the only potential impact on ground water would be possible contamination due to a leak or spill of oil or chemicals. The soils found at the Chippewa Falls site have relatively high hydraulic conductivity, which increases the potential for ground water contamination (UW, 1989). However, oil and chemical storage and handling during both construction and operation would be governed by SPCC plans and standard best practices to prevent and contain leaks and spills. Therefore, ground water impacts associated with facility construction and operation would be SMALL.As described above, best management practices and other standard provisions would be used during construction and operation to avoid and minimize impacts on surface water and ground water. These measures would ensure that impacts on water resources would be SMALL, and there would be no need for any other water resources impact mitigation measures.19.5.2.1.2.1.6Ecological Resources ImpactsNo significant ecological resources were identified on or in the immediate vicinity of the Chippewa Falls site. The majority of land on the site is cultivated cropland used for growing corn and soybeans. An abandoned railroad right-of-way (with the tracks removed) cuts diagonally through the southern portion of the site. South of this right-of-way is a fallow agricultural field, some of which has been graded for use by the Wissota Lake Business Park. Observations during a field reconnaissance visit to the site indicate that the edges of the agricultural fields support weedy herbaceous plant species typical of early successional stages. The plant community associated with the abandoned railroad right-of way is a mid-successional disturbance community with a few deciduous tree species and few prairie remnant species observed during field reconnaissance. The fallow agricultural field south of the right-of-way appears to support a typical old field plant community. Representative plant species observed within these areas are listed in Table 19.5.2-3.An apparent wetland community was observed in a narrow drainage way along the eastern edge of the site, immediately west of State Highway 178. Representative plant species observed within this area are listed in Table 19.5.2-3.Wildlife observed at the site included red-tailed hawk, common crow, black-capped chickadee, and various sparrows. None of the plant or animal species observed during field reconnaissance are listed by the USFWS or the WDNR as Endangered, Threatened, or of Special Concern. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-17Rev. 0Figure 19.5.2-4 shows a conceptual facility layout, including the area that would be developed with permanent facility structures and the area that would be temporarily disturbed for construction laydown and parking. It can be seen that the permanently developed area occupies part of the abandoned railroad right-of-way, part of the cropland to the north, and part of the fallow field to the south, while the temporarily disturbed area is located entirely in the cropland.The acreage of natural habitats found within the areas affected by the conceptual facility layout was estimated based on USGS land use/land cover GIS mapping data. Table 19.5.2-2 summarizes the acreages in the natural habitat categories and compares those quantities with the total acreages found within a 5 mi. (8.0 km) radius of the site. It can be seen that the permanently developed area would occupy approximately 0.5 ac. (0.2 ha) of deciduous forest, which represents the trees scattered along the abandoned railroad right-of-way. This is a tiny percentage of the deciduous forest found within 5 mi. (8.0 km) of the site, and the loss of this habitat would not be expected to have any noticeable ecological impact. Table 19.5.2-2 does not show any other natural habitats within the site boundaries.The apparent wetland community observed along the eastern edge of the site is not identified as wetland habitat in the GIS data used to compile Table 19.5.2-2, probably because the community developed somewhat recently as a result of drainage alterations caused by State Highway 178. This wetland community may have some ecological value, but it would not be disturbed during construction or operation of the SHINE facility. The drainage ditch that supports the wetland community would receive rainfall runoff from the site and could potentially experience indirect impacts such as increased runoff volumes or degradation of water quality. However, as discussed in Subsection 19.5.2.1.2.1.5, potential impacts would be minimized by implementing best management practices and pollution prevention plans during construction and operation. Therefore, the wetland community would not be significantly affected.The nearest wetland habitat represented in GIS mapping data is a small area located along a railroad line west of the Chippewa Falls site. This wetland area is approximately 0.25 mi. (0.4km) from the site boundary at its nearest point, and it is separated from the site by two roads and a row of commercial buildings. It would not be directly or indirectly affected by construction or operation of the SHINE facility.As discussed in Subsection 19.5.2.1.2.1.5, no streams or other surface water bodies have been identified within the boundaries of the Chippewa Falls site, and the only surface water features identified in close proximity to the site are drainage ditches along the roads that border the site. These drainage ditches do not represent significant aquatic ecological habitats. The nearest significant surface water bodies are Lake Wissota, which at its nearest point is approximately 0.75 mi. (1.2 km) north-northwest of the site, and the Chippewa River, which at its nearest point is approximately 0.9 mi. (1.4 km) south of the site. Both of these are significant ecological habitats, but neither would be directly or indirectly affected by construction or operation of the SHINE facility.A consultation letter received from the USFWS (2012a) states that "no federally-listed, proposed, or candidate species, or designated critical habitat occurs within the project area." This letter does not express any concerns about or recommendations applicable to the development of the Chippewa Falls site. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-18Rev. 0A letter documenting an Endangered Resources Re view conducted by t he WDNR (2011a) lists four Endangered, Threatened, or Special Concern species known or likely to occur in the project area. These species and their regulatory status are shown in Table 19.5.2-4. The letter indicates that none of these species are likely to occur on the project site, because they all are associated with aquatic habitats, primarily Lake Wissota and the Chippewa River. The letter does not list any actions that need to be taken to comply with state or federal endangered species laws. It recommends avoiding impacts on the wetland community observed along the eastern edge of the site and implementing strict erosion and siltation controls during the entire construction period.Considering the information presented above, aquatic and terrestrial ecology impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL. The methods used to clear vegetation, control erosion and siltation, and restore temporarily disturbed areas would be selected so as to minimize impacts as described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.5. No other impact mitigation measures would be required.19.5.2.1.2.1.7Historic and Cultural Resources ImpactsNo properties listed on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) are located on or in the immediate vicinity of the Chippewa Falls site. The nearest listed property is the Notre Dame Church and Goldsmith Memorial Chapel, which is approximately 2 mi. (3.2 km) southwest of the southwestern corner of the site. This property is located in a densely populated part of the City of Chippewa Falls, and it is separated from the site by numerous buildings, roads, trees, and other obstructions. Therefore, this property would not be directly or indirectly affected by construction or operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site.The Wisconsin State Archeologist conducted a search of the Wisconsin Historic Preservation Database in order to identify any historic and archeological resources that have been reported in the site vicinity, regardless of whether those resources are listed on the NRHP or not. The database search did not identify any historic or archeological resources that have been reported on the site or within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the site boundaries. The Wisconsin State Archeologist did not express any concerns about potential construction at the site except that Wisconsin law must be followed if human remains are unearthed or if Native American burial mounds or any marked or unmarked burial is suspected to be present. (Broihahn, 2011)Field reconnaissance in the site vicinity did not identify any buildings or other features that appeared likely to have historic or cultural significance. | ||
Based on the information presented above, construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would not be expected to directly or indirectly affect historic or cultural resources. If human remains or archeological artifacts were discovered during construction or operation, the procedures outlined for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.6 would be followed. Therefore, cultural resources impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL. There would be no need for impact mitigation measures. | Based on the information presented above, construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would not be expected to directly or indirectly affect historic or cultural resources. If human remains or archeological artifacts were discovered during construction or operation, the procedures outlined for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.6 would be followed. Therefore, cultural resources impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL. There would be no need for impact mitigation measures. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-19Rev. 019.5.2.1.2.1.8Socioeconomic ImpactsThis subsection evaluates the social and economic impacts that could result from constructing and operating the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site. The evaluation includes the impacts of construction and operation activities themselves and the demands placed by the construction and operation workforces on the site and the surrounding region. As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, the socioeconomic impacts of constructing and operating the SHINE facility at the Janesville site are expected to be largely restricted to Rock County, the county in which the site is located. Socioeconomic impacts in other counties are expected to be minimal and do not require evaluation. It is expected that the socioeconomic impacts of construction and operation at the Chippewa Falls site would similarly occur primarily in Chippewa County, the county in which the site is located. Therefore, the following impact evaluation focuses on Chippewa County. In accordance with the Revised ISG Augmenting NUREG-1537, the ev aluation considers potential impacts on housing, public services, public education, tax revenues, and transportation. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | HousingImpacts on housing could be caused by construction and operation workers moving, either permanently or temporarily, into the region surrounding the project site (Chippewa County). This influx of workers could decrease the availability of unoccupied housing units and increase the cost to buy or rent housing. The severity of such impacts would depend primarily on the existing availability of unoccupied housing units compared with the number of workers who would move into the area.NUREG-1437 establishes the following criteria for judging the severity of impacts on housing:SMALL - Small and not easily discernible change in housing availability. Increases in rental rates or housing values equal or slightly exceed the statewide inflation rate.MODERATE - Discernible but short-lived reduction in available housing units. Rental rates and housing values rise slightly faster than the inflation rate, but prices realign quickly once new housing units became available or project-related demand diminishes.LARGE - Project-related demand for housing units results in very limited housing availability and increases in rental rates and housing values well above normal inflationary increases in the state.Based on U.S. Census Bureau (USCB) data for 2010, the total number of housing units in Chippewa County was 27,185, and the number of vacant units was 2,775 (USCB, 2012a). As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for construction of the SHINE facility is 420. It is expected that many of these workers would be current residents of Chippewa County or the nearby region, but even if all of the workers moved into the county and required housing, the resulting demand for 420 housing units would represent only about 15 percent of the vacant housing units in the county. It is unlikely that this would result in any discernible change in ho using availability or increase in housing costs. Therefore, the housing impact associated with construction of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-20Rev. 0As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for operation of the SHINE facility is 150. This number is significantly smaller than the estimated number of construction workers. Therefore, the housing impact associated with operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Public ServicesPublic services include water supply and waste water treatment facilities; police, fire, and medical services; and social services. Impacts on public services could be caused by construction and operation workers moving into the region surrounding the project site (Chippewa County). This influx of workers and their families could increase the demand for public services, potentially requiring local governments to add facilities, programs, and/or staff.Per NUREG-1437, impacts on public services generally are considered to be SMALL if there is little or no need to add facilities, programs, and/or staff because of the influx of workers, and MODERATE or LARGE if additional facilities, programs, and/or staff are required. USCB estimates that the population of Chippewa County in 2011 was 62,778, and the average number of people per household was 2.5 (USCB, 2012b). As discussed above, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for construction of the SHINE facility is 420. It is expected that many of these workers would be current residents of Chippewa County or the nearby region, but even if all of the workers moved into the county with the average household size of 2.5 people, the resulting influx of 1,150 people would increase the population of the county by less than 2 percent. It is unlikely that this small population increase would result in a noticeable increase in the demand for public services or a need to add facilities, programs, and/or staff. Therefore, the public services impact associated with construction of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL.As discussed above, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for operation of the SHINE facility is 150. This number is significantly smaller than the estimated number of construction workers. Therefore, the public services impact associated with operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL.Public EducationImpacts on public education could be caused by construction and operation workers moving into and bringing school-aged children into the region surrounding the project site (Chippewa County). This increase in the number of school-aged children could cause crowding of local schools and potentially require school systems to add facilities and/or staff. | ||
Per NUREG-1437, impacts on education are considered to be SMALL if the project-related increase in school enrollment represents less than 3 percent of the total school enrollment in affected school systems, MODERATE if 4 to 8 percent, and LARGE if more than 8 percent.Based on Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (WDPI) data for 2010, the total public school enrollment in Chippewa County was 9,218 students (WDPI 2012). As discussed above, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for construction of the SHINE facility is 420. It is expected that many of these workers would be current residents of Chippewa County, but if all of the workers moved into the county and brought a school-aged child who attended a public school, the resulting influx of 420 students would increase school Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-21Rev. 0enrollment by approximately 4.6 percent. Using the NUREG-1437 guideline, this would indicate a MODERATE impact on education. However, given the conservativeness of the assumption that all construction workers would move into the county and the fact that the peak construction employment period would last less than 1 year, it is unlikely that the increase in school-aged children would result in noticeable crowding or a need to add facilities or staff. Therefore, the public education impact associated with construction of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALLAs discussed above, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for operation of the SHINE facility is 150. This number is significantly smaller than the estimated number of construction workers. Therefore, the public education impact associated with operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL.TaxesProperty taxes and other taxes paid during construction and operation of the SHINE facility would benefit the state and local jurisdictions that co llect the taxes. Per NUREG-1437, tax impacts are considered SMALL if project-related tax revenues represent less than 10 percent of the total tax revenues of the local taxing jurisdictions, MODERATE if 10 to 20 percent, and LARGE if more than 20 percent.As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, SHINE intends to enter into a Tax Increment Financing (TIF) agreement with the City of Janesville. This agreement is expected to cover the first 10 years of the NRC license period, which includes the construction period for the SHINE facility. Under this agreement, SHINE expects to pay a total of $635,000 per year in property taxes and payments in lieu of taxes. If the SHINE facility were constructed at the Chippewa Falls site, it is expected that SHINE would enter into a similar TIF agreement and make similar payments during the construction period. Based on Wisconsin Department of Revenue (WDOR) data for Chippewa County, the property taxes collected in 2011 were $14,887,300 (WDOR, 2012a). Therefore, even if the entire payments of $635,000 per year were counted toward property taxes, the payments would represent approximately 4.3 percent of the annual property tax revenues of Chippewa County, and the tax impact associated with construction of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL.After expiration of the 10-year TIF agreement with the City of Janesville, SHINE expects to pay property taxes of approximately $660,000 per year during the remaining period of operation for the SHINE facility. It is expected that tax payments at the Chippewa Falls site would be approximately the same, and such payments would represent approximately 4.4 percent of the annual property tax revenues of Chippewa County. Therefore, the tax impact associated with operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL.TransportationTransportation in the vicinity of the SHINE facility could be affected by the increase in vehicle traffic associated with construction and operation workers commuting to and from the site and the delivery of materials and equipment to the site. The increase in vehicle traffic could cause congestion and delays on local roads. The severity of such impacts would depend primarily on the existing road conditions and traffic volumes on the local roads compared with the expected volume of project-related traffic. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-22Rev. 0As shown in Figure 19.5.2-4, the entrance road for the SHINE facility would connect with Commerce Parkway, a City of Chippewa Falls street that forms the western boundary of the site. No other construction, modification of roads, or other transportation infrastructure would be required for construction, operation, or decommissioning of the SHINE facility. However, Commerce Parkway is a two-lane road that probably would experience a significant increase in traffic volume due to project-related traffic. Therefore, construction of turning lanes or other improvements might be necessary to avoid traffic delays on Commerce Parkway, as discussed below.U.S. Highway 53 provides long-distance road access to the site area. The exit nearest to the site is Exit 99, which is approximately 5 mi. (8.0 km) west of the site and connects with County Highway S. Thus, it is expected that most vehicles traveling to the site from outside of the Chippewa Falls metropolitan area would travel on County Highway S and then turn onto Commerce Parkway. Many vehicles traveling to the site from inside of the metropolitan area probably also would travel on County Highway S, although some might travel on County Highway I. Commerce Parkway and County Highway S are two-lane roads with paved shoulders, while County Highway I is a four-lane road with curbed shoulders and a two-way turning lane as the median. Table 19.5.2-5 provides Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WDOT) peak hourly traffic data for Commerce Parkway, County Highway S, County Highway I, and other roads in the site area (WDOT, 2011). It can be seen that the traffic volume on most of these roads is around 400 vehicles per hour during both the morning and evening peak periods. As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, the maximum number of vehicles expected to travel to and from the site during construction of the SHINE facility is 465 per day. The great majority of these vehicles (approximately 420) would represent commuting construction workers. These vehicles generally would arrive at the site on Commerce Parkway at about the same time each morning and leave on Commerce Parkway at about the same time each evening. Thus, commuting construction workers could roughly double the volume of traffic on Commerce Parkway during the peak morning and evening periods. The increase in traffic volumes on other roads in the site vicinity probably would not be as great but could be significant.Considering the nature of the roads in the site vicinity and the increase in traffic volume these roads would experience, it is likely that the peak construction-related traffic would noticeably alter existing transportation conditions (cause noticeable traffic delays) but not be sufficient to destabilize transportation resources. Therefore, the transportation impact associated with project construction would be MODERATE.As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, the maximum number of vehicles expected to travel to and from the site during operation of the SHINE facility is 118 per day. The great majority of these vehicles would represent commuting operation workers, but it is expected that these workers would be divided into three shifts. Thus, the maximum number of vehicles arriving at or departing from the site at any one time would be much less than during the construction period. Therefore, the transportation impact associated with facility operation would be SMALL.In order to alleviate traffic congestion during project construction, mitiga tion measures, such as adding turning lanes might be necessary, especially on Commerce Parkway. Specific mitigation measures would be selected after a detailed evaluation of traffic patterns and potential problem areas. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-23Rev. 019.5.2.1.2.1.9Human Health Impacts19.5.2.1.2.1.9.1Nonradiological ImpactsNo unusual existing sources of nonradioactive chemical exposure or effluents have been identified in the vicinity of the Chippewa Falls site. No operating industrial facilities with environmental monitoring programs have been identified in the site vicinity. A SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be essentially the same as the SHINE facility described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.8.1 with regard to the following factors:*Nonradioactive chemical sources (location, type, strength).*Nonradioactive liquid, gaseous, and solid waste management and effluent control systems.*Nonradioactive effluents released into the on-site and off-site environment. | |||
*Chemical exposure to the public and on-site workforce. | *Chemical exposure to the public and on-site workforce. | ||
*Physical occupational hazards.*Mitigation measures for nonradiological human health impacts.Nonradiological chemical sources, wastes, effluents, and occupational hazards associated with the SHINE facility would be strictly controlled to ensure compliance with applicable environmental and occupational regulations and standards as discussed in Subsection 19.4.8.1. Therefore, the nonradiological human health impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL.19.5.2.1.2.1.9.2Radiological Impacts No unusual existing sources of radiation have been identified in the vicinity of the Chippewa Falls site. The major sources and levels of background radiation exposure at the Chippewa Falls site are very similar to the sources and levels described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.3.8.2. The physical layout of the Chippewa Falls site is shown in Figure 19.5.2-4. Radioactive materials would be located in the central part of the production facility building. A SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be essentially the same as the SHINE facility described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.8.2 with regard to the following factors:*Characteristics of radiation sources and expected radioactive effluents.*Compliance with 10 CFR 20.1301, including calculated radiation dose rates at the site boundary.*Annual radiation dose to the maximally exposed worker. | *Physical occupational hazards.*Mitigation measures for nonradiological human health impacts.Nonradiological chemical sources, wastes, effluents, and occupational hazards associated with the SHINE facility would be strictly controlled to ensure compliance with applicable environmental and occupational regulations and standards as discussed in Subsection 19.4.8.1. Therefore, the nonradiological human health impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL.19.5.2.1.2.1.9.2Radiological Impacts No unusual existing sources of radiation have been identified in the vicinity of the Chippewa Falls site. The major sources and levels of background radiation exposure at the Chippewa Falls site are very similar to the sources and levels described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.3.8.2. The physical layout of the Chippewa Falls site is shown in Figure 19.5.2-4. Radioactive materials would be located in the central part of the production facility building. A SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be essentially the same as the SHINE facility described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.8.2 with regard to the following factors:*Characteristics of radiation sources and expected radioactive effluents.*Compliance with 10 CFR 20.1301, including calculated radiation dose rates at the site boundary.*Annual radiation dose to the maximally exposed worker. | ||
*Mitigation measures to minimize public and occupational exposures to radioactive material.Radiation sources and radioactive effluents would be strictly controlled to ensure compliance with applicable regulations and standards as discussed in Subsection 19.4.8.2. Therefore, the radiological human health impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL. | *Mitigation measures to minimize public and occupational exposures to radioactive material.Radiation sources and radioactive effluents would be strictly controlled to ensure compliance with applicable regulations and standards as discussed in Subsection 19.4.8.2. Therefore, the radiological human health impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-24Rev. 019.5.2.1.2.1.10Waste Management ImpactsNo conditions have been identified for the Chippewa Falls site that would significantly affect waste management impacts. A SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be essentially the same as the SHINE facility described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.9 with regard to the following factors:*Sources, types, and approximate quantities of solid, hazardous, radioactive, and mixed wastes.*Proposed waste management systems designed to collect, store, and process the waste. | ||
*Anticipated waste disposal or waste management plans.*Anticipated waste-minimization plans to minimize the generation of waste.Wastes would be handled, processed, stored, and disposed as discussed in Subsection 19.4.9. Therefore, the waste management impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL.19.5.2.1.2.1.11Transportation ImpactsPer the Final ISG Augmenting NUREG-1537, the traffic impacts of vehicles associated with the SHINE facility are discussed in Subsection 19.5.2.1.2.1.8. This subsection discusses the radiological and other human health impacts of transporting nuclear and non-nuclear materials associated with the project. No conditions have been identified | *Anticipated waste disposal or waste management plans.*Anticipated waste-minimization plans to minimize the generation of waste.Wastes would be handled, processed, stored, and disposed as discussed in Subsection 19.4.9. Therefore, the waste management impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL.19.5.2.1.2.1.11Transportation ImpactsPer the Final ISG Augmenting NUREG-1537, the traffic impacts of vehicles associated with the SHINE facility are discussed in Subsection 19.5.2.1.2.1.8. This subsection discusses the radiological and other human health impacts of transporting nuclear and non-nuclear materials associated with the project. No conditions have been identified fo r the Chippewa Falls site that would significantly affect the impacts of transporting nuclear and non-nuclear materials, including radioactive waste, nonradioactive waste, and medical isotopes. Because the Chippewa Falls site and the Janesville site are relatively close to each other in comparison with the projected origins and destinations of nuclear and non-nuclear materials, distance-related impacts of transportation would be essentially the same. A SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be essentially the same as the SHINE facility described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.10 with regard to the | ||
following factors:*Transportation modes. | |||
*Approximate transportation distances. | *Approximate transportation distances. | ||
*Treatment and packaging for radioactive and nonradioactive wastes.*Calculated radiological | |||
SMALL - Small and not easily discernible change in housing availability. Increases in rental rates or housing values equal or slightly exceed the statewide inflation rate. | SMALL - Small and not easily discernible change in housing availability. Increases in rental rates or housing values equal or slightly exceed the statewide inflation rate. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-37Rev. 0MODERATE - Discernible but short-lived reduction in available housing units. Rental rates and housing values rise slightly faster than the inflation rate, but prices realign quickly once new housing units became available or project-related demand diminishes.LARGE - Project-related demand for housing units results in very limited housing availability and increases in rental rates and housing values well above normal inflationary increases in the state.Based on USCB data for 2010, the total number of housing units in Portage County was 30,054, and the number of vacant units was 2240 (USCB, 2012a). As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for construction of the SHINE facility is 420. It is expected that many of these workers would be current residents of Portage Countyand the nearby region, but even if all of the workers moved into the county and required housing, the resulting demand for 420 housing units would represent less than 19 percent of the vacant housing units in the county. It is unlikely that this would result in any discernible change in housing availability or an increase in housing costs. Therefore, the housing impact associated with construction of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL.As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for operation of the SHINE facility is 150. This number is significantly smaller than the estimated number of construction workers. Therefore, the housing impact associated with operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Public ServicesPublic services include water supply and waste water treatment facilities; police, fire, and medical services; and social services. Impacts on public services could be caused by construction and operation workers moving into the region surrounding the project site (PortageCounty). This influx of workers and their families could increase the demand for public services, potentially requiring local governments to add facilities, programs, and/or staff.Per NUREG-1437, impacts on public services generally are considered to be SMALL if there is little or no need to add facilities, programs, and/or staff because of the influx of workers, and MODERATE or LARGE if additional facilities, programs, and/or staff are required. USCB estimates that the population of Portage County in 2011 was 70,084, and the average number of people per household was 2.4 (USCB, 2012e). As discussed above, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for construction of the SHINE facility is 420. It is expected that many of these workers would be current residents of Portage County and the nearby region, but even if all of the workers moved into the county with the average household size of 2.4 people, the resulting influx of 1,008 people would increase the population of the county by less than 2 percent. It is unlikely that this small population increase would result in a noticeable increase in the demand for public services or a need to add facilities, programs, and/or staff. Therefore, the public services impact associated with construction of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALLAs discussed above, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for operation of the SHINE facility is 150. This number is significantly smaller than the estimated number of construction workers. Therefore, the public services impact associated with operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-38Rev. 0Public EducationImpacts on public education could be caused by construction and operation workers moving into and bringing school-aged children into the region surrounding the project site (Portage County). This increase in the number of school-aged children could cause crowding of local schools and potentially require school systems to add facilities and/or staff. | ||
Per NUREG-1437, impacts on education are considered to be SMALL if the project-related increase in school enrollment represents less than 3 percent of the total school enrollment in affected school systems, MODERATE if 4 to 8 percent, and LARGE if more than 8 percent.Based on WDPI data for 2010, the total public school enrollment in Portage County was 9,528 students (WDPI, 2012). As discussed above, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for construction of the SHINE facility is 420. It is expected that many of these workers would be current residents of Portage County and the nearby region, but if all of the workers moved into the county and brought a school-aged child who attended a public school, the resulting influx of 420 students would increase school enrollment by approximately 4.4 percent. Using the NUREG-1437 guideline, this would indicate a MODERATE impact on education. However, given the conservativeness of the assumption that all construction workers would move into the county, and the fact that the peak construction employment period would last less than 1 year, it is unlikely that the increase in school-aged children would result in noticeable crowding or a need to add facilities or staff. Therefore, the public education impact associated with construction of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALLAs discussed above, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for operation of the SHINE facility is 150. This number is significantly smaller than the estimated number of construction workers. Therefore, the public education impact associated with operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL.TaxesProperty taxes and other taxes paid during construction and operation of the SHINE facility would benefit the state and local jurisdictions that co llect the taxes. Per NUREG-1437, tax impacts are considered SMALL if project-related tax revenues represent less than 10 percent of the total tax revenues of the local taxing jurisdictions, MODERATE if 10 to 20 percent, and LARGE if more than 20 percent.As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, SHINE intends to enter into a TIF agreement with the City of Janesville. This agreement is expected to cover the first 10 years of the NRC license period, which includes the construction period for the SHINE facility. Under this agreement, SHINE expects to pay a total of $635,000 per year in property taxes and payments in lieu of taxes. If the SHINE facility were constructed at the Stevens Point site, it is expected that SHINE would enter into a similar TIF agreement and make similar payments during the construction period. Based on WDOR data for Portage County, the property taxes collected in 2011 were $24,819,000 (WDOR, 2012a). Therefore, even if the entire payment of $635,000 per year were counted toward property taxes, the payments would represent approximately 2.6percent of the annual property tax revenues of Portage County, and the tax impact associated with construction of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would beSMALL. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-39Rev. 0After expiration of the 10-year TIF agreement with the City of Janesville, SHINE expects to pay property taxes of approximately $660,000 per year during the remaining period of operation for the SHINE facility. It is expected that tax payments at the Stevens Point site would be approximately the same, and such payments would represent approximately 2.7 percent of the annual property tax revenues of Portage County. Therefore, the tax impact associated with operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL.TransportationTransportation in the vicinity of the SHINE facility could be affected by the increase in vehicle traffic associated with construction and operation workers commuting to and from the site and the delivery of materials and equipment to the site. The increase in vehicle traffic could cause congestion and delays on local roads. The severity of such impacts would depend primarily on the existing road conditions and traffic volumes on the local roads compared with the expected volume of project-related traffic.As shown in Figure 19.5.2-7, the entrance road for the SHINE facility would connect with a new street that the City of Stevens Point has indicated they would construct along the northern boundary of the site. It is expected that this new street would connect with County Highway R (Eisenhower Road), an existing public road located approximately 1.0 mi. (1.6 km) west of the site, and Burbank Road, an existing public road located approximately 1.5 mi. (2.4 km) east of the site. The City also has indicated that they would construct a new street along the western boundary of the site, between the new street to the north and County Highway HH (McDill Avenue), an existing public road to the south. No other construction or modification of roads or other transportation infrastructure would be required for construction, operation, or decommissioning of the SHINE facility. Interstate-39 provides long-distance access to the site area. The exit nearest to the site is Exit156, which is approximately 1.5 mi. (2.4 km) southwest of the site and connects with County Highway HH. Exit 158, which is approximately 2 mi. (3.2 km) northwest of the site, connects with U.S. Highway 10. Thus, it is expected that most vehicles traveling to the site from outside of the Stevens Point metropolitan area would travel on County Highway HH or U.S. Highway 10, then turn onto County Highway R, and then turn onto the new street to be constructed along the northern boundary of the site. Many vehicles traveling to the site from inside of the metropolitan area probably also would travel on County Highways R and HH, although some might travel on Old Highway 18 or Burbank Road, which are the nearest existing public roads to the north and east of the site, respectively.U.S. Highway 10 is a multi-lane divided highway. County Highway R is an undivided four-lane road with a curbed shoulder. County Highway HH, Old Highway 18, and Burbank Road are two lane roads with minimal paved shoulders. Old Highway 18 and Burbank Road are narrow and do not have painted center stripes.Table 19.5.2-12 provides peak hourly traffic data for the roads in the site area (WDOT, 2011). It can be seen that the traffic volume on these roads varies greatly. Most relevantly, however, the traffic volume on County Highway R in the site area (south of U.S. Highway 10) is around 400 vehicles per hour during the morning peak period and around 700 vehicles per hour during the evening peak period. The traffic volume on County Highway HH is around 350 vehicles per hour during the morning peak period and around 500 vehicles per hour during the evening peak Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-40Rev. 0period. The traffic volume on both Old Highway 18 and Burbank Road is less than 50 vehicles per hour during both the morning and evening peak periods.As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, the maximum number of vehicles expected to travel to and from the site during construction of the SHINE facility is 465 per day. The great majority of these vehicles (approximately 420) would represent commuting construction workers. These vehicles generally would arrive at the site on County Highway R at about the same time each morning and leave on County Highway R at about the same time each evening. Thus, commuting construction workers could roughly double the volume of traffic on County Highway R during the peak morning period. The increase in traffic volumes on other roads in the site vicinity would not be as great but could be significant. Given the low existing traffic volumes and relatively poor road conditions on Old Highway 18 and Burbank Road, any appreciable increase in traffic could be significant for these roads.Considering the nature of the roads in the site vicinity and the increase in traffic volume these roads would experience, it is likely that the peak construction-related traffic would noticeably alter existing transportation conditions (cause noticeable traffic delays) but not be sufficient to destabilize transportation resources. Therefore, the transportation impact associated with project construction would be MODERATE.As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, the maximum number of vehicles expected to travel to and from the site during operation of the SHINE facility is 118 per day. The great majority of these vehicles would represent commuting operation workers, but it is expected that these workers would be divided into three shifts. Thus, the maximum number of vehicles arriving at or departing from the site at any one time would be much less than during the construction period. Therefore, the transportation impact associated with facility operation would be SMALL.In order to alleviate traffic congestion during project construction, mitiga tion measures such as widening or adding turning lanes might be necessary, especially on Old Highway 18 and Burbank Road. Specific mitigation measures would be selected after a detailed evaluation of traffic patterns and potential problem areas.19.5.2.1.2.2.9Human Health Impacts19.5.2.1.2.2.9.1Nonradiological Impacts No unusual existing sources of nonradioactive chemical exposure or effluents have been identified in the vicinity of the Stevens Point site. No operating industrial facilities with environmental monitoring programs have been identified in the site vicinity. A SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be essentially the same as the SHINE facility described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.8.1 with regard to the following factors:*Nonradioactive chemical sources (location, type, strength). | |||
*Nonradioactive liquid, gaseous, and solid waste management and effluent control systems.*Nonradioactive effluents released into the on-site and off-site environment. | *Nonradioactive liquid, gaseous, and solid waste management and effluent control systems.*Nonradioactive effluents released into the on-site and off-site environment. | ||
*Chemical exposure to the public and on-site workforce.*Physical occupational hazards.*Mitigation measures for nonradiological human health impacts. | *Chemical exposure to the public and on-site workforce.*Physical occupational hazards.*Mitigation measures for nonradiological human health impacts. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-41Rev. 0Nonradiological chemical sources, wastes, effluents, and occupational hazards associated with the SHINE facility would be strictly controlled to ensure compliance with applicable environmental and occupational regulations and standards as discussed in Subsection 19.4.8.1. Therefore, the nonradiological human health impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL.19.5.2.1.2.2.9.2Radiological Impacts No unusual existing sources of radiation have been identified in the vicinity of the Stevens Point site. The major sources and levels of background radiation exposure at the Stevens Point site are very similar to the sources and levels described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.3.8.2. The physical layout of the Stevens Point site is shown in Figure 19.5.2-7. Radioactive materials would be located in the central part of the production facility building. A SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be essentially the same as the SHINE facility described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.8.2 with regard to the following factors:*Characteristics of radiation sources and expected radioactive effluents. | ||
*Compliance with 10 CFR 20.1301, including calculated radiation dose rates at the site boundary.*Annual radiation dose to the maximally exposed worker.*Mitigation measures to minimize public and occupational exposures to radioactive material.Radiation sources and radioactive effluents would be strictly controlled to ensure compliance with applicable regulations and standards as discussed in Subsection 19.4.8.2. Therefore, the radiological human health impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL.19.5.2.1.2.2.10Waste Management ImpactsNo conditions have been identified for the Stevens Point site that would significantly affect waste management impacts. A SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be essentially the same as the SHINE facility described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.9 with regard to the following factors:*Sources, types, and approximate quantities of solid, hazardous, radioactive, and mixed wastes.*Proposed waste management systems designed to collect, store, and process the waste.*Anticipated waste disposal or waste management plans.*Anticipated waste-minimization plans to minimize the generation of waste.Wastes would be handled, processed, stored, and disposed as discussed in Subsection 19.4.9. Therefore, the waste management impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL. | *Compliance with 10 CFR 20.1301, including calculated radiation dose rates at the site boundary.*Annual radiation dose to the maximally exposed worker.*Mitigation measures to minimize public and occupational exposures to radioactive material.Radiation sources and radioactive effluents would be strictly controlled to ensure compliance with applicable regulations and standards as discussed in Subsection 19.4.8.2. Therefore, the radiological human health impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL.19.5.2.1.2.2.10Waste Management ImpactsNo conditions have been identified for the Stevens Point site that would significantly affect waste management impacts. A SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be essentially the same as the SHINE facility described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.9 with regard to the following factors:*Sources, types, and approximate quantities of solid, hazardous, radioactive, and mixed wastes.*Proposed waste management systems designed to collect, store, and process the waste.*Anticipated waste disposal or waste management plans.*Anticipated waste-minimization plans to minimize the generation of waste.Wastes would be handled, processed, stored, and disposed as discussed in Subsection 19.4.9. Therefore, the waste management impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-42Rev. 019.5.2.1.2.2.11Waste Management ImpactsPer the Final ISG Augmenting NUREG-1537, the traffic impacts of vehicles associated with the SHINE project are discussed in Subsection 19.5.2.1.2.2.8. This subsection discusses the radiological and other human health impacts of transporting nuclear and non-nuclear materials associated with the project.No conditions have been identified for the Stevens Point site that would significantly affect the impacts of transporting nuclear and non-nuclear materials, including radioactive waste, nonradioactive waste, and medical isotopes. Because the Stevens Point site and the Janesville site are relatively close to each other in comparison with the projected origins and destinations of nuclear and non-nuclear materials, distance-related impacts of transportation would be essentially the same. A SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be essentially the same as the SHINE facility described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.10 with regard to the following factors:*Transportation modes.*Approximate transportation distances.*Treatment and packaging for radioactive and nonradioactive wastes. | ||
*Calculated radiological dose to members of the public and workers from incident-free transportation scenarios.The impact of the transportation of nuclear and non-nuclear materials is discussed in Subsections 19.4.10.1.3 and 19.4.10.2 . Therefore, the transportation impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL.19.5.2.1.2.2.12Postulated Accident ImpactsNo conditions have been identified for the Stevens Point site that would significantly affect the radiological and nonradiological impacts from postulated accidents. A SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be essentially the same as the SHINE facility described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.11 with regard to the following factors:*Credible accidents having a potential for releases into the environment.*Radiological and nonradiological consequences from the postulated accidents.The SHINE facility would be designed, constructed, and operated to ensure that the consequences of postulated accidents would comply with applicable regulations and standards, as discussed in Subsection 19.4.11. Therefore, the postulated accident impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL.19.5.2.1.2.2.13Environmental Justice ImpactsEnvironmental justice issues involve aspects of the project that could disproportionately impact minority or low-income populations. The potential for disproportionate impacts depends primarily on the location of the project facilities in relation to existing minority and low-income populations.Minority and low-income populations within 5 mi. (8 km) of the Stevens Point site were identified based on USCB Census block group data (USCB, 2012c and 2012d). Census block groups with above-average minority and low-income populations were determined by comparing the minority Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | *Calculated radiological dose to members of the public and workers from incident-free transportation scenarios.The impact of the transportation of nuclear and non-nuclear materials is discussed in Subsections 19.4.10.1.3 and 19.4.10.2 . Therefore, the transportation impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL.19.5.2.1.2.2.12Postulated Accident ImpactsNo conditions have been identified for the Stevens Point site that would significantly affect the radiological and nonradiological impacts from postulated accidents. A SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be essentially the same as the SHINE facility described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.11 with regard to the following factors:*Credible accidents having a potential for releases into the environment.*Radiological and nonradiological consequences from the postulated accidents.The SHINE facility would be designed, constructed, and operated to ensure that the consequences of postulated accidents would comply with applicable regulations and standards, as discussed in Subsection 19.4.11. Therefore, the postulated accident impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL.19.5.2.1.2.2.13Environmental Justice ImpactsEnvironmental justice issues involve aspects of the project that could disproportionately impact minority or low-income populations. The potential for disproportionate impacts depends primarily on the location of the project facilities in relation to existing minority and low-income populations.Minority and low-income populations within 5 mi. (8 km) of the Stevens Point site were identified based on USCB Census block group data (USCB, 2012c and 2012d). Census block groups with above-average minority and low-income populations were determined by comparing the minority Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-43Rev. 0and poverty populations in each block group to the total population in that block group and to the average minority and poverty populations in the county and state. Where the minority or poverty population in a block group exceeded 50 percent of the total population in that block group, or where the minority or poverty population was found to be at least 20 percentage points greater than the comparable county and/or state averages, the minority or poverty population was defined as "above average." This methodology is consistent with NRC guidance for identification of Environmental Justic e populations (NRC, 2004).Table 19.5.2-13 shows the block groups and census tracts within 5 mi. (8 km) of the Stevens Point site, the percentage of households below the poverty level in each, and the percentage of each minority group, including American Indian and Hispanic populations, in each. The percentage of households below the poverty level, the percentage of each minority group, and aggregate percentage of all minority groups are compared with the average percentage in Portage County and the state of Wisconsin.As shown in Table 19.5.2-13, none of the block groups/census tracts within 5 mi. (8 km) of the Stevens Point site has an above average percentage of any minority groups individually or in the aggregate, but four block groups/census tracts have an above average percentage of households below the poverty level. These block groups/census tracts have 36.4 to 59.5 percent of households below the poverty level, compared with 12.4 percent in Portage County and 11.2percent in the state of Wisconsin. The location of these block groups/census tracts is shown in Figure 19.5.2-9. It can be seen that all of the block groups/census tracts are located west-northwest of the Stevens Point site, with the nearest one being approximately 3.5 mi. (5.6km) from the site. All of the block groups/census tracts are located on the far side of the City of Stevens Point, and all are separated from the site by numerous buildings, roads, trees, and other obstructions. None of the primary transportation routes that would be used to transport workers, materials, or equipment to the Stevens Point site pass through these block groups/ | ||
census tracks. Therefore, these populations would not be directly or indirectly affected by construction or operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site.No American Indian reservations or other special communities have been identified within 5 mi. (8 km) of the Stevens Point site. The nearest American Indian reservation is the Winnebago Reservation, which belongs to the Ho-Chunk Nation and is located approximately 20 mi. (32 km) southwest of the site (National Atlas of the United States, 2012; WDNR, 2012b).Based on the information presented above, there is no indication that any minority or low income population would be disproportionately affected during project construction or operation as compared to the effect on the general population. Based on the potential for disproportionate exposure to environmental hazards from the SHINE facility as well as multiple-hazard and cumulative hazard conditions, the human health and environmental effects on minority and low-income populations would not be significantly high or adverse. Therefore, the environmental justice impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | census tracks. Therefore, these populations would not be directly or indirectly affected by construction or operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site.No American Indian reservations or other special communities have been identified within 5 mi. (8 km) of the Stevens Point site. The nearest American Indian reservation is the Winnebago Reservation, which belongs to the Ho-Chunk Nation and is located approximately 20 mi. (32 km) southwest of the site (National Atlas of the United States, 2012; WDNR, 2012b).Based on the information presented above, there is no indication that any minority or low income population would be disproportionately affected during project construction or operation as compared to the effect on the general population. Based on the potential for disproportionate exposure to environmental hazards from the SHINE facility as well as multiple-hazard and cumulative hazard conditions, the human health and environmental effects on minority and low-income populations would not be significantly high or adverse. Therefore, the environmental justice impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-44Rev. 019.5.2.1.2.2.14Cumulative ImpactsPast, present, and reasonably foreseeable future development projects and other actions that could result in cumulative impacts at the Stevens Point site were identified by searching for economic development plans, permit lists, news releases, and similar sources of information. An effort was made to identify all relevant activities conducted, regulated, or approved by a federal agency or non-federal entity within 5 mi. (8 km) of the site. Available information about the projects and other activities identified is provided in Table 19.5.2-14.As shown in Table 19.5.2-14, the projects and other activities located within 5 mi. (8 km) of the Stevens Point site generally are of a relatively small scale and would not be expected to have significant impacts in the same areas affected by the SHINE facility. Construction of a new ethanol plant, as planned by Central Wisconsin Alcohol, Inc. approximately 1 mi. (1.6 km) from the Stevens Point site might have contributed to the land use impacts of the SHINE facility; however, the air construction permit application for this project recently was rejected and it is not clear that the project will proceed. The projects that are proceeding or appear likely to proceed would not be expected to have significant land use impacts. However, some of these projects could produce increases in vehicle traffic and ambient noise that might affect some of the same areas as the SHINE facility. Therefore, the cumulative effects of these pr ojects might contribute to the traffic and noise impacts of the SHINE facility, which are expected to be MODERATE as discussed above.19.5.2.2ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGIES 19.5.2.2.1Identification of Reasonable AlternativesThe SHINE facility uses a new, proprietary technology developed by SHINE in order to domestically produce medical isotopes such as Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has provided support to SHINE and three additional technologies for the domestic production of medical isotopes (NRC, 2011). The DOE conducted a rigorous technical review of proposed technologies for producing Mo-99 domestically before selecting its four cooperative agreement partners. The DOE intentionally chose four distinct technologies to support. Rather than repeat this selection process for the purpose of this section, the three other DOE cooperative agreement partner technologies were selected as the alternative technologies to be considered in this section.The three technologies considered were:*Linear accelerator-based technology (for production of Mo-99 only).*Neutron capture using existing power reactors (for production of Mo-99 only).*Low enriched uranium (LEU) aqueous homogenous reactors.Each of these technologies were evaluated to determine if they could reasonably be implemented at the Janesville site. While both an aqueous homogeneous reactor and linear accelerator facility could concievably be built at the SHINE site, there is no power reactor at the site. As a result, neutron capture in an existing power reactor was considered unreasonable for the purpose of this section and eliminated from the list.The two remaining technologies are considered reasonable alternatives to the SHINE technology for the Janesville site and are evaluated in the following subsections. However, as noted below, Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-45Rev. 0the linear accelerator-based approach is not able to produce medical isotopes other than Mo-99, and therefore, does not address the need for domestic SHINE as effectively as the SHINE technology.19.5.2.2.2Evaluation of Reasonable AlternativesThe two alternative technologies evaluated are as follows:*Linear accelerator-based approach (for production of Mo-99 only).*Low enriched uranium (LEU) aqueous homogeneous reactor approach.The following subsections describe these alternative technologies in more detail and evaluate the major environmental impacts associated with construction and operation of the technologies at the SHINE site. Cumulative impacts and potential impact mitigation measures would be largely determined by the project site conditions, and therefore, would be the same as described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.13.19.5.2.2.2.1Linear Accelerator Approach (Production of Mo-99 Only)19.5.2.2.2.1.1DescriptionThis technology uses multiple linear accelerators to produce Mo-99. The linear accelerator accelerates electrons that collide with a metal target, producing extremely intense high-energy photons. The high energy photons irradiate a target made of molybdenum-100 (Mo-100), producing Mo-99 (CLS, 2012). The Mo-99 is shipped to pharmacies for TechneGenŽ processing and Tc-99m generation. The design allows for increasing production when required by demand.19.5.2.2.2.1.2Land Use and Visual Resources ImpactsThe linear accelerator SHINE facility for this technology is 77,000 square (sq.) ft. (7200 sq. m) in size and requires an approximately 33 ac. site (13.4 ha) (DOE, 2012). The size of the facility is similar to the size of the SHINE facility, and it would be expected to have similar impacts on land use and visual resources (see Subsection 19.4.1). Therefore, the land use and visual impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.1.3Air Quality and Noise ImpactsConstruction activities associated with the proposed facility would generate air pollutant emissions from site-disturbing activities, such as grading, filling, compacting, trenching, and operation of construction equipment. The maximum annual greenhouse gas emissions would be about 0.037 percent of Wisconsin's 2009 carbon dioxide emissions (DOE, 2012). | ||
The proposed facility would produce air emissions from operation of the building's heating system. Process emissions would not be expected, but the use of chemicals used to dissolve Mo-99 targets and the resulting evaporation could result in small emissions. Operations emissions under the proposed project would not be expected to (1) cause or contribute to a violation of any Federal or State ambient air quality standard; (2) expose sensitive receptors to substantially increased pollutant concentrations; or (3) exceed any evaluation criteria established by a State implementation plan. Operation of the facility would also result in an increase in vehicular emissions and noise due to shipping radioisotopes and operating and maintaining the Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | The proposed facility would produce air emissions from operation of the building's heating system. Process emissions would not be expected, but the use of chemicals used to dissolve Mo-99 targets and the resulting evaporation could result in small emissions. Operations emissions under the proposed project would not be expected to (1) cause or contribute to a violation of any Federal or State ambient air quality standard; (2) expose sensitive receptors to substantially increased pollutant concentrations; or (3) exceed any evaluation criteria established by a State implementation plan. Operation of the facility would also result in an increase in vehicular emissions and noise due to shipping radioisotopes and operating and maintaining the Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-46Rev. 0facility. Noise would stem from the operation of linear accelerator and chemical processing equipment. While operations are likely to produce considerable noise, the noise would be contained within the production facility and would have no impact on the surrounding ambient noise levels. Employees working in this environment would follow best management practices, such as the use of hearing protection equipment, as necessary to limit exposure above the permissible levels defined by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (DOE, 2012). Therefore, the air quality and noise impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.1.4Geology, Soils, and Seismology ImpactsThe linear accelerator SHINE facility would be designed to withstand the same seismic and geologic hazards as the SHINE facility. Construction of the linear accelerator SHINE facility would require some excavation and the use of some geologic resources for fill material. No information on the design of the linear accelerator SHINE facility is available except the size, but the need for excavation and geologic resources should be similar to those described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.3. Therefore, the geology, soils, and seismology impacts during construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.1.5Water Resources ImpactsConstruction of the proposed facility and associated parking areas and roadways would likely involve conversion of less than 2 hectares (5 acres) of the property to impervious surface. This would result in a slight increase in potential runoff from the project site compared with the site's undeveloped state. Facility operations would not be expected to require di rect withdrawals of groundwater, as all required water would be obtained from municipal supplies (DOE, 2012). The water resource impacts would be similar to those described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.4. Therefore, the water resource impacts during construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.1.6Ecological Resources ImpactSince the linear accelerator SHINE facility is similar in size to the SHINE facility, the ecological resource impacts would be similar to those described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.5. Therefore, the ecological impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.1.7Historic and Cultural Resources Impacts Since the linear accelerator SHINE facility is similar in size to the SHINE facility, the historical and cultural resource impacts would be similar to those described for the SHINE facility discussed in Subsection 19.4.6. Therefore, the historical and cultural resource impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.1.8Socioeconomic ImpactsConstruction of the linear accelerator SHINE facility would have a positive socioeconomic impact related to employment and tax revenues. Operation of the facility would create 150 jobs (HI, 2011) as well as provide additional tax revenues and alleviate shortages of medical isotopes. These beneficial impacts, as well as potential adverse impacts on public services and transportation, would be similar to those described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.7. | ||
Therefore, the socioeconomic impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL. | Therefore, the socioeconomic impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-47Rev. 019.5.2.2.2.1.9Human Health ImpactsConstruction would entail potential hazards to workers typical of any construction site. Normal construction safety practices would be employed to promote worker safety and reduce the likelihood of worker injury during construction. Nonetheless, construction accidents could occur. Air emissions from the facility have the potential to contain radioactive material as a result of the accelerator operations and the dissolution and packaging of radioactive materials in the hot cells. However, the facility design and operation would be intended to control the amount of radioactive material released to a negligible amount. Liquid waste generated during operations would be collected, temporarily stored on-site, and sent off-site for treatment and disposal. The proposed facility would not release any radioactive material through wastewater. No public dose from air emissions or wastewater is expected. Although radiological emissions would not be expected, if any emissions were to occur, impacts on the public would be negligible (DOE, 2012).The potential sources of exposure for the workers include the activities associated with the linear accelerator irradiation of the Mo-100 targets, transfer of irradiated material into the hot cells, packaging and shipment of the Mo-99 product, and preparation of any radioactive waste for disposal. The Mo-99 production facility design and operation would include several features to limit worker dose. Only a fraction of the workers at the Mo-99 production facility would be expected to receive any radiation dose; individual worker doses would not exceed the 5-rem-per-year regulatory limit (DOE, 2012). The human health impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.1.10Waste Management ImpactsExcavation of the subgrade portion of the facility would generate up to 23,000 cubic meters (30,000 cubic yards) of soil/rock that would be disposed of off-site if not used for on-site grading. The soil/rock material would be recycled/reused as construction fill for other construction or grading purposes, if the material properties are acceptable. Construction activities would generate about 160 metric tons (175 tons) of solid waste in the form of wood, metal, concrete, or other miscellaneous construction debris. Construction waste would be recycled to the extent practicable or disposed of at an appropriate licensed landfill or waste management facility (DOE,2012). Operation of this type of facility would be expected to result in waste generation during the process of bombarding targets and preparing the Mo-99 product for shipment. About 10.4 cubic meters (14cubic yards) of low-level radioactive waste, 2.4 cubic meters (3.1 cubic yards) of hazardous waste, and 45 cubic meters (59 cubic yards) of solid waste would be generated annually. No mixed low-level radioactive waste generation would be expected. Existing commercial or municipal treatment and disposal facilities would be able to accommodate all projected quantities of waste generated by the proposed facility (DOE, 2012).No process-water discharges would be expected. Sanitary waste from the facility would be discharged to the sanitary sewer system; the quantity of waste, primarily from personnel water use, would be a small addition to the load on the local sewer system (DOE, 2012). The waste management impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-48Rev. 019.5.2.2.2.1.11Transportation ImpactsLow-level radioactive waste would be shipped by truck and/or rail to waste disposal facilities, and Mo-99 would be shipped by air for processing. The transportation impacts would be similar or less (since there would be no fission product wastes) than those for the SHINE facility discussed in Subsection 19.4.10. Therefore, the transportation impacts would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.1.12Postulated Accidents ImpactsA range of accidents involving radioactive Mo-99 or chemicals to be used in the process was postulated. Risks to the public from most postulated accidents would be small. Impacts of extremely unlikely severe accidents, such as building collapse from an earthquake or explosion, could extend to members of the public. A severe accident causing release of the entire helium inventory (from the linear accelerator target-cooling system) could result in dispersion of hazardous concentrations to a distance of about 85 meters (280 feet) from the building; the distance from the building to the site boundary is about 20 meters (66 feet). A severe accident involving direct exposure to a freshly irradiated molybdenum target would result in a risk of a latent cancer fatality of 7 x 10 | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | -4 (1 chance in 1,400) to someone exposed at the site boundary for an hour. Although considered extremely unlikely, an intentional destructive act involving release of a significant portion of a freshly-irradiated target would result in a risk of a latent cancer fatality of 8 x 10 | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | -5 to 3x 10-4 (1 chance in 3,000 to 13,000) to a person at the site boundary (DOE, 2012). The environmental impact of postulated accidents would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.1.13Environmental Justice ImpactsEnvironmental justice impacts are largely dependent on the site location, and since the alternative technologies are assumed to be constructed at the SHINE site, the impacts would be similar to those described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.12. Given that the impacts in all environmental resource areas discussed above would be SMALL, the environmental justice impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.2Low Enriched Uranium Aqueous Homogeneous Reactor Approach (Production of Mo-99, I-131 and Xe-133)19.5.2.2.2.2.1DescriptionThis process consists of an array of aqueous homogeneous reactors (AHR) to produce Mo-99, I-131 and Xe-133. The AHR uses an LEU uranyl nitrate solution for fuel and target material. Once produced, these isotopes are extracted and sent for processing, distribution to pharmacies, and Tc-99m generation. This technology has the potential to supply more than 50 percent of the US demand for Mo-99 (B&W TSG, 2009a).The facility consists of a small number of AHR modules, each with a generating capacity of 200 to 240 kilowatt (kW), less than 1 MW total (B&W TSG, 2009b). The use of LEU uranyl nitrate solution for both reactor fuel and target material allows Mo-99 to be produced in the entire reactor solution. The design reduces waste production and proliferation issues, and allows for a large negative coefficient of reactivity, passive safety factor, operating temperature of 80 degrees Celsius (°C) (176°F [degrees Fahrenheit]), and atmospheric operating pressure (B&W TSG, 2009c). The low power and small footprint of the AHR modules allows for additional facilities Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-49Rev. 0and/or increased production at the first facility. To produce Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133, LEU is dissolved in nitric acid and brought to criticality. To extract these isotopes, the solution is transferred from the reactor to a vent tank. After degassing, the solution is transferred to an extraction column where it undergoes nitric acid wash, water wash, and sodium hydroxide elution processes. The processed solution is cleaned up and returned to the reactor (B&W TSG, 2009b; B&W TSG, 2009c). 19.5.2.2.2.2.2Land Use and Visual Resources ImpactsThere is no information on the size of this type of facility. It is anticipated the size would be similar to the SHINE facility (see Subsection 19.4.1) (B&W TSG, 2009c). Therefore, the land use and visual resource impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.2.3Air Quality and Noise Impacts Construction of the facility results in an increase in dust and vehicular emissions and noise. Operation of the facility results in an increase in vehicular emissions and noise due to shipping radioisotopes and operating and maintaining the facility. The air quality and noise impacts would be similar to those described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.2. Therefore, the air quality and noise impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.2.4Geology, Soils, and Seismology ImpactsThe facility would be designed to withstand the same seismic and geologic hazards as the SHINE facility. Construction of the facility would require some excavation and the use of some geologic resources for fill material. No information on the design of the facility is available, but the need for excavation and geologic resources should be similar to those described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.3. Therefore, the geology, soils, and seismology impacts during construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.2.5Water Resources ImpactsThere is no information on the water requirements for this type of facility. However, the water requirements are anticipated to be greater than that of the SHINE facility (see Subsection 19.4.4) (B&W TSG, 2009c). However, the water resource impacts of construction and operation would likely be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.2.6Ecological Resources Impact There is no information on the size of this type of facility. However, the size is likely to be similar to the SHINE facility (B&W TSG, 2009c). Therefore, the ecological resource impacts of construction and operation would be similar to those described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.5 and the impacts would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.2.7Historic and Cultural Resources ImpactsThere is no information on the size of this type of facility. However, the size is likely to be similar to the SHINE facility (B&W TSG, 2009c). Therefore, the historic and cultural resource impacts of construction and operation would be similar to those described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.6 and the impacts would be SMALL. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-52Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-2 Potential Land Use and Natural Habitat Impacts at the Chippewa Falls Site (USGS, 2006)Land Use CategoryPermanently Developed AreaTemporarilyDisturbed AreaRemaining | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-50Rev. 019.5.2.2.2.2.8Socioeconomic ImpactsConstruction of the facility would have a positive socioeconomic impact related to employment and tax revenues. While there is no information on the number of jobs that would be created by operating this type of facility, it is likely to be similar to the operation of the SHINE facility. Operation also would provide additional tax revenues and alleviate shortages of medical isotopes. These beneficial impacts, as well as potential adverse impacts on public services and transportation, would be similar to those described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.7. Therefore, the socioeconomic impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.2.9Human Health ImpactsThere is no information available on this type of facility to directly assess the human health impacts of its construction and operation. However, the radiological and nonradiological human health impacts of this type of facility (B&W TSG, 2009b) is likely to be greater than those of the SHINE facility (see Subsection 19.4.8). However, the human health impacts of construction and operation are likely to be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.2.10Waste Management ImpactsThere is no information available on this type of facility to directly assess the radiological and nonradiological waste management impacts of its construction and operation. However, given the similar Mo-99 production levels, the waste production is anticipated to be similar to the SHINE facility (see Subsection 19.4.9). Therefore, the waste management impacts of construction and operation are likely to be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.2.11Transportation ImpactsThere is no information available on this type of facility to directly assess transportation impacts. However, given the similar Mo-99 production levels, the impacts of transporting spent fuel and radioactive waste from this type of facility is anticipated to be similar to those of the SHINE facility (see Subsection 19.4.10). Transportation impacts due to the shipment of Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133 to processing facilities would be similar to the impact of shipping isotopes from the SHINE facility as described in Subsection 19.4.10. Therefore, environmental impacts due to transportation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.2.12Postulated Accidents ImpactsThere is no information available on this type of facility to directly assess the impacts of postulated accidents. However, the postulated accident impacts of this type of facility are anticipated to be greater than those of the SHINE facility (see Subsection 19.4.11). Regardless, the environmental impact of postulated accidents would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.2.13Environmental Justice Impacts Environmental justice impacts are largely dependent on the site location, and since the alternative technologies are assumed to be constructed at the SHINE site, the impacts would be similar to those described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.12. Given that the impacts in all environmental resource areas discussed above would be SMALL, the environmental justice impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-51Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-1 Sensitive Features in the Chippewa Falls Site Area Measured fromSite NearestBoundaryMeasured fromCenter PointNearest Residence 10.07 mi. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-58Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-6 Minority and Poverty Populations within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Chippewa Falls Site (a)(Sheet 2 of 2)a)Shaded cells indicate "Above Average Populations" (USCB, 2012c).Minority Population (%)Block Group and TractHouseholdsLiving BelowPoverty LevelBlack orAfricanAmericanAmericanIndian andAlaska NativeAsianNative Hawaiianand Other PacificIslander | (0.12 km)0.40 mi.(0.65 km)Nearest Residence 20.12 mi. | ||
(0.19 km)0.39 mi.(0.63 km)Monkey Business Child Care Center0.21 mi. | |||
(0.34 km)0.40 mi.(0.65 km)Grace Adult Day Services0.49 mi. | |||
(0.79 km)0.64 mi.(1.04 km)Oral & Maxillofacial Associates0.58 mi. | |||
(0.93 km)0.74 mi.(1.19 km)Lakeland College and Chippewa Valley Technical College 0.56 mi.(0.90 km)0.70 mi.(1.13 km)Family Health Associates0.55 mi. | |||
(0.89 km)0.70 mi.(1.13 km)Chippewa Valley Eye Clinic0.54 mi (0.86 km)0.69 mi.(1.12 km)Wissota Health and Regional Vent Center0.69 (1.12 km)0.88 mi.(1.41 km)Marshfield Clinic Chippewa Falls Center0.64 mi. | |||
(1.03 km)0.84 mi.(1.35 km)St. Joseph's Hospital0.65 mi. | |||
(1.05 km)0.82 mi.(1.32 km)Wissota Sprints Assisted Living Center0.63 mi. | |||
(1.01 km)0.81 mi.(1.31 km)Marshfield Clinic Chippewa Falls Dental | |||
Center0.69 mi.(1.11 km)0.93 mi.(1.50 km)Kids USA Learning Center0.81 mi. | |||
(1.30 km)1.00 mi.(1.60 km)Sunrise Family Care Clinic0.77 mi. | |||
(1.24 km)0.95 mi.(1.53 km)Irvine Park (nearest public park)1.45 mi. | |||
(2.34 km)1.79 mi.(2.89 km)Notre Dame Church and Goldsmith Chapel (nearest listed historical site) 1.85 mi.(2.98 km)2.11 mi.(3.40 km)Parkview Elementary School (nearest public school) 1.50 mi.(2.41 km)1.79 mi.(2.88 km) | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-52Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-2 Potential Land Use and Natural Habitat Impacts at the Chippewa Falls Site (USGS, 2006) | |||
Land Use CategoryPermanently Developed AreaTemporarilyDisturbed AreaRemaining Area within Site BoundariesTotal Within Site BoundariesTotal Witin 5-Mile RadiusPercentage of 5-MileRadius within Site BoundariesDeveloped land2.6 ac.(1.0 ha)0.01 ac.(0.004 ha)6.5 ac.(2.6 ha)9.1 ac.(3.7 ha)8,966.4 ac.(3,628.6 ha)0.10%Cultivated Crops14.9 ac.(6.0 ha)13.7 ac.(5.5 ha)37.9 ac.(15.4 ha)66.5 ac.(26.9 ha)19,133.0 ac.(7,742.9 ha)0.35%Pasture/Hay0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)3,237.0 ac.(1,310.0 ha)0.0%Grassland/Herbaceous0 ac. | |||
(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)895.6 ac.(362.4 ha)0.0%Shrub/Scrub0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)568.9 ac.(230.2 ha)0.0%Deciduous Forest0.5 ac.(0.2 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0.3 ac.(0.1 ha)0.8 ac.(0.3 ha)7,301.3 ac.(2,954.7 ha)0.01%Evergreen Forest0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)1,116.1 ac.(451.7 ha)0.0%Mixed Forest0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)495.9 ac.(200.7 ha)0.0%Woody Wetlands0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)1,268.9 ac.(513.5 ha)0.0%Emergent, HerbaceousWetlands0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)732.8 ac.(296.5 ha)0.0%Open Water0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)6,549.0 ac.(2,650.3 ha)0.0%Barren Land (Rock/Sand/Clay)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0.0%Totals17.9 ac.(7.3 ha)13.7 ac.(5.5 ha)44.8 ac.(18.1 ha)76.4 ac.(30.9 ha)50,264.9 ac.(20,341.5 ha)0.15% | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-53Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-3 Plant Species Oberved at the Chippewa Falls Site(Sheet 1 of 2)Site LocaleScientific Name Common NameCultivated FieldEdgesBromus inermissmooth brome Cirsium vulgare thistleFestuca elatior fescuePicea sp. (treeline to north)sprucePinus resinosa (treeline to north)red pinePoa pratensisKentucky bluegrassPopulus deltoides (treeline to north)cottonwoodRubus sp. (treeline to north) blackberrySetaria glaucafoxtail grassSolidago sp. (treeline to north)goldenrod Symphyotrichum sp. | |||
asterTaraxicum officinalecommon dandelionTrifolium repenswhite cloverWetland Community Eleocharis sp.spikerushPhalaris arundinaceareed canary grass Rumex sp. | |||
dockScirpus cyperinus woolgrassTypha latifoliacommon cattail Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-54Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-3 Plant Species Oberved at the Chippewa Falls Site(Sheet 2 of 2)Site LocaleScientific Name Common NameOldfield/Railroad ROWAmbrosia artemisiifoliacommon ragweedAmorpha canescensleadplantAndropogon gerardiibig bluestemAristida sp.three-awned grassAsclepias syriacacommon milkweedAster nove-angliaeNew England aster Bromus inermissmooth bromeCornus speciesdogwood speciesFestuca elatior fescueLespedeza captitataprairie bush cloverMonarda fistulosawild bergamotPoa pratensisKentucky bluegrassPopulus deltoidescottonwoodPopulus tremuloides trembling aspenRubus flagellarusdewberryRubus sp. | |||
blackberryRudbeckia hirtablack-eyed susanSchizachyrium scoparium little bluestemSetaria glaucafoxtail grassSolidago sp. | |||
goldenrod Symphyotrichum sp. | |||
aster Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-55Rev. 0a)Species designated by the WDNR in Endangered Resources Review (WDNR, 2011a). b)Global ranking system ranging from G1: critically imperiled globally to G5: common, widespread, and abundant as described in the Wisconsin Natural Heritage Working List. c)State ranking system ranging from S1: critically imperiled in Wisconsin to S5: demonstrably secure in Wisconsin as described in the Wisconsin Natural Heritage Working List. d)Bald eagles are not expected to be present on project site due to lack of suitable habitat; however, as a result of Federal protection under the Bald & Golden Eagle Protection Act and Migratory Bird Act, Wisconsin DNR must be contacted if individuals begin to nest in or near sit e.e)Classification signifying an issue with abundance or distribution to increase awareness before species becomes threatened or endangered. Species not legally protected by state or federal endangered species laws, but may be protected by other laws, policies, or permitting processes requiring or strongly encouraging protection of these resources. f)The term "threatened" is defined in the Endangered Species Act as "any species which is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range". Table 19.5.2-4 Endangered Resources Known or Likely to Occur in the Chippewa Falls Site Area (a)Scientific NameCommon NameState StatusGlobal Rank (b)State Rank (c)BirdsHaliaeetus IeucocephalusBald eagle (d)Special Concern (Fully Protected) | |||
(e)G5S4 (breeding);S4 (non-breeding)FishAcipenser fulvescens lake sturgeonSpecial Concern (Regulated by harvest seasons) (e)G3; G4S3Moxostoma valenciennesigreater redhorseThreatened (f)G4S3InsectsOphiogomphus smithisand snaketailSpecial Concern (No regulations) (e)G2; G3S3 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-56Rev. 0a)Traffic count for the hour between 00:00 and 09:59 hours with the greatest traffic volume.b)Traffic count for the hour between 10:00 and 14:59 hours with the greatest traffic volume.c)Traffic count for the hour between 15:00 and 23:59 hours with the greatest traffic volume.Table 19.5.2-5 Annual Average Hourly Traffic Counts in the Chippewa Falls Site AreaAnnual Average Hourly Traffic (WDOT, 2011) | |||
AM Peak (a)Middday Peak (b)PM Peak (c)Daily TotalCounty Highway S between WI-124 and 149th Street4302984054,573County Highway S west of WI-1783382223623,831WI-178 between Lake View and Chippewa Drive2242052512,7771st Avenue east of State Street258N/A3843,253 Commerce Parkway between Bergman and Warren Street3844124505,211County Highway I between Scheidler Road an d WI-1784844555715,643WI-178 between County Highway I and Chippewa River7046047838,283 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-57Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-6 Minority and Poverty Populations within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Chippewa Falls Site (a)(Sheet 1 of 2)Minority Population (%)Block Group and TractHouseholdsLiving BelowPoverty LevelBlack orAfricanAmericanAmericanIndian andAlaska NativeAsianNative Hawaiianand Other PacificIslander alone SomeOtherRace aloneTwo or More RacesHispanicor LatinoAggregateBlock Group 1, Census Tract 10212.4%0.5%0.6%1.3%0.0%0.1%0.5%1.3%4.3%Block Group 2, Census Tract 1022.1%0.6%0.3%2.6%0.0%0.1%1.0%2.4%7.0%Block Group 3, Census Tract 1028.8%0.4%0.6%0.8%0.0%0.1%1.2%1.7%4.7%Block Group 1, Census Tract 10336.5%1.6%0.5%0.1%0.0%0.0%1.4%2.2%5.9%Block Group 2, Census Tract 10314.5%0.0%0.6%0.1%0.1%0.3%1.1%1.8%4.0%Block Group 3, Census Tract 10310.4%0.7%0.5%0.5%0.0%0.0%1.1%0.5%3.3%Block Group 4, Census Tract 10325.0%0.6%0.7%0.1%0.0%0.0%1.0%1.4%3.8%Block Group 5, Census Tract 1033.1%0.3%0.3%1.1%0.0%0.0%0.9%1.1%3.7%Block Group 6, Census Tract 1036.0%0.1%0.2%2.0%0.0%0.0%0.7%2.6%5.6%Block Group 1, Census Tract 1047.0%0.1%0.3%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.9%2.2%Block Group 3, Census Tract 1041.0%0.4%0.4%4.2%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.7%5.9%Block Group 1, Census Tract 1058.4%0.9%0.0%0.5%0.0%0.0%0.6%1.8%3.9%Block Group 2, Census Tract 10518.3%1.2%0.1%1.3%0.1%0.0%2.0%1.0%5.7%Block Group 3, Census Tract 1057.0%0.6%1.2%0.6%0.0%0.0%2.4%0.7%5.4%Block Group 4, Census Tract 10516.5%6.4%1.5%1.1%0.0%0.0%1.2%2.2%12.4%Block Group 1, Census Tract 1075.9%0.4%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%1.0%0.7%2.6%Block Group 2, Census Tract 1076.5%0.3%0.1%0.7%0.0%0.0%0.8%0.8%2.8%Block Group 3, Census Tract 10713.7%0.5%0.4%1.0%0.0%0.0%1.2%1.1%4.2%Block Group 3, Census Tract 1081.0%0.1%1.1%0.9%0.0%0.0%1.0%0.4%3.5%Block Group 4, Census Tract 1102.3%0.1%0.1%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.9%0.5%2.0%Block Group 5, Census Tract 1105.4%0.6%0.1%0.3%0.0%0.1%1.1%0.4%2.6%Block Group 4, Census Tract 1121.9%0.1%0.0%0.2%0.0%0.0%0.2%0.5%1.0% | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-58Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-6 Minority and Poverty Populations within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Chippewa Falls Site (a)(Sheet 2 of 2)a)Shaded cells indicate "Above Average Populations" (USCB, 2012c).Minority Population (%)Block Group and TractHouseholdsLiving BelowPoverty LevelBlack orAfricanAmericanAmericanIndian andAlaska NativeAsianNative Hawaiianand Other PacificIslander alone SomeOther RacealoneTwo orMore RacesHispanicor LatinoAggregateTotal Area, 5 Mi. Radius9.5%0.9%0.5%1.0%0.0%0.0%1.0%1.2%4.6%Chippewa County10.9%1.5%0.4%1.2%0.0%0.0%0.9%1.3%5.4%State of Wisconsin11.2%6.2%0.9%2.3%0.0%0.1%1.4%5.9%16.7% | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-59Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-7 Potentially Significant Projects Identified within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Cippewa Falls Site Vicinity(Sheet 1 of 2)Project/Company NameSummary of ProjectLocationDistancefrom SiteStatusReferenceEOG Resources Inc.Silica sand processing plant.Chippewa Falls 1 mi. (1.6 km)Operating, achieved full operation in May 2012.The Chippewa Herald, 2012EOG Resources, 2012Wissota Green Housing DevelopmentBuilding of a traditional neighborhood, complete with neighborhood parks and a home owners association park with access to Lake Wissota. (100 lots, with varying lot sizes).Chippewa Falls1 mi. (1.6 km)Conditional Use Permit approved in 2005; developer went bankrupt in 2009; land scheduled to be sold to continue development individually.The Chippewa Herald, 2009CN Railway Intermodal Train-Truck ProjectRail to truck transfer facility; future expansion that will allow an estimated 400 trucks per week. Chippewa Falls2 mi. (3.2 km)Operating, with plans for expansion.Rubenzer, 2011Chippewa Falls Irvine Park and ZooUpdates to current exhibits. | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-59Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-7 Potentially Significant Projects Identified within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Cippewa Falls Site Vicinity(Sheet 1 of 2)Project/Company NameSummary of ProjectLocationDistancefrom SiteStatusReferenceEOG Resources Inc.Silica sand processing plant.Chippewa Falls 1 mi. (1.6 km)Operating, achieved full operation in May 2012.The Chippewa Herald, 2012EOG Resources, 2012Wissota Green Housing DevelopmentBuilding of a traditional neighborhood, complete with neighborhood parks and a home owners association park with access to Lake Wissota. (100 lots, with varying lot sizes).Chippewa Falls1 mi. (1.6 km)Conditional Use Permit approved in 2005; developer went bankrupt in 2009; land scheduled to be sold to continue development individually.The Chippewa Herald, 2009CN Railway Intermodal Train-Truck ProjectRail to truck transfer facility; future expansion that will allow an estimated 400 trucks per week. Chippewa Falls2 mi. (3.2 km)Operating, with plans for expansion.Rubenzer, 2011Chippewa Falls Irvine Park and ZooUpdates to current exhibits. | ||
Next step is to design the primate/small animal building and visitor/artifact center.Chippewa Falls2 mi. (3.2 km)Approved by Chippewa Falls Park Board in December 2011; progress will not occur until fundraising completed.Vetter, 2012Indianhead Plating, Inc.Construction of a hard chrome plating tank.Chippewa Falls2 mi. (3.2 km)Applied for air construction permit in December 2011, waiting for approval.WDNR, 2012cSpectrum Industries Construction of burn off oven for paint hangers.Chippewa Falls2 mi. (3.2 km)Air construction permit issued in February 2011.WDNR, 2012dGreat Northern Corporation Construction of printers.Chippewa Falls2 mi. (3.2 km)Air construction permit issued in March 2011.WDNR, 2012eDairyland Power Cooperative -Seven Mile Creek Landfill Gas to Renewable Energy StationModifications to an existing internal combustion engine and existing landfill gas to energy generating facility.Eau Claire 2 mi. (3.2 km)Air construction permit issued in March 2011.WDNR, 2012f Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-60Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-7 Potentially Significant Projects Identified within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Cippewa Falls Site Vicinity(Sheet 2 of 2)Project/Company NameSummary of ProjectLocationDistancefrom SiteStatusReferenceWRR Environmental Services Company, Inc.Construction of tanks Q and R and modifications to the F-V (Full - Vacuum) Fractionation Distillation Column.Eau Claire 4 mi. (6.4 km)Air construction permit issued in February 2011.WDNR, 2012gWheaton Generating Station(430 MW maximum, fuel oil)Operating power plant with potential air pollution control projects for compliance with future regulatory requirements.Chippewa County5 mi. (8.0 km)Operating, with possible addition of air pollution control equipment in the future.ThinkResources, Inc. 2008Elk Mound Generating Station (71 MW, Combustion Turbines )Operating power plant with potential air pollution control projects for compliance with future regulatory requirements.Chippewa County5 mi. (8.0 km)Operating, with possible addition of air pollution control equipment in the future.McCarthy, 2011USEPA, 2012cEDI Aftermarket Services FacilityAdditional facility with new machining/ grinding capabilities for flat die rework.Chippewa Falls5 mi. (8.0 km)Scheduled to finish by October 2012.EDI, 2011 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | Next step is to design the primate/small animal building and visitor/artifact center.Chippewa Falls2 mi. (3.2 km)Approved by Chippewa Falls Park Board in December 2011; progress will not occur until fundraising completed.Vetter, 2012Indianhead Plating, Inc.Construction of a hard chrome plating tank.Chippewa Falls2 mi. (3.2 km)Applied for air construction permit in December 2011, waiting for approval.WDNR, 2012cSpectrum Industries Construction of burn off oven for paint hangers.Chippewa Falls2 mi. (3.2 km)Air construction permit issued in February 2011.WDNR, 2012dGreat Northern Corporation Construction of printers.Chippewa Falls2 mi. (3.2 km)Air construction permit issued in March 2011.WDNR, 2012eDairyland Power Cooperative -Seven Mile Creek Landfill Gas to Renewable Energy StationModifications to an existing internal combustion engine and existing landfill gas to energy generating facility.Eau Claire 2 mi. (3.2 km)Air construction permit issued in March 2011.WDNR, 2012f Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-60Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-7 Potentially Significant Projects Identified within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Cippewa Falls Site Vicinity(Sheet 2 of 2)Project/Company NameSummary of ProjectLocationDistancefrom SiteStatusReferenceWRR Environmental Services Company, Inc.Construction of tanks Q and R and modifications to the F-V (Full - Vacuum) Fractionation Distillation Column.Eau Claire 4 mi. (6.4 km)Air construction permit issued in February 2011.WDNR, 2012gWheaton Generating Station(430 MW maximum, fuel oil)Operating power plant with potential air pollution control projects for compliance with future regulatory requirements.Chippewa County5 mi. (8.0 km)Operating, with possible addition of air pollution control equipment in the | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-62Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-9 Potential Land Use and Natural Habitat Impacts at the Stevens Point Site (USGS, 2006)Land Use CategoryPermanentlyDeveloped AreaTemporarilyDisturbed | |||
Sand/Clay) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)108.5 ac.(43.9 ha)0.0%Totals 17.4 ac.(7.1 ha) 13.6 ac.(5.5 ha) 49.3 ac.(20.0 ha) 80.4 ac.(32.5 ha)50,264.9 ac.(20,341.5 ha)0.16% | future.ThinkResources, Inc. 2008Elk Mound Generating | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical | |||
d)Annual average hourly traffic counts from 2009. e)Annual average hourly traffic counts from 2010.Annual Average Hourly Traffic (WDOT, 2011)AM Peak (a)Midday Peak (b)PM Peak (c)Daily TotalI-39 southbound off-ramp to County Highway HH1712483203,383I-39 southbound on-ramp from County Highway HH1071862252,302I-39 northbound off-ramp to County Highway HH1692172312,888I-39 northbound on-ramp from County Highway HH2262182553,272County Highway HH between I-39 and County Highway R3514265226,125County Highway R north of Porter Road (e)413N/A7236,565 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-68Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-13 Minority and Poverty Populations within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Stevens Point Site (a)(Sheet 1 of 2)Minority Population (%)Block Group and TractHouseholdsLiving BelowPoverty LevelBlack orAfricanAmericanAmericanIndian andAlaska NativeAsianNative Hawaiianand Other PacificIslander aloneSomeOther RacealoneTwo orMore RacesHispanicor LatinoAggregateBlock Group 3, Census Tract 96015.6%0.0%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.6%2.0%3.0%Block Group 4, Census Tract 96025.3%0.1%0.2%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.4%1.1%Block Group 1, Census Tract 960339.2%0.9%0.1%5.0%0.0%0.1%0.9%1.6%8.8%Block Group 2, Census Tract 960318.1%0.9%0.1%16.8%0.1%0.1%1.3%2.8%22.1%Block Group 3, Census Tract 960336.4%1.4%0.8%4.7%0.1%0.2%2.0%3.3%12.7%Block Group 4, Census Tract 960348.7%0.3%0.8%6.9%0.0%0.2%0.9%2.4%11.6%Block Group 1, Census Tract 960459.5%0.7%0.5%2.2%0.2%0.0%1.6%2.3%7.4%Block Group 2, Census Tract 960418.0%0.7%0.0%3.7%0.0%0.0%0.6%4.0%9.1%Block Group 3, Census Tract 960428.9%1.6%0.3%5.8%0.0%0.0%0.7%2.9%11.3%Block Group 4, Census Tract 960414.8%0.0%0.7%3.0%0.0%0.0%0.8%1.6%6.1%Block Group 5, Census Tract 960416.1%1.4%0.5%3.6%0.2%0.1%1.5%2.3%9.5%Block Group 1, Census Tract 96050.0%0.0%0.1%2.4%0.0%0.0%1.0%1.4%5.0%Block Group 2, Census Tract 96055.8%0.3%0.3%1.3%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.8%3.1%Block Group 3, Census Tract 960511.0%0.3%0.6%0.9%0.0%0.0%0.9%5.7%8.5%Block Group 4, Census Tract 96051.4%0.5%0.5%2.8%0.0%0.1%0.6%1.5%6.0%Block Group 1, Census Tract 96062.3%0.1%0.2%0.7%0.0%0.0%0.4%1.3%2.7%Block Group 4, Census Tract 96062.5%0.3%0.1%0.4%0.0%0.4%1.0%0.9%3.1%Block Group 1, Census Tract 9607.0111.7%0.5%0.3%4.2%0.0%0.1%1.5%6.0%12.5%Block Group 2, Census Tract 9607.012.6%0.3%0.2%2.8%0.0%0.0%0.8%1.4%5.5%Block Group 3, Census Tract 9607.017.5%0.3%0.2%2.7%0.0%0.1%1.1%2.3%6.7%Block Group 1, Census Tract 9607.025.3%0.8%0.2%4.4%0.1%0.0%1.1%1.8%8.4%Block Group 2, Census Tract 9607.021.7%0.4%0.0%3.4%0.0%0.1%0.5%1.6%6.0% | Station (71 MW, Combustion Turbines )Operating power plant with potential air pollution control projects for compliance with future regulatory requirements.Chippewa County5 mi. (8.0 km)Operating, with possible addition of air pollution control equipment in the future.McCarthy, 2011USEPA, 2012cEDI Aftermarket Services FacilityAdditional facility with new machining/ grinding capabilities for flat die rework.Chippewa Falls5 mi. (8.0 km)Scheduled to finish by October 2012.EDI, 2011 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-61Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-8 Sensitive Features in the Stevens Point Site Area Measured fromSite Nearest BoundaryMeasured from Center PointNearest Residence 10.20 mi.(0.33 km) 0.39 mi.(0.63 km)Nearest Residence 20.21 mi.(0.34 km) 0.41 mi.(0.65 km)Little Scholars Child Center and Preschool0.60 mi.(0.97 km) 0.83 mi.(1.34 km)Children's Discovery Center (day care)0.66 mi. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-69Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-13 Minority and Poverty Populations within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Stevens Point Site (a)(Sheet 2 of 2)a)Shaded cells indicate "Above Average Populations" (USCB, 2012c) Minority Population (%)Block Group and TractHouseholdsLiving BelowPoverty LevelBlack orAfricanAmericanAmericanIndian andAlaska NativeAsianNative Hawaiianand Other PacificIslander | (1.06 km) 0.85 mi.(1.37 km)Stockton School (potential historical site)0.69 mi.(1.12 km) 0.92 mi.(1.48 km)Conifer Park (city park)0.78 mi.(1.26 km) 1.03 mi.(1.67 km)Little Scholars Beginnings (day care)0.74 mi. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-70Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-14 | (1.19 km) 0.93 mi.(1.50 km)Medical Office Building0.89 mi.(1.43 km)1.11 mi.(1.79 km)Unnamed Cemetery (potential historical site)0.85 mi.(1.37 km) 1.10 mi.(1.78 km)Oakview Dental Center0.83 mi.(1.34 km) 1.04 mi.(1.68 km)Aspirus Stevens Point Medical Clinic0.98 mi.(1.58 km) 1.21 mi.(1.95 km)Bannach Elementary School (nearest public school)1.53 mi.(2.46 km) 1.86 mi.(2.99 km)Saint Michael's Hospital (nearest hospital)3.54 mi.(5.69 km) 3.77 mi.(6.07 km)Nelson Hall (nearest listed historical site)3.54 mi.(5.69 km) 3.74 mi.(6.01 km) | ||
Natural Gas-Fueled Electric Generator New generator to be installed at existing Wastewater Treatment Facility; will burn digester gas (methane) produced there. Stevens Point3 mi. (4.8 km)Received funding in July 2012.City of Stevens Point, 2012bColumbia Energy Center (455 MW baseload, coal fired)Operating power plant with potential air pollution control projects for compliance with future regulatory requirements.Portage3 mi. (4.8 km)Operating, with possible addition of air pollution control equipment in the future.Jerde, 2011Copps Food CenterConstruction of a 70,000 sq. ft. store with 385 stall parking lot.Stevens Point3 mi. (4.8 km)Plans approved in January 2012.City of Stevens Point, 2012a Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-71Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-14 Potentially Significant Projects Identified within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Stevens Point Site Vicinity(Sheet 2 of 2)Project/Company NameSummary of ProjectLocationDistancefrom SiteStatusReferenceSchmeeckle Trails Housing DevelopmentExpansion of existing residential development.Stevens Point3.5 mi. (5.6 km)Beginning second phase of building "essential houses" in the development. iMakeSense, LLC, 2010WIMME Sand & GravelSand and gravel plant.Plover(Portage County)5 mi. (8.0 km)Operating.WDNR, 2012jU.S. Highway 10 Expansion ProjectNew four lane highway that will bypass downtown Stevens Point.Stevens Point5 mi. (8.0 km)Construction started in 2006, scheduled for completion in 2012.WDOT, 2012Water and Sewer Reconstruction Project Michigan Avenue and Fourth Avenue mains to be reconstructed.Stevens Point4 mi. (6.4 km)5 mi. (8.0 km)Scheduled to be completed in 2012.City of Stevens Point, 2012c Lake Dredging (several locations)Several areas are to be dredged and fill material hauled off-site.McDill Lake District(Portage County)5 mi. (8.0 km)Scheduled to start in 2012.City of Stevens Point, 2011bNeenah Paper Inc. | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-62Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-9 Potential Land Use and Natural Habitat Impacts at the Stevens Point Site (USGS, 2006)Land Use CategoryPermanentlyDeveloped AreaTemporarilyDisturbed Area Remaining Areawithin Site BoundariesTotal WithinSite BoundariesTotal Within 5-Mile RadiusPercentage of 5-MileRadius within Site BoundariesDeveloped land 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)13,555.3 ac. | ||
Whiting Mill Biomass Plant (wood and waste fibers to steam)Operating power plant with potential air pollution control projects for compliance with future regulatory requirements.Stevens Point5 mi. (8.0 km)Operating, with possible addition of air pollution control equipment in the future.Environmental Leader, LLC, 2008 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical | (5,485.6 ha) 0.0%Cultivated Crops3.6 ac.(1.4 ha)13.6 ac.(5.5 ha)13.4 ac.(5.4 ha)30.6 ac.(12.4 ha)18,062.4 ac. | ||
(7,309.6 ha)0.17%Pasture/Hay 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)3,616.6 ac. | |||
(1,463.6 ha) 0.0%Grassland/Herbaceous 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)262.9 ac.(106.4 ha) 0.0%Shrub/Scrub 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)50.8 ac.(20.6 ha) 0.0%Deciduous Forest13.9 ac.(5.6 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)34.3 ac.(13.9 ha) 48.2 ac.(19.5 ha)7,537.7 ac. | |||
(3,050.4 ha)0.64%Evergreen Forest 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)1,566.5 ac.(633.9 ha) 0.0%Mixed Forest 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)1.6 ac.(0.6 ha)1.6 ac.(0.6 ha)935.2 ac.(378.4 ha)0.17%Woody Wetlands 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)2,627.1 ac. | |||
(1,063.2 ha) 0.0%Emergent, Herbaceous Wetlands 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)814.9 ac.(329.8 ha) 0.0%Open Water 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)1,126.8 ac.(456.0 ha) 0.0%Barren Land (Rock/ | |||
Sand/Clay) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)108.5 ac.(43.9 ha) 0.0%Totals 17.4 ac.(7.1 ha) 13.6 ac.(5.5 ha) 49.3 ac.(20.0 ha) 80.4 ac.(32.5 ha)50,264.9 ac.(20,341.5 ha)0.16% | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-63Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-10 Plant Species Observed at the Stevens Point Site(Sheet 1 of 2)Site LocaleScientific NameCommon Name Forested AreaAbies balsameabalsam firAcer saccharum sugar maple Carex sp. | |||
sedgeOstrya virginianahop hornbeamPinus strobuswhite pinePinus sylvestris scotch pinePrunus serotinablack cherryQuercus alba white oakQuercus macrocarpabur oakQuercus rubrared oakQuercus speciesother oak species Ribes sp.gooseberry Rubus sp. | |||
blackberry Smilax sp.green briarTilia americana American basswoodViburnum sp.viburnum Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-64Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-10 Plant Species Observed at the Stevens Point Site(Sheet 2 of 2)Site LocaleScientific NameCommon NameCultivated Field EdgesAmbrosia artemisiifoliacommon ragweedAmorpha canescensleadplantBromus inermissmooth bromeConyza canadensishorseweedEuthamia graminifoliaflattop goldenrodPanicum sp.panic grassPotentilla quinquefoliacreeping cinquefoilRubus flagellarusdewberrySetaria glaucafoxtail grass Solidago sp.goldenrod Symphyotrichum sp. | |||
aster Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-65Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-11 Endangered Resources Known or Likely to Occur in the Stevens Point Site Area (a)a)Species designated by the WDNR in Endangered Resources Review (WDNR, 2011b). b)Global ranking system ranging from G1: critically imperiled globally to G5: common, widespread, and abundant according to the Wisconsin Natural Heritage Working List. c)State ranking system ranging from S1: critically imperiled in Wisconsin to S5: demonstrably secure in Wisconsin according to the Wisconsin Natural Heritage Working List. d)Classification signifying an issue with abundance or distribution to increase awareness before species becomes threatened or endangered. Species not legally protected by state or federal endangered species laws, but may be protected by other laws, policies, or permitting processes requiring or strongly encouraging protection of these resources. e)The term "threatened" is defined in the Endangered Species Act as "any species which is likely to become an endangered specie s within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range". Scientific NameCommon NameState StatusGlobal Rank (b)State Rank (c)MammalsMicrotus ochrogasterprairie voleSpecial Concern (No regulations) | |||
(d)G5S2PlantsAsclepias lanuginose woolly milkweedThreatened (e)G4S1Arabis missouriensisMissouri rock-cressSpecial Concern (d)G5S2ReptilesGlyptemys insculpta wood turtleThreatened (e)G4S2 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-66Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-12 Annual Average Hourly Traffic Counts in the Stevens Point Site Area(Sheet 1 of 2)Annual Average Hourly Traffic (WDOT, 2011)AM Peak (a)Midday Peak (b)PM Peak (c)Daily TotalI-39 southbound off-ramp from US-103724966416,898I-39 southbound on-ramp from US-103154374975,710 I-39 northbound off-ramp from US-103041881872,787I-39 northbound on-ramp from US-107746276118,734US-10 between I-39 and Maple Bluff 1,8952,8232,54932,681County Highway R north of US-101892612953,440County Highway R south of US-103966037047,962I-39 between US-10 and County Highway HH1,4221,4071,77022,086Old Highway 18 west of Burbank Road (d)181929281Old Highway 18 between Burbank and Stockton Road (d)222845390Burbank Road south of Old Highway 18 (d)151830260 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-67Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-12 Annual Average Hourly Traffic Counts in the Stevens Point Site Area(Sheet 2 of 2)a)Traffic count for the hour between 00:00 and 09:59 hours with the greatest traffic volume.b)Traffic count for the hour between 10:00 and 14:59 hours with the greatest traffic volume.c)Traffic count for the hour between 15:00 and 23:59 hours with the greatest traffic volume. | |||
d)Annual average hourly traffic counts from 2009. e)Annual average hourly traffic counts from 2010.Annual Average Hourly Traffic (WDOT, 2011) | |||
AM Peak (a)Midday Peak (b)PM Peak (c)Daily TotalI-39 southbound off-ramp to County Highway HH1712483203,383I-39 southbound on-ramp from County | |||
Highway HH1071862252,302I-39 northbound off-ramp to County Highway HH1692172312,888I-39 northbound on-ramp from County Highway HH2262182553,272County Highway HH between I-39 and | |||
County Highway R3514265226,125County Highway R north of Porter Road (e)413N/A7236,565 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-68Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-13 Minority and Poverty Populations within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Stevens Point Site (a)(Sheet 1 of 2)Minority Population (%)Block Group and TractHouseholdsLiving BelowPoverty LevelBlack orAfricanAmericanAmericanIndian andAlaska NativeAsianNative Hawaiianand Other PacificIslander aloneSomeOther RacealoneTwo orMore RacesHispanicor LatinoAggregateBlock Group 3, Census Tract 96015.6%0.0%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.6%2.0%3.0%Block Group 4, Census Tract 96025.3%0.1%0.2%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.4%1.1%Block Group 1, Census Tract 960339.2%0.9%0.1%5.0%0.0%0.1%0.9%1.6%8.8%Block Group 2, Census Tract 960318.1%0.9%0.1%16.8%0.1%0.1%1.3%2.8%22.1%Block Group 3, Census Tract 960336.4%1.4%0.8%4.7%0.1%0.2%2.0%3.3%12.7%Block Group 4, Census Tract 960348.7%0.3%0.8%6.9%0.0%0.2%0.9%2.4%11.6%Block Group 1, Census Tract 960459.5%0.7%0.5%2.2%0.2%0.0%1.6%2.3%7.4%Block Group 2, Census Tract 960418.0%0.7%0.0%3.7%0.0%0.0%0.6%4.0%9.1%Block Group 3, Census Tract 960428.9%1.6%0.3%5.8%0.0%0.0%0.7%2.9%11.3%Block Group 4, Census Tract 960414.8%0.0%0.7%3.0%0.0%0.0%0.8%1.6%6.1%Block Group 5, Census Tract 960416.1%1.4%0.5%3.6%0.2%0.1%1.5%2.3%9.5%Block Group 1, Census Tract 96050.0%0.0%0.1%2.4%0.0%0.0%1.0%1.4%5.0%Block Group 2, Census Tract 96055.8%0.3%0.3%1.3%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.8%3.1%Block Group 3, Census Tract 960511.0%0.3%0.6%0.9%0.0%0.0%0.9%5.7%8.5%Block Group 4, Census Tract 96051.4%0.5%0.5%2.8%0.0%0.1%0.6%1.5%6.0%Block Group 1, Census Tract 96062.3%0.1%0.2%0.7%0.0%0.0%0.4%1.3%2.7%Block Group 4, Census Tract 96062.5%0.3%0.1%0.4%0.0%0.4%1.0%0.9%3.1%Block Group 1, Census Tract 9607.0111.7%0.5%0.3%4.2%0.0%0.1%1.5%6.0%12.5%Block Group 2, Census Tract 9607.012.6%0.3%0.2%2.8%0. | |||
0%0.0%0.8%1.4%5.5%Block Group 3, Census Tract 9607.017.5%0.3%0.2%2.7%0. | |||
0%0.1%1.1%2.3%6.7%Block Group 1, Census Tract 9607.025.3%0.8%0.2%4.4%0. | |||
1%0.0%1.1%1.8%8.4%Block Group 2, Census Tract 9607.021.7%0.4%0.0%3.4%0. | |||
0%0.1%0.5%1.6%6.0% | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-69Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-13 Minority and Poverty Populations within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Stevens Point Site (a)(Sheet 2 of 2)a)Shaded cells indicate "Above Average Populations" (USCB, 2012c) Minority Population (%)Block Group and TractHouseholdsLiving BelowPoverty LevelBlack orAfricanAmericanAmericanIndian andAlaska NativeAsianNative Hawaiianand Other PacificIslander alone SomeOther RacealoneTwo orMore RacesHispanicor LatinoAggregateBlock Group 1, Census Tract 96086.5%0.6%0.0%2.8%0.0%0.0%0.9%2.0%6.3%Block Group 2, Census Tract 960824.5%1.3%0.4%5.9%0.0%0.5%1.7%2.4%12.3%Block Group 3, Census Tract 960819.3%1.4%0.3%4.8%0.0%0.0%1.3%1.0%8.7%Block Group 4, Census Tract 960810.8%0.9%0.2%5.1%0.0%0.0%3.0%3.0%12.4%Block Group 1, Census Tract 96099.9%1.3%0.5%3.4%0.0%0.0%1.0%2.9%9.1%Block Group 2, Census Tract 960919.1%0.4%0.5%2.6%0.0%0.0%1.8%2.6%7.8%Block Group 3, Census Tract 960924.8%0.2%0.0%4.2%0.0%0.0%2.1%3.5%10.0%Block Group 4, Census Tract 96099.6%1.4%0.5%3.3%0.0%0.0%2.0%4.2%11.4%Block Group 1, Census Tract 961038.1%0.9%0.3%2.0%0.1%0.0%1.2%3.3%7.7%Block Group 2, Census Tract 961025.8%1.9%0.2%2.2%0.1%0.0%0.9%2.1%7.4%Block Group 1, Census Tract 96113.0%0.2%0.1%3.9%0.1%0.0%1.2%2.6%8.1%Block Group 2, Census Tract 961115.0%0.0%0.4%0.4%0.0%0.0%1.1%2.2%4.1%Block Group 3, Census Tract 961110.9%0.5%0.5%6.3%0.1%0.1%0.8%2.5%10.7%Block Group 4, Census Tract 961114.9%0.2%0.2%0.6%0.0%0.0%1.3%2.1%4.4%Block Group 2, Census Tract 96124.2%0.4%0.3%3.7%0.0%0.0%1.0%5.1%10.6%Block Group 3, Census Tract 961215.6%0.7%0.5%5.3%0.0%0.0%1.1%4.6%12.2%Total Area, 5 Mi. Radius13.6%0.6%0.3%3.5%0.0%0.1%1.1%2.5%8.1%Portage County12.4%0.5%0.3%2.8%0.0%0.0%1.0%2.6%7.3%State of Wisconsin11.2%6.2%0.9%2.3%0.0%0.1%1.4%5.9%16.7% | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-70Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-14 Potentially Significant Projects Identified within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Stevens Point Site Vicinity(Sheet 1 of 2)Project/Company NameSummary of ProjectLocationDistancefrom SiteStatusReferenceCentral Wisconsin Alcohol, Inc.Construction of an ethanol plant based on whey fermentation.Plover1 mi. (1.6 km)Air construction permit denied by the state March 20, 2012. WDNR, 2012hNAPA Distribution Center Replacing current parking lot with a new lot with 105 stalls. Also planning a 25,000 sq. ft. addition to distribution center.Stevens Point1 mi. (1.6 km)Plans approved in January 2012.City of Stevens Point, 2012aDonaldson Company Inc.Modifications to equipment configurations at existing filter manufacturing facility.Stevens Point1 mi. (1.6 km)Air construction permit issued in Oct. 2011, expires June 2013.WDNR, 2012iMunicipal Transit CenterDevelopment of a 35,070 sq. ft vacant lot for a parking lot with 57 parking spaces.Stevens Point1 mi. (1.6 km)Plans approved in January 2012.City of Stevens Point, 2012aFocus on Energy Methane/ | |||
Natural Gas-Fueled Electric | |||
Generator New generator to be installed at existing Wastewater Treatment Facility; will burn digester gas (methane) produced there. Stevens Point3 mi. (4.8 km)Received funding in July 2012.City of Stevens Point, 2012bColumbia Energy Center (455 MW baseload, coal fired)Operating power plant with potential air pollution control projects for compliance with future regulatory requirements.Portage3 mi. (4.8 km)Operating, with possible addition of air pollution control equipment in the future.Jerde, 2011Copps Food CenterConstruction of a 70,000 sq. ft. store with 385 stall parking lot.Stevens Point3 mi. (4.8 km)Plans approved in January 2012.City of Stevens Point, 2012a Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-71Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-14 Potentially Significant Projects Identified within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Stevens Point Site Vicinity(Sheet 2 of 2)Project/Company NameSummary of ProjectLocationDistancefrom SiteStatusReferenceSchmeeckle Trails Housing DevelopmentExpansion of existing residential development.Stevens Point3.5 mi. (5.6 km)Beginning second phase of building "essential houses" in the development. iMakeSense, LLC, 2010WIMME Sand & GravelSand and gravel plant.Plover(Portage County)5 mi. (8.0 km)Operating.WDNR, 2012jU.S. Highway 10 Expansion ProjectNew four lane highway that will bypass downtown Stevens Point.Stevens Point5 mi. (8.0 km)Construction started in 2006, scheduled for completion in 2012.WDOT, 2012Water and Sewer Reconstruction Project Michigan Avenue and Fourth Avenue mains to be reconstructed.Stevens Point4 mi. (6.4 km)5 mi. (8.0 km)Scheduled to be completed in 2012.City of Stevens Point, 2012c Lake Dredging (several locations)Several areas are to be dredged and fill material hauled off-site.McDill Lake District(Portage County)5 mi. (8.0 km)Scheduled to start in 2012.City of Stevens Point, 2011bNeenah Paper Inc. | |||
Whiting Mill Biomass Plant (wood and waste fibers to steam)Operating power plant with potential air pollution control projects for compliance with future regulatory requirements.Stevens Point5 mi. (8.0 km)Operating, with possible addition of air pollution control equipment in the future.Environmental Leader, LLC, 2008 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-72Rev. 019.5.3COST-BENEFIT OF THE ALTERNATIVESThis section discusses the costs and benefits of each reasonable alternative and the proposed action, including a qualitative discussion of environmental impacts and identification of any assumptions and uncertainties. The following information on costs and benefits is provided:*Qualitative discussion of environmental degradation (including impacts to air and water quality; biotic resources; aesthetic resources; socioeconomic impacts, such as noise, traffic congestion, and increased demand for public services; and land use changes). *Qualitative discussion of effects on public health and safety.*Other costs (including lost tax revenue, decreased recreational value, and transportation, as appropriate).*Qualitative discussion of environmental benefits (comparable to the discussion of environmental degradation).*Average annual production of commercial products. | |||
*Expected increase in tax payments to state and local tax jurisdictions during (1) the construction period and (2) facility operations.*Creation and improvement of transportation infrastructure and other facilities.*Other benefits.The following types of alternatives are discussed:*Alternative sites | *Expected increase in tax payments to state and local tax jurisdictions during (1) the construction period and (2) facility operations.*Creation and improvement of transportation infrastructure and other facilities.*Other benefits.The following types of alternatives are discussed:*Alternative sites | ||
*Alternative technologies19.5.3.1ALTERNATIVE SITESThis subsection discusses the costs and benefits of the proposed site (Janesville) and the two alternative sites (Chippewa Falls and Stevens Point). For this evaluation, the SHINE facility design, described in Section 19.2, and the construction and operation practices, described in Section 19.4, are assumed to be the same for each site. This assumption allows for a comprehensive and consistent comparison of costs and benefits.19.5.3.1.1Janesville (Proposed) Site19.5.3.1.1.1Environmental DegredationThe environmental impacts expected to result from construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Janesville site are summarized below.Air Quality*Facility construction results in fugitive dust emissions and exhaust emissions due to on road and off-road vehicles.*Facility operation results in minor emissions of nitrogen oxides ( | *Alternative technologies19.5.3.1ALTERNATIVE SITESThis subsection discusses the costs and benefits of the proposed site (Janesville) and the two alternative sites (Chippewa Falls and Stevens Point). For this evaluation, the SHINE facility design, described in Section 19.2, and the construction and operation practices, described in Section 19.4, are assumed to be the same for each site. This assumption allows for a comprehensive and consistent comparison of costs and benefits.19.5.3.1.1Janesville (Proposed) Site19.5.3.1.1.1Environmental DegredationThe environmental impacts expected to result from construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Janesville site are summarized below. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical | Air Quality*Facility construction results in fugitive dust emissions and exhaust emissions due to on road and off-road vehicles.*Facility operation results in minor emissions of nitrogen oxides (NO x), particulate matter (PM), and sulfur dioxide (SO 2). Preliminary modeling indicates that the air quality impacts of these criteria pollutants are minimal and do not approach ambient air quality standards. However, the Significant Impact Level for 1-hour NO x may be exceeded, requiring more detailed modeling for state air pollution permitting. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-73Rev. 0Water Quality*Facility construction results in some discharge of suspended solids to local drainage ditch systems. Very small probability of affecting identified water resources due to low surface runoff potential and distance from the nearest surface water body (approximately 1.6 mi. [2.6 km]).*Construction activities will not reach groundwater. Dewatering of groundwater is not anticipated. *Increased potential for oil or chemical discharges to surface water and groundwater due to accidental spills during construction and operation. Very small probability of release, because of oil and chemical control measures. *Facility operation requires discharge of wastewater to the City of Janesville sanitary sewer system, which has adequate capacity. *Facility operation requires water withdrawal from the City of Janesville water supply system, which has adequate capacity. *Developed facility site results in minor pollutant loads and increased runoff from roadways, parking areas, industrial activities, and landscaping.Biotic Resources*Facility construction results in limited disturbance to on-site agriculture lands and minor displacement of migrating birds that use the agricultural lands to feed.*Construction activities, noise, and lighting result in some displacement of fauna, particularly birds and mammals.*Potential for bird collisions with man-made structures, such as cranes and buildings during construction.*Facility operation does not result in additional impacts except minor potential for bird collisions with buildings and minor disturbance of wildlife due to security lighting at night.Aesthetic Resources*During facility construction, dust, cranes, and facility structures partially obstruct views of existing landscape and create some visual elements that are out-of-character with the site setting. *During facility operation, the existing agricultural landscape is permanently altered, but the facility appearance is consistent with light industrial uses associated with the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport.*During both construction and operation, aesthetic impacts are limited by the presence of relatively few sensitive receptors in close proximity. | ||
Socioeconomics*Facility construction results in some temporary increases in noise, due to use of heavy equipment on the site and construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon.*Facility operation results in minor increases in noise primarily due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. Normal operations include noise from stationary equipment, such as heating, cooling, and ventilation equipment. Continuous noise levels at the site boundary are maintained below local and state noise limit criteria. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-74Rev. 0*During both construction and operation, noise impacts are limited by the presence of relatively few sensitive receptors in close proximity.*Facility construction results in some temporary increase in local traffic due to construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon and periodic construction vehicle traffic throughout the work day.*Facility operation results in minor increase in local traffic due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. *During both construction and operation, traffic impacts are limited by the capacity and good condition of the existing roads that serve the site area.*Facility construction results in some temporary increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and wastewater treatment facilities to serve construction workers who move into the site area.*Facility operation results in minor increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and treatment facilities to serve operations workers who move into the site area.*During both construction and operation, socioeconomic impacts are limited because most workers are expected to reside in Rock County (not relocate to the area) and because the housing market, public education resources, etc., generally have excess capacity.Land Use*Facility construction results in the permanent conversion of approximately 26 acres (ac.) (10.5 hectare [ha]) of agricultural lands to industrial land use, and the temporary conversion of approximately 14 ac. (5.7 ha) of agricultural lands to industrial land use.*All of the land permanently or temporarily converted to industrial land use is classified as Prime Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance.*Facility operation does not result in additional on-site land use impacts. | |||
*No off-site land use impacts are expected during construction or operation except for minor construction of housing to serve facility workers who move into the site area.19.5.3.1.1.2Effects on Public Health and SafetyDuring facility construction, minor impacts to public health and safety may result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and fugitive dust), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. Any such impacts are expected to be temporary and restricted to the immediate vicinity of the project site. | *No off-site land use impacts are expected during construction or operation except for minor construction of housing to serve facility workers who move into the site area.19.5.3.1.1.2Effects on Public Health and SafetyDuring facility construction, minor impacts to public health and safety may result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and fugitive dust), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. Any such impacts are expected to be temporary and restricted to the immediate vicinity of the project site. | ||
During facility operation, minor impacts to public health and safety may result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and emissions of conventional pollutants from stationary equipment), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. In addition, the public is exposed to minor doses of radiation due to transportation of radioactive materials to and from the site, as well as direct radiation and releases of gaseous effluents from the SHINE process. All radioactive materials are strictly controlled, and all radiological doses comply with regulatory limits. | During facility operation, minor impacts to public health and safety may result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and emissions of conventional pollutants from stationary equipment), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. In addition, the public is exposed to minor doses of radiation due to transportation of radioactive materials to and from the site, as well as direct radiation and releases of gaseous effluents from the SHINE process. All radioactive materials are strictly controlled, and all radiological doses comply with regulatory limits. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-75Rev. 019.5.3.1.1.3Other CostsNo other environmental costs, such as lost tax revenues or decreased recreational values, have been identified. The project is not expected to result in any transportation impacts except for the minor traffic impacts on local roads discussed in Subsection 19.5.3.1.1.1.19.5.3.1.1.4Environmental Benefits Facility construction is expected to create approximately 420 construction jobs during the peak of construction activities. Facility operation is expected to create approximately 150 permanent operational jobs. In addition, the wages earned and money spent by facility employees will stimulate additional economic activity, but this benefit has not been quantified. In addition to economic benefits, the project also will benefit the health of people who need diagnostic tests that require technetium-99m (Tc-99m) and other isotopes. The facility is expected to satisfy approximately half of the annual demand for Tc-99m in the United States, and to provide a more reliable supply of this isotope than currently exists. This represents a significant health benefit. The facility will also produce I-131 and Xe-133, which will have additional health benefits.19.5.3.1.1.5Production of Commercial ProductsThe facility has the capacity to produce an average of approximately 156,000 6-day Ci of Mo-99 per year. This translates to millions of doses of Tc-99m per year for diagnostic tests.In addition, the facility is expected to produce an average of approximately 100,000 Ci of I-131 and 100,000 Ci of Xe-133 per year.19.5.3.1.1.6Increase in Tax Payments The facility is expected to pay property taxes of approximately $635,000 per year during construction and approximately $660,000 per year during operation (after expiration of an initial 10-year TIF agreement), representing an increase of approximately 0.30 percent in the annual property tax revenues of Rock County. 19.5.3.1.1.7Creation and Improvement of InfrastructureNo creation or improvement of infrastructure is expected to result directly from the project. The City of Janesville plans to install a water main and a sewer main along the northern boundary of the site, but the project is not dependent on this construction.19.5.3.1.1.8Other BenefitsNo other significant benefits have been identified. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-76Rev. 019.5.3.1.2Chippewa Falls Site19.5.3.1.2.1Environmental DegredationThe environmental impacts that would be expected to result from construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site are summarized below. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical | Air Quality*Facility construction results in fugitive dust emissions and exhaust emissions due to on road and off-road vehicles.*Facility operation results in minor emissions of NO x, PM, and SO | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical | : 2. Although air quality modeling has not been performed at the Chippewa Falls site, it is expected that air quality impacts would be similar to those modeled at the Janesville site, meaning that pollutant concentrations would not approach ambient air quality standards but may exceed the Significant Impact Level for 1-hour NO x, requiring more detailed modeling for state air pollution permitting.Water Quality*Facility construction results in some discharge of suspended solids to local drainage ditch systems. Very small probability of affecting identified water resources due to low surface runoff potential and distance from the nearest surface water body (0.75 mi. [1.2 km]).*Construction activities will not reach groundwater. Dewatering of groundwater is not anticipated. *Increased potential for oil or chemical discharges to surface water and groundwater due to accidental spills during construction and operation. Very small probability of release, because of oil and chemical control measures. *Facility operation results in discharge of wastewater to City of Chippewa Falls sanitary sewer system, which has adequate capacity. *Facility operation requires water withdrawal from City of Chippewa Falls water supply system, which has adequate capacity. *Developed facility site results in minor pollutant loads and increased runoff from roadways, parking areas, industrial activities, and landscaping.Biotic Resources*Facility construction results in limited disturbance to on-site agricultural lands and minor displacement of migrating birds that use the agricultural lands to feed.*Construction activities, noise, and lighting result in some displacement of fauna, particularly birds and mammals.*Potential for bird collisions with man-made structures, such as cranes and buildings during construction.*Facility operation does not result in additional impacts except minor potential for bird collisions with buildings and minor disturbance of wildlife due to security lighting at night. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-77Rev. 0Aesthetic Resources*During facility construction, dust, cranes, and facility structures partially obstruct views of existing landscape and create some visual elements that are out of character with the site setting. *During facility operation, the existing agricultural landscape is permanently altered, but the facility appearance is generally consistent with nearby commercial land uses.*During facility construction, aesthetic impacts may result in complaints from the public about a changed sense of place or a diminution in enjoyment of the physical environment, due to the presence of several sensitive receptors in close proximity to the site. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical | Socioeconomics*Facility construction results in some temporary increases in noise, due to use of heavy equipment on the site and construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon.*Facility operation results in minor increases in noise primarily due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. Normal operations include noise from stationary equipment, such as heating, cooling, and ventilation equipment. Continuous noise levels at the site boundary are maintained below local and state noise limit criteria. *During facility construction, noise impacts may result in complaints from the public due to the presence of several sensitive receptors in close proximity to the site.*Facility construction results in some temporary increase in local traffic due to construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon and periodic construction vehicle traffic throughout the work day.*Facility operation results in minor increase in local traffic due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. *During facility construction, project-related traffic may noticeably alter transportation conditions on local roads, due to the condition of the existing roads that serve the site area.*Facility construction results in some temporary increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and wastewater treatment facilities to serve construction workers who move into the site area.*Facility operation results in minor increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and treatment facilities to serve operations workers who move into the site area.*During both construction and operation, socioeconomic impacts are limited because most workers are expected to reside in Chippewa County (not relocate to the area) and because the housing market, public education resources, etc., generally have excess capacity.Land Use*Facility construction results in the permanent conversion of approximately 15 ac. (6.1 ha) of agricultural lands and 3 ac. (1.2 ha) of fallow lands to industrial land use, and the temporary conversion of approximately 14 ac. (5.7 ha) of agricultural lands to industrial land use. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-78Rev. 0*Almost all of the land permanently or temporarily converted to industrial land use is classified as Prime Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance.*Facility operation does not result in additional on-site land use impacts.*No off-site land use impacts are expected during construction or operation except for minor construction of housing to serve facility workers who move into the site area.19.5.3.1.2.2Effects on Public Health and SafetyDuring facility construction, minor impacts to public health and safety might result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and fugitive dust), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. Any such impacts would be temporary and restricted to the immediate vicinity of the project site.During facility operation, minor impacts to public health and safety might result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and emissions of conventional pollutants from stationary equipment), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. In addition, the public would be exposed to minor doses of radiation due to transportation of radioactive materials to and from the site, as well as direct radiation and releases of gaseous effluents from the SHINE process. All radioactive materials would be strictly controlled, and all radiological doses would comply with regulatory limits.19.5.3.1.2.3Other CostsNo other environmental costs, such as lost tax revenues or decreased recreational values, have been identified. The project would not be expected to result in any transportation impacts except for the traffic impacts on local roads discussed in Subsection 19.5.3.1.2.1.19.5.3.1.2.4Environmental BenefitsFacility construction is expected to create approximately 420 construction jobs during the peak of construction activities. Facility operation is expected to create approximately 150 permanent operational jobs. In addition, the wages earned and money spent by facility employees will stimulate additional economic activity, but this benefit has not been quantified. In addition to economic benefits, the project also would benefit the health of people who need diagnostic tests that require Tc-99m and other isotopes. The facility is expected to satisfy approximately half of the annual demand for Tc-99m in the United States, and to provide a more reliable supply of this isotope than currently exists. This represents a significant health benefit. The facility will also produce I-131 and Xe-133, which will have additional health benefits.19.5.3.1.2.5Production of Commercial Products The facility has the capacity to produce an average of approximately 156,000 6-day Ci of Mo-99 per year. This translates to millions of doses of Tc-99m per year for diagnostic tests.In addition, the facility is expected to produce an average of approximately 100,000 Ci of I-131 and 100,000 Ci of Xe-133 per year. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-79Rev. 019.5.3.1.2.6Increase in Tax PaymentsThe facility would be expected to pay approximately the same amount of property taxes at the Chippewa Falls site as at the Janesville site. This means that the facility would pay approximately $635,000 per year during construction and approximately $660,000 per year during operation, representing an increase of approximately 4.4 percent in the annual property tax revenues of Chippewa County.19.5.3.1.2.7Creation and Improvement of InfrastructureNo creation or improvement of infrastructure is expected to result directly from the project. However, improvements such as widening or adding turning lanes to existing roads near the project site might be necessary to alleviate traffic congestion during construction.19.5.3.1.2.8Other BenefitsNo other significant benefits have been identified.19.5.3.1.3Stevens Point Site19.5.3.1.3.1Environmental DegredationThe environmental impacts that would be expected to result from construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site are summarized below. | ||
Air Quality*Facility construction results in fugitive dust emissions and exhaust emissions due to on road and off-road vehicles.*Facility operation results in minor emissions of NO x, PM, and SO | |||
: 2. Although air quality modeling has not been performed at the Stevens Point site, it is expected that air quality impacts would be similar to those modeled at the Janesville site, meaning that pollutant concentrations would not approach ambient air quality standards but may exceed the Significant Impact Level for 1-hour NO x, requiring more detailed modeling for state air pollution permitting.Water Quality*Facility construction results in some discharge of suspended solids to local drainage ditch systems. Very small probability of affecting identified water resources due to low surface runoff potential and distance from the nearest surface water body (2.0 mi. [3.2 km]). *Construction activities will likely reach groundwater. Soil borings drilled on-site encountered groundwater at a depth of 8 to 11 ft. (2.4 to 3.4 m), and groundwater was observed inside water wells between the depths of 7 and 20 ft. (2.1 and 6.1 m). Dewatering of groundwater is anticipated during construction. *Increased potential for oil or chemical discharges to surface water and groundwater due to accidental spills during construction and operation. Very small probability of release, because of oil and chemical control measures. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-80Rev. 0*Facility operation results in discharge of wastewater to the City of Stevens Point sanitary sewer system, which has adequate capacity. *Facility operation requires water withdrawal from the City of Stevens Point water supply system, which has adequate capacity. *Developed facility site results in minor pollutant loads and increased runoff from roadways, parking areas, industrial activities, and landscaping.Biotic Resources*Facility construction results in limited disturbance to on-site agricultural lands and minor displacement of migrating birds that use the agricultural lands to feed.*Facility construction results in clearing of on-site woodlot (partial or complete) and some displacement of fauna, particularly birds and mammals that inhabit the woodlot. *Construction activities, noise, and lighting result in some displacement of fauna, particularly birds and mammals.*Potential for bird collisions with man-made structures, such as cranes and buildings during construction.*Facility operation does not result in additional impacts except minor potential for bird collisions with buildings and minor disturbance of wildlife due to security lighting at night.Aesthetic Resources*During facility construction, dust, cranes, and facility structures partially obstruct views of existing landscape and create some visual elements that are out-of-character with the site setting. *During facility operation, the existing agricultural landscape and woodlot is permanently altered, but the facility appearance may be consistent with the City of Stevens Point's plan to develop the area as a business park. *During facility construction, aesthetic impacts may result in complaints from the public about a changed sense of place or a diminution in enjoyment of the physical environment, due to the presence of several sensitive receptors in close proximity to the site. | |||
Socioeconomics*Facility construction results in some temporary increases in noise due to use of heavy equipment on the site and construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon.*Facility operation results in minor increases in noise primarily due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. Normal operations include noise from stationary equipment, such as heating, cooling, and ventilation equipment. Continuous noise levels at the site boundary are maintained below local and state noise limit criteria. *During facility construction, noise impacts may result in complaints from the public due to the presence of several sensitive receptors in close proximity to the site.*Facility construction results in some temporary increase in local traffic due to construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon and periodic construction vehicle traffic throughout the work day.*Facility operation results in minor increase in local traffic due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-81Rev. 0*During facility construction, project-related traffic may noticeably alter transportation conditions on local roads, due to the condition of the existing roads that serve the site area.*Facility construction results in some temporary increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and wastewater treatment facilities to serve construction workers who move into the site area.*Facility operation results in minor increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and treatment facilities to serve operations workers who move into the site area.*During both construction and operation, socioeconomic impacts are limited because most workers are expected to reside in Portage County (not relocate to the area) and because the housing market, public education resources, etc., generally have excess capacity.Land Use*Facility construction results in the permanent conversion of approximately 3.6 ac. (1.4 ha) of agricultural lands and 13.9 ac. (5.6 ha) of wooded lands to industrial land use, and the temporary conversion of approximately 13.6 ac. (5.5 ha) of agricultural lands to industrial land use.*Almost all of the land permanently or temporarily converted to industrial land use is classified as Prime Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance.*Facility operation does not result in additional on-site land use impacts.*Off-site land use impacts expected are construction of two public streets along the northern and western site boundaries and minor construction of housing to serve facility workers who move into the site area. 19.5.3.1.3.2Effects on Public Health and SafetyDuring facility construction, minor impacts to public health and safety might result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and fugitive dust), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. Any such impacts would be temporary and restricted to the immediate vicinity of the project site.During facility operation, minor impacts to public health and safety might result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and emissions of conventional pollutants from stationary equipment), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. In addition, the public would be exposed to minor doses of radiation due to transportation of radioactive materials to and from the site, as well as direct radiation and releases of gaseous effluents from the SHINE process. All radioactive materials would be strictly controlled, and all radiological doses would comply with regulatory limits.19.5.3.1.3.3Other Costs No other environmental costs, such as lost tax revenues or decreased recreational values, have been identified. The project would not be expected to result in any transportation impacts except for the traffic impacts on local roads discussed in Subsection 19.5.3.1.3.1. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-82Rev. 019.5.3.1.3.4Environmental BenefitsFacility construction is expected to create approximately 420 construction jobs during the peak of construction activities. Facility operation is expected to create approximately 150 permanent operational jobs. In addition, the wages earned and money spent by facility employees will stimulate additional economic activity, but this benefit has not been quantified.In addition to economic benefits, the project also would benefit the health of people who need diagnostic tests that require Tc-99m and other isotopes. The facility is expected to satisfy approximately half of the annual demand for Tc-99m in the United States, and to provide a more reliable supply of this isotope than currently exists. This represents a significant health benefit. The facility will also produce I-131 and Xe-133, which will have additional health benefits.19.5.3.1.3.5Production of Commercial ProductsThe facility has the capacity to produce an average of approximately 156,000 6-day Ci of Mo-99 per year. This translates to millions of doses of Tc-99m per year for diagnostic tests.In addition, the facility is expected to produce an average of approximately 100,000 Ci of I-131 and 100,000 Ci of Xe-133 per year.19.5.3.1.3.6Increase in Tax PaymentsThe facility would be expected to pay approximately the same amount of taxes at the Stevens Point site as at the Janesville site. This means that the facility would pay approximately $635,000 per year during construction and approximately $660,000 per year during operation, representing an increase of approximately 2.7 percent in the annual property tax revenues of Portage County .19.5.3.1.3.7Creation and Improvement of InfrastructureThe City of Stevens Point would be expected to construct public streets along the northern and western site boundaries of the site in connection with the project. Other potential modifications of transportation infrastructure, such as widening or adding turning lanes to existing roads, might be necessary to alleviate traffic congestion during construction. 19.5.3.1.3.8Other BenefitsNo other significant benefits have been identified. | |||
19.5.3.2ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGIESThis subsection discusses the costs and benefits of the proposed SHINE SHINE technology and the two alternative technologies. For this evaluation, the alternative technologies are assumed to be constructed at the proposed Janesville site. This assumption allows for a comprehensive and consistent comparison of costs and benefits. | 19.5.3.2ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGIESThis subsection discusses the costs and benefits of the proposed SHINE SHINE technology and the two alternative technologies. For this evaluation, the alternative technologies are assumed to be constructed at the proposed Janesville site. This assumption allows for a comprehensive and consistent comparison of costs and benefits. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-83Rev. 019.5.3.2.1SHINE (Proposed) Technology19.5.3.2.1.1Environmental DegredationThe environmental impacts expected to result from construction and operation of the SHINE SHINE technology are summarized below. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical | Air Quality*Facility construction results in fugitive dust emissions and exhaust emissions due to on road and off-road vehicles.*Facility operation results in minor emissions of NO x, PM, and SO | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical | : 2. These emissions result primarily from natural gas heating of the facility buildings and periodic testing of the emergency diesel generator, plus small amounts of NO x from the SHINE process. Water Quality*Facility construction results in some discharge of suspended solids to local drainage ditch systems. *Construction activities will not reach groundwater. Dewatering of groundwater is not anticipated. *Increased potential for oil or chemical discharges to surface water and groundwater due to accidental spills during construction and operation. Very small probability of release, because of oil and chemical control measures. *Facility operation requires water for use in SHINE (target solution and makeup water for the Target Solution Vessel), isotope processing (isotope extraction and purification, uranium extraction, and waste processing), potable water, fire protection, and facility heating and cooling systems. All required water is withdrawn from the City of Janesville water supply system. *Facility operation requires discharge of wastewater, including sanitary wastes, blowdown from building heating boilers, and liquid wastes from thermal denitration and vent system scrubbers. All wastewater is discharged to the City of Janesville sanitary sewer system and complies with local, state, and federal pre-treatment and wastewater discharge requirements.*Developed facility site results in minor pollutant loads and increased runoff from roadways, parking areas, industrial activities, and landscaping.Biotic Resources*Facility construction results in limited disturbance to on-site agriculture lands and minor displacement of migrating birds that use the agricultural lands to feed.*Construction activities, noise, and lighting result in some displacement of fauna, particularly birds and mammals.*Potential for bird collisions with man-made structures, such as cranes and buildings during construction.*Facility operation does not result in additional impacts except minor potential for bird collisions with buildings and minor disturbance of wildlife due to security lighting at night. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-84Rev. 0Aesthetic Resources*During facility construction, dust, cranes, and facility structures partially obstruct views of existing landscape and create some visual elements that are out-of-character with the site setting.*During facility operation, the existing agricultural landscape is permanently altered, but the facility appearance is consistent with light industrial uses associated with the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport. | ||
Socioeconomics*Facility construction results in some temporary increases in noise due to use of heavy equipment on the site and construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon.*Facility operation results in minor increases in noise primarily due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. Normal operations include noise from stationary equipment, such as heating, cooling, and ventilation equipment. Continuous noise levels at the site boundary are maintained below local and state noise limit criteria. *Facility construction results in some temporary increase in local traffic due to construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon and periodic construction vehicle traffic throughout the work day.*Facility operation results in minor increase in local traffic due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. *Facility construction results in some temporary increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and wastewater treatment facilities to serve construction workers who move into the site area.*Facility operation results in minor increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and treatment facilities to serve operations workers who move into the site area.Land Use*Facility construction results in the permanent conversion of approximately 26 ac. (10.5ha) of agricultural lands to industrial land use, and the temporary conversion of approximately 14 ac. (5.7 ha) of agricultural lands to industrial land use.*Facility operation does not result in additional on-site land use impacts.*No off-site land use impacts are expected during construction or operation except for minor construction of housing to serve facility workers who move into the site area.19.5.3.2.1.2Effects on Public Health and SafetyDuring facility construction, minor impacts to public health and safety may result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and fugitive dust), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. Any such impacts are expected to be temporary and restricted to the immediate vicinity of the project site. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-85Rev. 0During facility operation, minor impacts to public health and safety may result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and emissions of conventional pollutants from stationary equipment), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. In addition, the public is exposed to minor doses of radiation due to transportation of radioactive materials to and from the site, as well as direct radiation and releases of gaseous effluents from the SHINE process. All radioactive materials are strictly controlled, and all radiological doses comply with regulatory limits.19.5.3.2.1.3Other CostsNo other environmental costs, such as lost tax revenues or decreased recreational values, have been identified. The project is not expected to result in any transportation impacts except for the minor traffic impacts on local roads discussed in Subsection 19.5.3.2.1.1.19.5.3.2.1.4Environmental BenefitsFacility construction is expected to create approximately 420 construction jobs during the peak of construction activities. Facility operation is expected to create approximately 150 permanent operational jobs. In addition, the wages earned and money spent by facility employees will stimulate additional economic activity, but this benefit has not been quantified .In addition to economic benefits, the project also will benefit the health of people who need diagnostic tests that require Tc-99m and other isotopes. The facility is expected to satisfy approximately half of the annual demand for Tc-99m in the United States, and to provide a more reliable supply of this isotope than currently exists. This represents a significant health benefit. The facility will also produce I-131 and Xe-133, which will have additional health benefits.19.5.3.2.1.5Production of Commercial ProductsThe facility has the capacity to produce an average of approximately 156,000 6-day Ci of Mo-99 per year. This translates to millions of doses of Tc-99m per year for diagnostic tests.In addition, the facility is expected to produce an average of approximately 100,000 Ci of I-131 and 100,000 Ci of Xe-133 per year.19.5.3.2.1.6Increase in Tax Payments The facility is expected to pay property taxes of approximately $635,000 per year during construction and approximately $660,000 per year during operation (after expiration of an initial 10-year TIF agreement), representing an increase of approximately 0.30 percent in the annual property tax revenues of Rock County .19.5.3.2.1.7Creation and Improvement of InfrastructureNo creation or improvement of infrastructure is expected to result directly from the project. The City of Janesville plans to install a water main and a sewer main along the northern boundary of the site, but the project is not dependent on this construction.19.5.3.2.1.8Other BenefitsNo other significant benefits have been identified. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-86Rev. 019.5.3.2.2Linear Accelerator Approach (Production of Mo-99 Only)19.5.3.2.2.1Environmental DegradationThe environmental impacts expected to result from construction and operation of the linear accelerator technology are summarized below. | |||
Air Quality*Facility construction results in fugitive dust emissions and exhaust emissions due to on road and off-road vehicles.*Facility operation results in minor emissions of conventional air pollutants. Similarly to the SHINE facility, these emissions would be expected to result from natural gas heating of the facility buildings, periodic testing of the emergency diesel generator, and the SHINE process. Water Quality*Facility construction results in some discharge of suspended solids to local drainage ditch systems. *No information is available on the depth of excavation required for this type of facility. However, the depth to the lowest subfloor is assumed to be similar to the SHINE facility, and on that basis dewatering of groundwater is not expected to be required. *Increased potential for oil or chemical discharges to surface water and groundwater due to accidental spills during construction and operation. Very small probability of release, because of oil and chemical control measures. *Facility operation requires water for use in SHINE, isotope processing, potable water, fire protection, and facility heating and cooling systems. All required water is withdrawn from the City of Janesville water supply system. *Facility operation requires discharge of wastewater, including sanitary wastes, blowdown from building heating boilers, and liquid wastes from SHINE and isotope processing. All wastewater is discharged to the City of Janesville sanitary sewer system and complies with local, state, and federal pre-treatment and wastewater discharge requirements. *Developed facility site results in minor pollutant loads and increased runoff from roadways, parking areas, industrial activities, and landscaping.Biotic Resources*Facility construction results in limited disturbance to on-site agriculture lands and minor displacement of migrating birds that use the agricultural lands to feed.*Construction activities, noise, and lighting result in some displacement of fauna, particularly birds and mammals.*Potential for bird collisions with man-made structures, such as cranes and buildings during construction.*Facility operation does not result in additional impacts except minor potential for bird collisions with buildings and minor disturbance of wildlife due to security lighting at night. | Air Quality*Facility construction results in fugitive dust emissions and exhaust emissions due to on road and off-road vehicles.*Facility operation results in minor emissions of conventional air pollutants. Similarly to the SHINE facility, these emissions would be expected to result from natural gas heating of the facility buildings, periodic testing of the emergency diesel generator, and the SHINE process. Water Quality*Facility construction results in some discharge of suspended solids to local drainage ditch systems. *No information is available on the depth of excavation required for this type of facility. However, the depth to the lowest subfloor is assumed to be similar to the SHINE facility, and on that basis dewatering of groundwater is not expected to be required. *Increased potential for oil or chemical discharges to surface water and groundwater due to accidental spills during construction and operation. Very small probability of release, because of oil and chemical control measures. *Facility operation requires water for use in SHINE, isotope processing, potable water, fire protection, and facility heating and cooling systems. All required water is withdrawn from the City of Janesville water supply system. *Facility operation requires discharge of wastewater, including sanitary wastes, blowdown from building heating boilers, and liquid wastes from SHINE and isotope processing. All wastewater is discharged to the City of Janesville sanitary sewer system and complies with local, state, and federal pre-treatment and wastewater discharge requirements. *Developed facility site results in minor pollutant loads and increased runoff from roadways, parking areas, industrial activities, and landscaping.Biotic Resources*Facility construction results in limited disturbance to on-site agriculture lands and minor displacement of migrating birds that use the agricultural lands to feed.*Construction activities, noise, and lighting result in some displacement of fauna, particularly birds and mammals.*Potential for bird collisions with man-made structures, such as cranes and buildings during construction.*Facility operation does not result in additional impacts except minor potential for bird collisions with buildings and minor disturbance of wildlife due to security lighting at night. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-87Rev. 0Aesthetic Resources*During facility construction, dust, cranes, and facility structures partially obstruct views of existing landscape and create some visual elements that are out-of-character with the site setting. *During facility operation, the existing agricultural landscape is permanently altered, but the facility appearance is consistent with light industrial uses associated with the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport. | ||
Socioeconomics*Facility construction results in some temporary increases in noise due to use of heavy equipment on the site and construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon.*Facility operation results in minor increases in noise primarily due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. Normal operations include noise from stationary equipment, such as heating, cooling, and ventilation equipment. Continuous noise levels at the site boundary are maintained below local and state noise limit criteria. *Facility construction results in some temporary increase in local traffic due to construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon and periodic construction vehicle traffic throughout the work day.*Facility operation results in minor increase in local traffic due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. *Facility construction results in some temporary increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and wastewater treatment facilities to serve construction workers who move into the site area.*Facility operation results in minor increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and treatment facilities to serve operations workers who move into the site area.Land Use*Facility construction would result in the permanent conversion of approximately 30 ac. (12.1 ha) of agricultural lands to industrial land use. Temporary conversion of land to support construction activities would be expected to be similar to the SHINE facility, which means that approximately 14 ac. (5.7 ha) of agricultural lands would be temporarily converted to industrial use.*Facility operation does not result in additional on-site land use impacts. | |||
*No off-site land use impacts are expected during construction or operation except for minor construction of housing to serve facility workers who move into the site area.19.5.3.2.2.2Effects on Public Health and SafetyDuring facility construction, minor impacts to public health and safety might result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and fugitive dust), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. Any such impacts would be temporary and restricted to the immediate vicinity of the project site. | *No off-site land use impacts are expected during construction or operation except for minor construction of housing to serve facility workers who move into the site area.19.5.3.2.2.2Effects on Public Health and SafetyDuring facility construction, minor impacts to public health and safety might result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and fugitive dust), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. Any such impacts would be temporary and restricted to the immediate vicinity of the project site. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-88Rev. 0During facility operation, minor impacts to public health and safety might result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and emissions of conventional pollutants from stationary equipment), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. In addition, the public would be exposed to minor doses of radiation due to transportation of radioactive materials to and from the site, as well as direct radiation and releases of gaseous effluents from the SHINE process. All radioactive materials would be strictly controlled, and all radiological doses would comply with regulatory limits.19.5.3.2.2.3Other CostsNo other environmental costs, such as lost tax revenues or decreased recreational values, have been identified. The project is not expected to result in any transportation impacts except for the minor traffic impacts on local roads discussed in Subsection 19.5.3.2.2.1.19.5.3.2.2.4Environmental BenefitsConstruction of this type of facility would be expected to create approximately the same number of construction jobs as the SHINE facility, which means approximately 420 construction jobs during the peak of construction activities. Facility operation would create approximately 150 permanent operational jobs. In addition, the wages earned and money spent by facility employees will stimulate additional economic activity, but this benefit has not been quantified. In addition to economic benefits, the project would also benefit the health of people who need diagnostic tests that require Tc-99m. The facility would be expected to produce approximately the same amount of Tc-99m as the SHINE facility, which means it would satisfy approximately half of the annual demand for these isotopes in the United States. This represents a significant health benefit. However, this type of facility would not produce I-131 and Xe-133, as the SHINE facility does.19.5.3.2.2.5Production of Commercial ProductsThe linear accelerator SHINE facility is designed for increasing production when required by demand. However, at full production the facility would be expected to produce 3,000 6-day Ci per week, which means it has the capacity to produce up to approximately 156,000 6-day Ci of Mo-99 per year. 19.5.3.2.2.6Increase in Tax PaymentsThe facility would be expected to pay approximately the same amount of taxes as the SHINE facility. This means that the facility would pay property taxes of approximately $635,000 per year during construction and approximately $660,000 per year during operation (after expiration of an initial 10-year TIF agreement), representing an increase of approximately 0.30 percent in the annual property tax revenues of Rock County .19.5.3.2.2.7Creation and Improvement of InfrastructureNo creation or improvement of infrastructure would be expected to result directly from the project. The City of Janesville plans to install a water main and a sewer main along the northern boundary of the site, but the project is not dependent on this construction. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-89Rev. 019.5.3.2.2.8Other BenefitsNo other significant benefits have been identified.19.5.3.2.3Low Enriched Uranium (LEU) Aqueous Homogeneous Reactor Approach (Production of Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133)19.5.3.2.3.1Environmental DegradationThe environmental impacts expected to result from construction and operation of the LEU Aqueous Homogeneous Reactor technology are summarized below. | ||
Air Quality*Facility construction results in fugitive dust emissions and exhaust emissions due to on road and off-road vehicles.*Facility operation results in minor emissions of conventional air pollutants. Similarly to the SHINE facility, these emissions would be expected to result from natural gas heating of the facility buildings, periodic testing of the emergency diesel generator, and the SHINE process. Water Quality*Facility construction results in some discharge of suspended solids to local drainage ditch systems. *No information is available on the depth of excavation required for this type of facility. However, the depth to the lowest subfloor is assumed to be similar to the SHINE facility, and on that basis dewatering of groundwater is not expected to be required. *Increased potential for oil or chemical discharges to surface water and groundwater due to accidental spills during construction and operation. Very small probability of release, because of oil and chemical control measures. *Facility operation requires water for use in SHINE, isotope processing, reactor cooling, potable water, fire protection, and facility heating and cooling systems. All required water is withdrawn from the City of Janesville water supply system. *Facility operation requires discharge of wastewater, including sanitary wastes, blowdown from building heating boilers, and liquid wastes from SHINE and isotope processing. All wastewater is discharged to the City of Janesville sanitary sewer system and complies with local, state, and federal pre-treatment and wastewater discharge requirements. *Developed facility site results in minor pollutant loads and increased runoff from roadways, parking areas, industrial activities, and landscaping.Biotic Resources*Facility construction results in limited disturbance to on-site agriculture lands and minor displacement of migrating birds that use the agricultural lands to feed.*Construction activities, noise, and lighting result in some displacement of fauna, particularly birds and mammals.*Potential for bird collisions with man-made structures, such as cranes and buildings during construction. | Air Quality*Facility construction results in fugitive dust emissions and exhaust emissions due to on road and off-road vehicles.*Facility operation results in minor emissions of conventional air pollutants. Similarly to the SHINE facility, these emissions would be expected to result from natural gas heating of the facility buildings, periodic testing of the emergency diesel generator, and the SHINE process. Water Quality*Facility construction results in some discharge of suspended solids to local drainage ditch systems. *No information is available on the depth of excavation required for this type of facility. However, the depth to the lowest subfloor is assumed to be similar to the SHINE facility, and on that basis dewatering of groundwater is not expected to be required. *Increased potential for oil or chemical discharges to surface water and groundwater due to accidental spills during construction and operation. Very small probability of release, because of oil and chemical control measures. *Facility operation requires water for use in SHINE, isotope processing, reactor cooling, potable water, fire protection, and facility heating and cooling systems. All required water is withdrawn from the City of Janesville water supply system. *Facility operation requires discharge of wastewater, including sanitary wastes, blowdown from building heating boilers, and liquid wastes from SHINE and isotope processing. All wastewater is discharged to the City of Janesville sanitary sewer system and complies with local, state, and federal pre-treatment and wastewater discharge requirements. *Developed facility site results in minor pollutant loads and increased runoff from roadways, parking areas, industrial activities, and landscaping.Biotic Resources*Facility construction results in limited disturbance to on-site agriculture lands and minor displacement of migrating birds that use the agricultural lands to feed.*Construction activities, noise, and lighting result in some displacement of fauna, particularly birds and mammals.*Potential for bird collisions with man-made structures, such as cranes and buildings during construction. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-90Rev. 0*Facility operation does not result in additional impacts except minor potential for bird collisions with buildings and minor disturbance of wildlife due to security lighting at night.Aesthetic Resources*During facility construction, dust, cranes, and facility structures partially obstruct views of existing landscape and create some visual elements that are out-of-character with the site setting. *During facility operation, the existing agricultural landscape is permanently altered, but the facility appearance is consistent with light industrial uses associated with the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical | Socioeconomics*Facility construction results in some temporary increases in noise due to use of heavy equipment on the site and construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon.*Facility operation results in minor increases in noise primarily due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. Normal operations include noise from stationary equipment, such as heating, cooling, and ventilation equipment. Continuous noise levels at the site boundary are maintained below local and state noise limit criteria. *Facility construction results in some temporary increase in local traffic due to construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon and periodic construction vehicle traffic throughout the work day.*Facility operation results in minor increase in local traffic due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. *Facility construction results in some temporary increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and wastewater treatment facilities to serve construction workers who move into the site area.*Facility operation results in minor increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and treatment facilities to serve operations workers who move into the site area.Land Use*Construction of this type of facility would be expected to result in approximately the same land disturbance as the SHINE facility, which means the permanent conversion of approximately 26 ac. (10.5 ha) of agricultural lands to industrial land use and the temporary conversion of approximately 14 ac. (5.7 ha) of agricultural lands to industrial land use.*Facility operation does not result in additional on-site land use impacts.*No off-site land use impacts are expected during construction or operation except for minor construction of housing to serve facility workers who move into the site area. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-91Rev. 019.5.3.2.3.2Effects on Public Health and SafetyDuring facility construction, minor impacts to public health and safety might result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and fugitive dust), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. Any such impacts would be expected to be temporary and restricted to the immediate vicinity of the project site.During facility operation, minor impacts to public health and safety might result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and emissions of conventional pollutants from stationary equipment), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. In addition, the public would be exposed to minor doses of radiation due to transportation of radioactive materials to and from the site, as well as direct radiation and releases of gaseous effluents from the SHINE process. All radioactive materials would be strictly controlled, and all radiological doses would comply with regulatory limits.19.5.3.2.3.3Other Costs No other environmental costs, such as lost tax revenues or decreased recreational values, have been identified. The project is not expected to result in any transportation impacts except for the minor traffic impacts on local roads discussed in Subsection 19.5.3.2.4.1.19.5.3.2.3.4Environmental BenefitsConstruction of this type of facility would be expected to create approximately the same number of construction jobs as the SHINE facility, which means approximately 420 construction jobs during the peak of construction activities. Facility operation would create approximately 150 permanent operational jobs. In addition, the wages earned and money spent by facility employees will stimulate additional economic activity, but this benefit has not been quantified. In addition to economic benefits, the project also would benefit the health of people who need diagnostic tests that require Tc-99m and other isotopes. The facility would be expected to produce approximately the same amount of Tc-99m as the SHINE facility, which means it would satisfy approximately half of the annual demand for these isotopes in the United States. This represents a significant health benefit. The facility would also produce I-131 and Xe-133, which would have additional health benefits.19.5.3.2.3.5Production of Commercial ProductsThe facility would be expected to produce 3,000 6-day Ci per week, which means it would produce approximately 156,000 6-day Ci of Mo-99 per year. This translates to approximately 9,500,000 doses of Tc-99m per year for diagnostic tests. In addition, the facility would be expected to produce approximately 100,000 Ci of I-131 and 100,000 Ci of Xe-133 per year.19.5.3.2.3.6Increase in Tax PaymentsThe facility would be expected to pay approximately the same amount of taxes as the SHINE facility. This means that the facility would pay property taxes of approximately $635,000 per year during construction and approximately $660,000 per year during operation (after expiration of an initial 10-year TIF agreement), representing an increase of approximately 0.30 percent in the annual property tax revenues of Rock County. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewComparison of the Potential Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-93Rev. 019.5.4COMPARISON OF THE POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS19.5.4.1ALTERNATIVE SITESThis section compares the environmental impacts, costs, and benefits | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-92Rev. 019.5.3.2.3.7Creation and Improvement of InfrastructureNo creation or improvement of infrastructure would be expected to result directly from the project. The City of Janesville plans to install a water main and a sewer main along the northern boundary of the site, but the project is not dependent on this construction.19.5.3.2.3.8Other BenefitsNo other significant benefits have been identified. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewComparison of the Potential Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-95Rev. 0Table 19.5.4-1 Comparison of Construction Impacts for the SHINE Site and Alternative SitesCategorySHINE (Janesville)Chippewa FallsStevens PointNo-Action Land Use | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewComparison of the Potential Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-93Rev. 019.5.4COMPARISON OF THE POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS19.5.4.1ALTERNATIVE SITESThis section compares the environmental impacts, costs, and benefits di scussed in Subsections 19.5.2 and 19.5.3 for the alternative sites with the impacts, costs, and benefits expected at the SHINE project site, and evaluates whether any of the alternatives would reduce or avoid adverse effects. Table 19.5.4-1 summarizes the expected environmental impacts of project construction at the SHINE project site (Janesville), each of the alternative sites (Chippewa Falls and Stevens Point), and the No-Action Alternative. Construction impacts at the SHINE project site are SMALL for every resource category. Both of the alternative sites have MODERATE construction impacts in several resource categories. Chippewa Falls and Stevens Point both have a MODERATE construction impact in Visual Resources, Noise, and Socioeconomic Transportation. In addition, Stevens Point has a MODERATE construction impact in Land Use and Ground Water Resources. As expected, the No-Action Alternative impacts are SMALL for every resource category as no construction would occur. However, the No-Action Alternative would not produce any of the benefits that would be produced by construction at the SHINE site or the alternative sites. These benefits include the creation of jobs and increases in tax payments to the local jurisdictions in which the site is located.Table 19.5.4-2 summarizes the expected environmental impacts of project operation at the SHINE project site, each of the alternative sites, and the No-Action Alternative. Operation impacts at the SHINE project site and both of the alternative sites are SMALL for every resource category. As expected, the No-Action Alternative impacts are SMALL for every resource category as project operation would not occur. Again, however, the No-Action Alternative would not produce any of the benefits that would be produced by operation at the SHINE project site or the alternative sites. These benefits include the of jobs, increases in tax payments to the local jurisdictions in which the site is located, the production of valuable commercial products, and the significant health benefits of having a reliable domestic source of diagnostic isotopes. Based on the information summarized above, neither of the alternative sites would reduce or avoid adverse effects as compared with the SHINE project site. The No-Action Alternative would avoid the environmental impacts associated with construction and operation, but since all of these impacts are SMALL at the SHINE project site, avoiding these impacts is not significant. The No-Action Alternative would not produce any of the benefits associated with the project.19.5.4.2ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGIESThis section compares the environmental impacts, costs, and benefits di scussed in Subsections 19.5.2 and 19.5.3 for the alternative technologies with the impacts, costs, and benefits expected for the SHINE technology, and evaluates whether any of the alternatives would reduce or avoid adverse effects. Table 19.5.4-3 summarizes the expected environmental impacts of project construction for the SHINE technology, each of the alternative technologies (linear accelerator technology and LEU aqueous homogeneous reactor), and the No-Action Alternative. Construction impacts for the SHINE technology are SMALL for every resource category. The alternative technologies also have SMALL construction impacts for every resource category. As expected, the No-Action Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewComparison of the Potential Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-94Rev. 0Alternative impacts are SMALL for every resource category as no construction would occur. However, the No-Action Alternative would not produce any of the benefits that would be produced by construction of the SHINE technology or the alternative technologies. These benefits include the creation of jobs and increases in tax payments to the local jurisdictions in which the project is located. Table 19.5.4-4 summarizes the expected environmental impacts of project operation for the SHINE technology, each of the alternative technologies, and the No-Action Alternative. Operational impacts for the SHINE technology are SMALL for every resource category. The alternative technologies also have SMALL operational impacts for every resource category. As expected, the No-Action Alternative impacts are SMALL for every resource category as project operation would not occur. Again, however, the No-Action Alternative would not produce any of the benefits that would be produced by operation of the SHINE technology or the alternative technologies. These benefits include the creation of jobs, increases in tax payments to the local jurisdictions in which the site is located, the production of valuable commercial products, and the significant health benefits of having a reliable domestic source of diagnostic isotopes. Based on the information summarized above, none of the alternative technologies would reduce or avoid adverse effects as compared with the SHINE technology. The No-Action Alternative would avoid the environmental impacts associated with construction and operation, but since all of these impacts are SMALL for the SHINE technology, avoiding these impacts is not significant. The No-Action Alternative would not produce any of the benefits associated with the project. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewComparison of the Potential Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-95Rev. 0Table 19.5.4-1 Comparison of Construction Impacts for the SHINE Site and Alternative SitesCategorySHINE (Janesville)Chippewa FallsStevens PointNo-Action Land Use Impacts SMALLSMALLMODERATESMALLVisual Resources Impacts SMALLMODERATEMODERATESMALLAir Quality Impacts SMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLNoise Impacts SMALLMODERATEMODERATESMALLGeology, Soils, and Seismology Impacts SMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLWater Resources Impacts Surface Water Impacts SMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL Ground Water ImpactsSMALLSMALLMODERATESMALLEcological Resources Impacts Aquatic Resource sSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL Terrestrial Resour cesSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLHistorical and Cultural Resources Impacts SMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLSocioeconomic Impacts HousingSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL Public Services SMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL Public EducationSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL TaxesSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL TransportationSMALLMODERATEMODERATESMALLHuman Health Impacts Nonradiological ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL Radiological ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLWaste Management Impacts SMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLTransportation Impacts SMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLPostulated Accident Impacts SMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLEnvironmental Justice Impacts SMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLEnvironmental Benefits - Jobs 420420 420 NoneEnvironmental Benefits - HealthNoneNoneNoneNoneProduction of Commercial ProductsNoneNoneNoneNoneProperty Tax Payments$635,000 per year$635,000 per year$635,000 per yearNone Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewComparison of the Potential Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-96Rev. 0Table 19.5.4-2 Comparison of Operation Impacts for the SHINE Site and Alternative Sitesa)The number of required operation workers and property tax payments are expected to be the same for all sites.CategorySHINE (Janesville)Chippewa FallsStevens PointNo-Action Land Use ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLVisual Resources ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLAir Quality ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLNoise ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLGeology, Soils, and Seismology ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLWater Resources Impacts Surface Water ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL Ground Water ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLEcological Resources Impacts Aquatic ResourcesSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL Terrestrial ResourcesSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLHistorical and Cultural Resources ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLSocioeconomic Impacts HousingSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL Public ServicesSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL Public EducationSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL TaxesSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL TransportationSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLHuman Health Impacts Nonradiological ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL Radiological ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLWaste Management ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLTransportation ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLPostulated Accident ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLEnvironmental Justice ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLEnvironmental Benefits - Jobs150150150NoneEnvironmental Benefits - HealthReliable source ofdiagnostic isotopesReliable source ofdiagnostic isotopesReliable source ofdiagnostic isotopesNoneProduction of Commercial Products Mo-99, I-131, Xe-133Mo-99, I-131, Xe-133Mo-99, I-131, Xe-133 NoneProperty Tax Payments(a)$660,000 per year$660,000 per year$660,000 per year None Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewComparison of the Potential Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-97Rev. 0Table 19.5.4-3 Comparison of Construction Impacts for the SHINE Technology and Alternative TechnologiesCategorySHINE TechnologyLinear Accelerator TechnologyLow Enriched Uranium Aqueous Homogeneous ReactorNo-Action Land Use ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLVisual Resources ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLAir Quality ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLNoise ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLGeology, Soils, and Seismology ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLWater Resources ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLEcological Resources ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLHistorical and Cultural Resources ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLSocioeconomic ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLHuman Health ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLWaste Management ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLTransportation ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLPostulated Accident ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLEnvironmental Justice ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLEnvironmental Benefits - Jobs420 420 420 NoneEnvironmental Benefits - HealthNoneNoneNoneNoneProduction of Commercial ProductsNoneNoneNoneNoneProperty Tax Payments$635,000 per year$635,000 per year$635,000 per yearNone Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewComparison of the Potential Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-98Rev. 0Table 19.5.4-4 Comparison of Operation Impacts for the SHINE Technology and Alternative Technologiesa)The number of required operation workers and property tax payments are assumed to be the same for all technologies.CategorySHINE TechnologyLinear Accelerator TechnologyLow Enriched Uranium Aqueous Homogeneous ReactorNo-Action AlternativeLand Use ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLVisual Resources ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLAir Quality ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLNoise ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLGeology, Soils, and Seismology ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLWater Resources ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLEcological Resources ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLHistorical and Cultural Resources ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLSocioeconomic ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLHuman Health ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLWaste Management ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLTransportation ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLPostulated Accident ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLEnvironmental Justice ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLEnvironmental Benefits - Jobs150 150 150 NoneEnvironmental Benefits - HealthReliable source of diagnostic isotopesReliable source of diagnostic isotopesReliable source of diagnostic isotopesNoneProduction of Commercial ProductsMo-99, I-131, Xe-133Mo-99 Mo-99, I-131, Xe-133NoneProperty Tax Payments (a)$660,000 per year$660,000 per year$660,000 per yearNone Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTable of ContentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-iRev. 0SECTION | |||
==19.6CONCLUSION== | ==19.6CONCLUSION== | ||
STable of | STable of Contents SectionTitlePage | ||
==19.6CONCLUSION== | ==19.6CONCLUSION== | ||
S.................................................................................................19.6-119.6.1UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS............................19.6-119.6.2RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SHORT-TERM USES AND LONG-TERMPRODUCTIVITY OF THE ENVIRONMENT....................................................19.6-1319.6.3IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCES.................................................................................................19.6-15 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-iiRev. 0List of | S.................................................................................................19.6-119.6.1UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS............................19.6-119.6.2RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SHORT-TERM USES AND LONG-TERMPRODUCTIVITY OF THE ENVIRONMENT....................................................19.6-1319.6.3IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCES.................................................................................................19.6-15 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-iiRev. 0List of Tables NumberTitle19.6.1-1Construction-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts19.6.1-2Operations-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts19.6.3-1United States Inventories for Minerals Used in Construction Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of FiguresSHINE Medical Technologies 19.6-iiiRev. 0List of Figures NumberTitleNone Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.6-ivRev. 0Acronyms and AbbreviationsAcronym/Abbreviation Definition ac.acreBMPbest management practice hahectarekgkilogramLOSlevel of service NOxnitrogen oxidesOSHAOccupational Safety and Health AdministrationROIRegion of InfluenceSHState HighwaySHINESHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. | ||
SWPPPStorm Water Pollution Prevention PlanUSU.S. HighwayWDNRWisconsin Department of Natural ResourcesWHSWisconsin Historical Society Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical | SWPPPStorm Water Pollution Prevention PlanUSU.S. HighwayWDNRWisconsin Department of Natural ResourcesWHSWisconsin Historical Society Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.6-1Rev. 0CHAPTER 19 | ||
==19.6CONCLUSION== | ==19.6CONCLUSION== | ||
S19.6.1UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTSUnavoidable adverse impacts are predicted adverse environmental impacts that cannot be avoided and for which there are no practical means of further mitigation. This section considers unavoidable adverse impacts from construction and operation of the proposed SHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. (SHINE) facility.19.6.1.1Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts of ConstructionConstruction impacts and measures and controls available to reduce or eliminate impacts are discussed in detail in Section 19.4. As described in the section, all impacts are SMALL, as they are either not detectable or are minor compared to the availability of the affected resources. Table 19.6.1-1 summarizes construction-related impacts that result in a measurable loss or permanent change in resources, the mitigation and control measures available to reduce those impacts, and the remaining unavoidable adverse impacts after mitigation and control measures are applied. For many of the impacts related to construction activities, the mitigation measures are referred to as best management practices (BMPs). Typically, these mitigation measures are based on the types of activities that are to be performed. The mitigation measures are implemented through permitting requirements, and plans and procedures developed for the construction activities.Unavoidable adverse impacts from construction of the SHINE facility include changing land use on 25.67 acres (ac.) (10.39 hectares [ha]) of agricultural/cultivated crop land to industrial facilities, the conversion of prime farmland and farmland of statewide importance to industrial land, and partial obstruction of views of the existing landscape. Since there are no streams, ponds, or water bodies present on the SHINE site, potential construction-related impacts to water resources are limited to off-site impacts associated with runoff and siltation. Impacts to agricultural/cultivated crop land from construction of the facility are mitigated by returning lands within the site boundary that surround the interior developed areas to either cultivated fields or restored native landscapes upon completion of construction. To minimize impacts to visual resources, landscaping of the site along U.S. Highway 51 (US 51) street frontage and bordering access road will be performed. Open spaces around the facility structures are vegetated with cool-season lawn and shrub borders. Impacts from stormwater runoff are mitigated with stormwater management plans and BMPs during construction. Construction activities also temporarily impact 14.54 ac. (5.88 ha) of agricultural lands used for the construction parking area, construction material staging or lay down area, and water and sewer line installation. Temporary impact areas are either returned to agriculture or restored with either cool-season grasses or native prairie.Construction activities result in unavoidable localized increases in air emissions and noise. Activities associated with the use of construction equipment may result in varying amounts of dust, air emissions, noise, and vibration that may potentially impact both on-site workers and off-site residents of the community. Potential noise impacts also include traffic noise associated with the construction workforce traveling to and from the SHINE site, particularly during shift Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical | S19.6.1UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTSUnavoidable adverse impacts are predicted adverse environmental impacts that cannot be avoided and for which there are no practical means of further mitigation. This section considers unavoidable adverse impacts from construction and operation of the proposed SHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. (SHINE) facility.19.6.1.1Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts of ConstructionConstruction impacts and measures and controls available to reduce or eliminate impacts are discussed in detail in Section 19.4. As described in the section, all impacts are SMALL, as they are either not detectable or are minor compared to the availability of the affected resources. Table 19.6.1-1 summarizes construction-related impacts that result in a measurable loss or permanent change in resources, the mitigation and control measures available to reduce those impacts, and the remaining unavoidable adverse impacts after mitigation and control measures are applied. For many of the impacts related to construction activities, the mitigation measures are referred to as best management practices (BMPs). Typically, these mitigation measures are based on the types of activities that are to be performed. The mitigation measures are implemented through permitting requirements, and plans and procedures developed for the construction activities.Unavoidable adverse impacts from construction of the SHINE facility include changing land use on 25.67 acres (ac.) (10.39 hectares [ha]) of agricultural/cultivated crop land to industrial facilities, the conversion of prime farmland and farmland of statewide importance to industrial land, and partial obstruction of views of the existing landscape. Since there are no streams, ponds, or water bodies present on the SHINE site, potential construction-related impacts to water resources are limited to off-site impacts associated with runoff and siltation. Impacts to agricultural/cultivated crop land from construction of the facility are mitigated by returning lands within the site boundary that surround the interior developed areas to either cultivated fields or restored native landscapes upon completion of construction. To minimize impacts to visual resources, landscaping of the site along U.S. Highway 51 (US 51) street frontage and bordering access road will be performed. Open spaces around the facility structures are vegetated with cool-season lawn and shrub borders. Impacts from stormwater runoff are mitigated with stormwater management plans and BMPs during construction. Construction activities also temporarily impact 14.54 ac. (5.88 ha) of agricultural lands used for the construction parking area, construction material staging or lay down area, and water and sewer line installation. Temporary impact areas are either returned to agriculture or restored with either cool-season grasses or native prairie.Construction activities result in unavoidable localized increases in air emissions and noise. Activities associated with the use of construction equipment may result in varying amounts of dust, air emissions, noise, and vibration that may potentially impact both on-site workers and off-site residents of the community. Potential noise impacts also include traffic noise associated with the construction workforce traveling to and from the SHINE site, particularly during shift Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.6-2Rev. 0changes. Emissions from construction activities and equipment are minimized through implementation of mitigation measures, including proper maintenance of construction equipment and vehicles. Posted speed limits, traffic control and administrative measures, such as staggered shift hours, will reduce traffic noise during the weekday business hours. By implementation of mitigation measures, emissions and noise impacts associated with construction activities are temporary and localized at and near the SHINE site.19.6.1.2Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts of OperationsOperational impacts and measures and controls available to reduce or eliminate impacts are discussed in detail in Section 19.4. As described in the section, all impacts are SMALL, as they are either not detectable or are minor compared to the availability of the affected resources. | ||
Table 19.6.1-2 summarizes operations-related impacts that result in a measurable loss or permanent change in resources, the mitigation and control measures available to reduce these impacts, and the remaining adverse impacts after mitigation and control measures are applied. As indicated in Table 19.6.1-2 most of the adverse impacts are either avoidable or negligible after mitigation and control measures are considered. Unavoidable adverse impacts from operation of the SHINE facility include a change to the viewshed, potential storm water runoff to the intermittent stream or Rock River, and infrequent bird collisions with buildings. Minor visual impacts to the viewshed will occur as a result of the main building and exhaust vent stack. However, the surrounding viewshed includes light industrial development, therefore impacts are minor. Stormwater runoff during plant operation is controlled through a vegetated on-site detention swale. Infrequent bird collisions with buildings at the SHINE facility and associated structures may result in some bird mortality. Most buildings on the SHINE site have a relatively low profile, therefore effects on bird populations from collisions with buildings is minimized.The operation of the SHINE facility will result in a slight degradation in the level of service (LOS) at the signalized intersection of US 51 and State Highway (SH) 11. Specifically, the westbound SH 11 to southbound US 51 left-turning movement is affected during the morning peak hour. This condition is easily mitigated by optimizing the signal timing for this turning movement, which will improve the LOS to its existing level. 19.6.1.3Summary of Adverse Environmental Impacts from Construction and OperationsTables 19.6.1-1 and 19.6.1-2 indicate that all of the adverse environmental impacts associated with the new facility construction and operation are SMALL and are further reduced through the application of mitigation and control measures. Most of the impacts from construction and operation are SMALL due to design features that result in lower levels of impacts, BMPs that control and mitigate emissions and discharges to air and water, use of agricultural/cultivated crop lands that were previously altered or disturbed, and applicable federal and state permitting requirements designed to protect humans and biota. These SMALL impacts generally have no detectable adverse impacts or only minor adverse impacts. | Table 19.6.1-2 summarizes operations-related impacts that result in a measurable loss or permanent change in resources, the mitigation and control measures available to reduce these impacts, and the remaining adverse impacts after mitigation and control measures are applied. As indicated in Table 19.6.1-2 most of the adverse impacts are either avoidable or negligible after mitigation and control measures are considered. Unavoidable adverse impacts from operation of the SHINE facility include a change to the viewshed, potential storm water runoff to the intermittent stream or Rock River, and infrequent bird collisions with buildings. Minor visual impacts to the viewshed will occur as a result of the main building and exhaust vent stack. However, the surrounding viewshed includes light industrial development, therefore impacts are minor. Stormwater runoff during plant operation is controlled through a vegetated on-site detention swale. Infrequent bird collisions with buildings at the SHINE facility and associated structures may result in some bird mortality. Most buildings on the SHINE site have a relatively low profile, therefore effects on bird populations from collisions with buildings is minimized.The operation of the SHINE facility will result in a slight degradation in the level of service (LOS) at the signalized intersection of US 51 and State Highway (SH) 11. Specifically, the westbound SH 11 to southbound US 51 left-turning movement is affected during the morning peak hour. This condition is easily mitigated by optimizing the signal timing for this turning movement, which will improve the LOS to its existing level. 19.6.1.3Summary of Adverse Environmental Impacts from Construction and OperationsTables 19.6.1-1 and 19.6.1-2 indicate that all of the adverse environmental impacts associated with the new facility construction and operation are SMALL and are further reduced through the application of mitigation and control measures. Most of the impacts from construction and operation are SMALL due to design features that result in lower levels of impacts, BMPs that control and mitigate emissions and discharges to air and water, use of agricultural/cultivated crop lands that were previously altered or disturbed, and applicable federal and state permitting requirements designed to protect humans and biota. These SMALL impacts generally have no detectable adverse impacts or only minor adverse impacts. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.6-3Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-1 Construction-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 1 of 6)ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsLand Use and Visual ResourcesConstruction of new facility will permanently impact 25.67 ac. (10.39 ha) of agricultural/cultivated crop land.Impacts include conversion of prime farmland and farmland of statewide importance to industrial land.Construction activities comply with all relevant federal, state, and local regulatory requirements, including BMPs and stormwater management plans to control erosion and runoff.Impacts to agricultural/cultivated crop land are mitigated by returning lands within the site boundary that surround the interior developed areas to cultivated fields or restored native landscapes or cool-season grasses upon construction completion.A total of 25.67 ac. (10.39 ha) of agricultural/cultivated crop land is lost.Amount of prime farmland or farmland of statewide importance lost is minor in context of region.Partial obstruction of views of the existing landscape.Visual impacts are minimized through landscaping of the site. Open spaces around the facility structures are vegetated with cool-season lawn and shrub borders.A minor change in existing landscape is expected.Temporary impact of 14.54 ac. (5.88ha) of agricultural lands used for construction parking area, construction material staging or lay down area, and water and sewer line installation.Temporary impact areas are either returned to agriculture or restored with either cool-season grasses or native prairie.Some localized short-term impacts to temporary impact areas are expected. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.6-4Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-1 Construction-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 2 of 6)ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsGeologic ResourcesPotential local adverse impacts due to excavation and other construction related activities.Geologic resources at the site are the same throughout the region and do not include any unique or rare geological resources.No mitigation measures beyond compliance with local building codes are anticipated as no significant impacts due to large scale or local hazards are identified.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Water UseAll public water supplies in Rock County are sourced from groundwater. Additional needs during construction are identified and are satisfied under existing system capacities.Water and sewer utility lines will be installed by the City of Janesville in support of the overall TIF development on the north side of the site. No additional upgrades or mitigation measures are expected.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Water QualityPotential impacts are limited to off-site areas and are associated with runoff and siltation into roadside swales. BMPs will be used in accordance with the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) as required by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) to prevent sediment runoff and subsequent siltation in off-site areas during construction.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Terrestrial EcologyWildlife potentially affected by construction, includes bird, mammal, and/or herpetofauna | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical | species.Area is routinely disturbed for agriculture and there are no water resources on-site, therefore wildlife use of the site is low.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.6-5Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-1 Construction-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 3 of 6) ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsTerrestrial Ecology, cont'dThere is a potential for bird collisions with man-made structures such as cranes and buildings during construction.Based on findings of NUREG-1437, the effects of avian collisions with man-made structures occur at very low frequencies.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Artificial lighting could create or exacerbate an avian-collision hazard if tall cranes are illuminated during nighttime construction.For any nighttime construction, BMPs such as shielding and appropriate directional lighting are used to mitigate the hazards to wildlife associated with artificial nighttime illumination.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Potential impacts to state or federal threatened/endangered species or species of special concern identified within the region.Consultation identified state and federally listed species in the region, however none on the SHINE site. None of the listed species were observed on-site during field reconnaissance surveys.Sensitive species located in off-site riparian areas could be affected indirectly during construction via stormwater runoff from the site. The use of appropriate BMPs during construction combined with the distance to the nearest off-site areas minimizes impacts to any protected species.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Aquatic EcologyPotential impacts are limited to off-site areas associated with runoff and siltation into the small intermittent stream and Rock River.BMPs will be used in accordance with the SWPPP as required by the WDNR to prevent sediment runoff and subsequent siltation in receiving streams during construction.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.6-6Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-1 Construction-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 4 of 6)ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSocioeconomicsThere is a minor potential increase in the local population and associated increased demand for local public services, schooling, housing, and land.Estimated population increases are relatively small compared to the population in the ROI. Increases in local tax revenues support increased services. Specific measures and controls are not needed as impacts are minor.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Potential impacts in traffic infrastructure and patterns due to increased traffic from | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical | |||
construction-related vehicles.Construction-related traffic does not affect the level of service anywhere in the transportation infrastructure and no modifications to the infrastructure are necessary.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Human HealthPotential impacts to the general public and construction workforce include dust and other air emissions during construction.BMPs including dust control plans are implemented during construction to minimize fugitive dust.Minor localized increases in air emissions will occur, mostly at and near the SHINE site. Radiation ExposurePotential adverse impacts to the general public and construction workforce from the construction and handling of isotope production equipment and supplies.Exposure is minimized through safe handling procedures and robust Radiation Protection and ALARA Programs.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Air QualityActivities associated with the use of construction equipment may result in varying amounts of dust, air emissions, noise, and vibration and may potentially impact both on-site workers and off-site residents of the community.BMPs and dust control plans are used for controlling fugitive dust.Proper maintenance of construction equipment and vehicles is used to control air emissions.Minor localized increases in air emissions will occur, mostly at and near the SHINE site.Detectable changes to local meteorology are not anticipated. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.6-7Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-1 Construction-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 5 of 6)ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsAir Quality, cont'dPainting, coating and similar operations also generate emissions from the use of volatile organic compounds.Contractors, vendors, and subcontractors will adhere to appropriate federal and state occupational health and safety regulations. Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.On-site equipment use and traffic due to construction activities can result in local increases in emissions. Potential air quality impacts are limited as the project is in an attainment area and is largely surrounded by agricultural fields and other undeveloped areas.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated. | |||
NoisePotential impacts due to increase in noise levels from construction equipment, including to nearby residences, churches, and recreational areas.On-site noise level exposure is controlled through appropriate training, personnel protective equipment, periodic health and safety monitoring, and industry good practices. Noise levels from equipment are expected attenuate rapidly between the site and the nearest sensitive noise receptors.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Potential increase in traffic noise associated with construction workforce traveling to and from the SHINE site, particularly during shift changes.Posted speed limits, traffic control and administrative measures, such as staggered shift hours reduces traffic noise during weekday business hours.Potential noise impacts are intermittent and limited primarily to shift changes. Environmental | |||
JusticeThere is potential for adverse impacts to low-income and minority populations.Populations classified as low income are distant from the site not impacted by the SHINE facility.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.6-8Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-1 Construction-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 6 of 6)ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsHistoric and Cultural ResourcesNo adverse impacts on cultural or historic resources have been identified.A Phase I study was performed and the Wisconsin Historical Society (WHS) reviewed the findings and indicated that no further consultation is needed.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.6-9Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-2 Operations-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 1 of 4)ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsLand Use and Visual ResourcesVisual impacts as a result of the main building and exhaust vent stack.The majority of the facility structures have a relatively low profile. The exhaust vent stack will extend to 96 feet (29 meters) above grade. No mitigation is required.Minor impacts to viewscape will occur, however the surrounding viewshed includes similar light industrial development, therefore impacts are small.Geologic ResourcesPotential impacts from sediment erosion at the site.The primary soils present at the site are classified as slightly erodible and the secondary soils are classified as moderately erodible. No mitigation is required.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Water UsePotential impact on water supply for the region based on demand from SHINE facility.The City of Janesville has determined the current system has more than enough capacity to support the increase in demand. No mitigation is required.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Water QualityPotential impacts from stormwater runoff to the intermittent stream or Rock River.A vegetated on-site detention swale is used to control stormwater runoff.Mitigation measures in combination with the distance to the water bodies will minimize runoff and siltation to off-site areas.Terrestrial EcologyPossible exposure of terrestrial fauna and flora to herbicides due to vegetation management practices may occur.Herbicides are applied per an integrated pest management plan and applicable permit/BMP requirements.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Infrequent bird collisions with buildings resulting in mortality can occur.Most buildings on the SHINE site have a relatively low profile, minimizing bird collisions.Effects on bird populations from collisions with buildings are minimized and are not anticipated to be significant. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-10Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-2 Operations-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 2 of 4)ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsAquatic EcologyPotential impacts from stormwater runoff to the off-site intermittent stream or Rock River.A vegetated on-site detention swale is used to control storm water runoff.Mitigation measures in combination with the distance to the water bodies will minimize runoff and siltation to off-site receiving streams.SocioeconomicsAn increase in the Region of Influence (ROI) population of 0.08 percent will occur to support the operations workforce, potentially impacting social services.Adequate housing, school capacity, water supply and water treatment capacities exist to accommodate minor population increase; therefore, mitigation is not required.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Potential beneficial impacts to tax revenues to Janesville and Rock County.There is an increase in tax revenues collected by county and regional taxing authorities which does have beneficial impacts.No mitigation is required.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated. Increased traffic along US 51 coming from the north, resulting in a slight decrease in LOS at the intersection of US 51 and SH 11 during morning peak hour.Traffic impacts are mitigated by optimizing the signal timing at the intersection to accommodate a greater turning movement from westbound SH11 to southbound US 51.By optimizing signal timing at the intersection, the LOS for the intersection is improved to its existing level.Human HealthPotential pathways of public exposure to chemicals include air, land, and water.Control systems to minimize potential exposure to the public include conveyance of all wastewater produced from the facility to the City of Janesville wastewater treatment facility, use of swales to control off-site runoff, erosion control measures, and air emission controls. Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated. | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-10Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-2 Operations-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 2 of 4)ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsAquatic EcologyPotential impacts from stormwater runoff to the off-site intermittent stream or Rock River.A vegetated on-site detention swale is used to control storm water runoff.Mitigation measures in combination with the distance to the water bodies will minimize runoff and siltation to off-site receiving streams.SocioeconomicsAn increase in the Region of Influence (ROI) population of 0.08 percent will occur to support the operations workforce, potentially impacting social services.Adequate housing, school capacity, water supply and water treatment capacities exist to accommodate minor population increase; therefore, mitigation is not required.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Potential beneficial impacts to tax revenues to Janesville and Rock County.There is an increase in tax revenues collected by county and regional taxing authorities which does have beneficial impacts.No mitigation is required.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated. Increased traffic along US 51 coming from the north, resulting in a slight decrease in LOS at the intersection of US 51 and SH 11 during morning peak hour.Traffic impacts are mitigated by optimizing the signal timing at the intersection to accommodate a greater turning movement from westbound SH11 to southbound US 51.By optimizing signal timing at the intersection, the LOS for the intersection is improved to its existing level.Human HealthPotential pathways of public exposure to chemicals include air, land, and water.Control systems to minimize potential exposure to the public include conveyance of all wastewater produced from the facility to the City of Janesville wastewater treatment facility, use of swales to control off-site runoff, erosion control measures, and air emission controls. Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-11Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-2 Operations-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 3 of 4)ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsRadiation ExposurePotential adverse impacts to the general public and operations workforce from isotope production and associated waste.Site shielding design of the buildings minimizes radiation exposure of the public outside the buildings. Exposure of the workforce is minimized through compliance with OSHA standards.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Air QualityIncreased vehicle emissions and dust from the commuting workforce and routine deliveries to/from the SHINE facility.The volume of traffic during operations is considerably lower than during construction. | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-11Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-2 Operations-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 3 of 4)ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsRadiation ExposurePotential adverse impacts to the general public and operations workforce from isotope production and associated waste.Site shielding design of the buildings minimizes radiation exposure of the public outside the buildings. Exposure of the workforce is minimized through compliance with OSHA standards.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Air QualityIncreased vehicle emissions and dust from the commuting workforce and routine deliveries to/from the SHINE facility.The volume of traffic during operations is considerably lower than during construction. | ||
Vehicles are largely limited to paved areas, reducing the emissions of fugitive dust.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Emissions from the natural gas-fired boiler and heaters.Emissions of nitrogen oxides ( | Vehicles are largely limited to paved areas, reducing the emissions of fugitive dust.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Emissions from the natural gas-fired boiler and heaters.Emissions of nitrogen oxides (NO x) from the boiler are controlled using low-NO x burners, which produces lower NO x emissions during the combustion process.Emissions from the heaters are controlled using combustion controls and properly designed and tuned burners.No impacts exceed the primary ambient air quality standards that are established to protect public health; therefore unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.NoiseNoise generated during operations relates primarily to vehicular movements associated with employees and deliveries.The number of work-related trips is minor relative to the existing traffic flow on US 51 and does not result in notable increased noise emissions.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.External noise emissions from the SHINE facility during operation may impact surrounding sensitive noise receptors.Operational noise from the facility is primarily limited by the walls and other physical barriers of the facility itself.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-12Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-2 Operations-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 4 of 4)ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsEnvironmental JusticeNo adverse impacts on minority or low-income populations have been identified.Level of impact is comparable for all populations and mitigation is not required.Impacts to low income and minority populations are not anticipated.Historic and Cultural ResourcesNo adverse impacts on cultural or historic resources have been identified.A Phase I study was performed and the WHS reviewed the findings and indicated that no further consultation is needed.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated. | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-12Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-2 Operations-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 4 of 4)ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsEnvironmental JusticeNo adverse impacts on minority or low-income populations have been identified.Level of impact is comparable for all populations and mitigation is not required.Impacts to low income and minority populations are not anticipated.Historic and Cultural | ||
ResourcesNo adverse impacts on cultural or historic resources have been identified.A Phase I study was performed and the WHS reviewed the findings and indicated that no further consultation is needed.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewRelationship Between Short-Term Uses and Long-Term Productivity of the EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-13Rev. 019.6.2RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SHORT-TERM USES AND LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY OF THE ENVIRONMENTThis Environmental Report focuses on the analyses and resulting conclusions associated with the environmental impacts from activities during the new plant construction and operation at the SHINE site. These activities are considered short-term uses for purposes of this section. In this section, the long-term is considered to be initiated with the conclusion of new facility decommissioning at the SHINE site. This section includes an evaluation of the extent that the short-term uses preclude any options for future long-term use of the SHINE site.19.6.2.1Construction of the SHINE Facility and Long-Term ProductivitySubsection 19.6.1.1 summarizes the potential unavoidable adverse environmental impacts of construction and the measures proposed to reduce those impacts. Some SMALL adverse environmental impacts could remain after all practical measures to avoid or mitigate them are taken. However, none of these impacts represent long-term effects that preclude any options for future use of the SHINE site.The acreage disturbed during construction of the facility is larger than that required for the actual structures and other ancillary facilities because of the need for construction parking areas, and construction material staging and laydown areas. Preparation of these on-site areas coupled with noise from construction activities, may displace some wildlife and alter existing vegetation. Once the new facility is completed, the areas not needed for operations are returned to agricultural land or restored with either cool-season grasses or native prairie.Construction of the SHINE facility includes the installation of water and sewer lines that connect the facility to the City of Janesville water supply system. This additional infrastructure will be available and beneficial to any future use of the SHINE site after decommissioning.Noise emitted by some construction activities increases the ambient noise levels on-site and in adjacent off-site areas. During construction, the workforce is protected from excessive noise levels by adherence to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requirements within high noise environments. There are no effects on the long-term productivity of the SHINE site as a result of these impacts.Construction traffic increases the volume of traffic on local roads, but does not have an adverse impact on the LOS. Consequently, no modifications to the traffic infrastructure are necessary and there are no effects on long-term productivity.Facility construction has beneficial socioeconomic effects on the local area such as new construction-related jobs, local spending by the construction workforce, and payment of taxes within the area and region. The in-migration of the construction and operation workforce support the expansion of existing small businesses or locations for new small businesses that might serve SHINE and its employees. The beneficial impacts from the in-migration of the construction workforce and indirect economic output and employment resulting from construction expenditures to the communities within the region of influence (ROI) cease once construction is complete. However, the changes that are the result of increased tax revenues continue throughout the operational life of the facility. | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewRelationship Between Short-Term Uses and Long-Term Productivity of the EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-13Rev. 019.6.2RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SHORT-TERM USES AND LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY OF THE ENVIRONMENTThis Environmental Report focuses on the analyses and resulting conclusions associated with the environmental impacts from activities during the new plant construction and operation at the SHINE site. These activities are considered short-term uses for purposes of this section. In this section, the long-term is considered to be initiated with the conclusion of new facility decommissioning at the SHINE site. This section includes an evaluation of the extent that the short-term uses preclude any options for future long-term use of the SHINE site.19.6.2.1Construction of the SHINE Facility and Long-Term ProductivitySubsection 19.6.1.1 summarizes the potential unavoidable adverse environmental impacts of construction and the measures proposed to reduce those impacts. Some SMALL adverse environmental impacts could remain after all practical measures to avoid or mitigate them are taken. However, none of these impacts represent long-term effects that preclude any options for future use of the SHINE site.The acreage disturbed during construction of the facility is larger than that required for the actual structures and other ancillary facilities because of the need for construction parking areas, and construction material staging and laydown areas. Preparation of these on-site areas coupled with noise from construction activities, may displace some wildlife and alter existing vegetation. Once the new facility is completed, the areas not needed for operations are returned to agricultural land or restored with either cool-season grasses or native prairie.Construction of the SHINE facility includes the installation of water and sewer lines that connect the facility to the City of Janesville water supply system. This additional infrastructure will be available and beneficial to any future use of the SHINE site after decommissioning.Noise emitted by some construction activities increases the ambient noise levels on-site and in adjacent off-site areas. During construction, the workforce is protected from excessive noise levels by adherence to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requirements within high noise environments. There are no effects on the long-term productivity of the SHINE site as a result of these impacts.Construction traffic increases the volume of traffic on local roads, but does not have an adverse impact on the LOS. Consequently, no modifications to the traffic infrastructure are necessary and there are no effects on long-term productivity.Facility construction has beneficial socioeconomic effects on the local area such as new construction-related jobs, local spending by the construction workforce, and payment of taxes within the area and region. The in-migration of the construction and operation workforce support the expansion of existing small businesses or locations for new small businesses that might serve SHINE and its employees. The beneficial impacts from the in-migration of the construction workforce and indirect economic output and employment resulting from construction expenditures to the communities within the region of influence (ROI) cease once construction is complete. However, the changes that are the result of increased tax revenues continue throughout the operational life of the facility. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewRelationship Between Short-Term Uses and Long-Term Productivity of the EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-14Rev. 0Construction of the SHINE facility will have no impacts on populations identified as minority or low-income as minority populations are lacking within the region around the SHINE site, and low income populations are limited to isolated areas in the center of Janesville. Therefore, there are no effects on the long-term productivity of the SHINE site as a result of impacts on environmental justice. 19.6.2.2Operation of the SHINE Facility and Long-Term Productivity Subsection 19.6.1.2 summarizes the potential unavoidable adverse environmental impacts of operation and the measures proposed to reduce or eliminate those impacts. Some SMALL adverse environmental impacts could remain after all practical measures to avoid or mitigate them are taken. However, none of these impacts represent long-term effects that preclude any options for future use of the SHINE site.The SHINE site is located in an area that has previously been disturbed for agricultural use and is currently zoned for industrial use as an amendment to the Tax Increment Financing No.35 Project Plan. Therefore, operation of the new facility represents a continuation of the planned land use. Once the facility is decommissioned to Nuclear Regulatory Commission standards, the land could be available for other industrial or non-industrial uses.During operation, noise levels are expected to decrease to ambient levels as facility-generated noise is limited by the walls and other physical barriers of the facility itself. Operation of the new facility will slightly increase air emissions from the boiler and stacks. The equipment is operated in accordance with applicable federal, state, and local regulations, and is not expected to result in any long-term decrease in regional air quality. Preliminary modeling shows that for all pollutants except for the 1-hour nitrogen oxides ( | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewRelationship Between Short-Term Uses and Long-Term Productivity of the EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-14Rev. 0Construction of the SHINE facility will have no impacts on populations identified as minority or low-income as minority populations are lacking within the region around the SHINE site, and low income populations are limited to isolated areas in the center of Janesville. Therefore, there are no effects on the long-term productivity of the SHINE site as a result of impacts on environmental justice. 19.6.2.2Operation of the SHINE Facility and Long-Term Productivity Subsection 19.6.1.2 summarizes the potential unavoidable adverse environmental impacts of operation and the measures proposed to reduce or eliminate those impacts. Some SMALL adverse environmental impacts could remain after all practical measures to avoid or mitigate them are taken. However, none of these impacts represent long-term effects that preclude any options for future use of the SHINE site.The SHINE site is located in an area that has previously been disturbed for agricultural use and is currently zoned for industrial use as an amendment to the Tax Increment Financing No.35 Project Plan. Therefore, operation of the new facility represents a continuation of the planned land use. Once the facility is decommissioned to Nuclear Regulatory Commission standards, the land could be available for other industrial or non-industrial uses.During operation, noise levels are expected to decrease to ambient levels as facility-generated noise is limited by the walls and other physical barriers of the facility itself. Operation of the new facility will slightly increase air emissions from the boiler and stacks. The equipment is operated in accordance with applicable federal, state, and local regulations, and is not expected to result in any long-term decrease in regional air quality. Preliminary modeling shows that for all pollutants except for the 1-hour nitrogen oxides (NO x), the maximum concentrations are below the Significant Impact Level.Operation of the SHINE facility will have a comparable impact on all populations in the region around the site. No impacts are expected to either minority or low income populations as minority populations are lacking within the region around the SHINE site, and low income populations are limited to isolated areas in the center of Janesville. Therefore there are no long-term effects to environmental justice that preclude any options for future use of the SHINE site. 19.6.2.3Summary of the Relationship Between Short-Term Use and Long-Term ProductivityThe impacts resulting from the SHINE facility construction and operation result in both adverse and beneficial short-term impacts. The principal short-term adverse impacts are SMALL residual impacts (after mitigation measures are implemented) to land use, terrestrial ecology, local traffic, and air quality. There are no long-term impacts to the environment. The principal short-term benefits are the creation of additional jobs, additional tax revenues, and improvements to local infrastructure. The principal long-term benefit is the continued availability of the improved infrastructure and potential benefits from increased tax revenues after facility decommissioning. The short-term impacts and benefits and long-term benefits do not affect long-term productive use of the SHINE site. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIrreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-15Rev. 019.6.3IRREVERSIBLE AND | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIrreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-15Rev. 019.6.3IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIE VABLE COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCESThis subsection describes the expected irreversible and irretrievable environmental resource commitments used in the new facility construction and operation. The term irreversible commitments of resources describes environmental resources that are potentially changed by the new facility construction or operation and that could not be restored at some later time to the resource's state prior to construction or operation. Irretrievable commitments of resources are generally materials that are used for the new facility in such a way that they could not, by practical means, be recycled or restored for other uses.19.6.3.1Irreversible Environmental Commitments of ResourcesIrreversible environmental resource commitments resulting from the new facility, in addition to the materials used for radioisotope production are described in the following sections.19.6.3.1.1Land Use The land used for the SHINE facility is not irreversibly committed because once SHINE ceases operations and the facility is decommissioned in accordance with Nuclear Regulatory Commission requirements, the land supporting the facilities could be returned to other industrial or nonindustrial uses. There is no storage or disposal of radioactive and nonradioactive wastes at the site. Medical isotopes are not stored for any significant time period as these items are transported to clients as quickly as possible. Irradiated enriched uranium is not an issue as the facility cleans up and recycles this material rather than storing spent nuclear fuel. Approximately 26ac. (10.5ha) of prime farmland or farmland of statewide importance on the SHINE site could be irreversibly converted to developed land or experience surface soil damage during temporary use such that the soil properties responsible for the prime farmland designation would be irreversibly damaged.19.6.3.1.2Hydrologic ResourcesThe new facility requires water from the Janesville Water Utility to use for construction, isotope production, potable water, fire protection, and facility heating and cooling. The City of Janesville provides water supply for both public drinking and fire protection through groundwater wells. The average estimated water usage by the SHINE facility during operations is 6070 gallons (22,977 L) per day and a consumptive water use of 1560 gallons (5905 L) per week. According to the city of Janesville, the total pumping capacity of its eight groundwater wells is 29 Mgd (109.8 Mld). | ||
Average water usage is about 11 Mgd (41.6 Mld). Accordingly, the excess capacity of the Janesville water supply system is approximately 18 Mgd (68.1 Mld). Because there is excess capacity within the Janesville water supply system, there are no indirect effects associated with the demand from the SHINE facility. There are no direct impacts to water quality or hydrology from the SHINE facility; therefore there will be no irreversible impacts.19.6.3.1.3Ecological Resources Long-term irreversible losses of terrestrial biota are not anticipated. Subsequent to the completion of construction, floral and faunal resources are expected to recover in areas that are not affected by on-going operations. Floral resources at the site and in the region are limited to agricultural/cultivated crop plants. Losses of fauna due to operations are primarily attributable to Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIrreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-16Rev. 0bird collisions with buildings at the facility as wildlife occurrence on the site is relatively infrequent. There are no wetlands or water bodies located at the SHINE site.All water for the SHINE facility is provided by the Janesville Water Utility, therefore, water supply intake or cooling water intake structures on the Rock River are not needed. Thus, there are no operational impacts associated with impingement or entrainment of aquatic biota. Furthermore, the SHINE facility does not discharge directly into the Rock River or any other nearby water body thus, avoiding any impacts associated with pollutant or thermal discharges to aquatic resources. In addition, a vegetated on-site detention swale is used to control stormwater runoff which, when combined with the distance to the nearest off-site water bodies minimizes runoff and siltation to off-site receiving streams.19.6.3.1.4Socioeconomic Resources No irreversible commitments will be made to socioeconomic resources because they are reallocated for other purposes once the facility is decommissioned. | Average water usage is about 11 Mgd (41.6 Mld). Accordingly, the excess capacity of the Janesville water supply system is approximately 18 Mgd (68.1 Mld). Because there is excess capacity within the Janesville water supply system, there are no indirect effects associated with the demand from the SHINE facility. There are no direct impacts to water quality or hydrology from the SHINE facility; therefore there will be no irreversible impacts.19.6.3.1.3Ecological Resources Long-term irreversible losses of terrestrial biota are not anticipated. Subsequent to the completion of construction, floral and faunal resources are expected to recover in areas that are not affected by on-going operations. Floral resources at the site and in the region are limited to agricultural/cultivated crop plants. Losses of fauna due to operations are primarily attributable to Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIrreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-16Rev. 0bird collisions with buildings at the facility as wildlife occurrence on the site is relatively infrequent. There are no wetlands or water bodies located at the SHINE site.All water for the SHINE facility is provided by the Janesville Water Utility, therefore, water supply intake or cooling water intake structures on the Rock River are not needed. Thus, there are no operational impacts associated with impingement or entrainment of aquatic biota. Furthermore, the SHINE facility does not discharge directly into the Rock River or any other nearby water body thus, avoiding any impacts associated with pollutant or thermal discharges to aquatic resources. In addition, a vegetated on-site detention swale is used to control stormwater runoff which, when combined with the distance to the nearest off-site water bodies minimizes runoff and siltation to off-site receiving streams.19.6.3.1.4Socioeconomic Resources No irreversible commitments will be made to socioeconomic resources because they are reallocated for other purposes once the facility is decommissioned. | ||
19.6.3.1.5Historic and Cultural ResourcesNo known historic or cultural resources are irreversibly altered due to the SHINE facility.19.6.3.1.6Air Quality Dust and other emissions, such as vehicle exhaust, are released to the air during construction activities. Implementation of controls and limits at the source of emissions on the construction site result in reduction of impacts off-site. The dust control program reduces dust due to construction activities to minimize dust reaching site boundaries. Specific mitigation measures are discussed in Subsection 19.4.2.1.1. During operations, emissions will be a product of vehicle exhaust, isotope production, and fuel combustion resulting in very low levels of gaseous pollutants and particulates released from the facility into the air. Contractors, vendors, and subcontractors are required to adhere to appropriate federal and state occupational health and safety regulations to protect workers from adverse conditions, including air emissions. Emissions during operations are in compliance with applicable Federal and State regulations, minimizing their impact on public health and the environment.19.6.3.1.7Irretrievable Commitments of ResourcesIrretrievable commitments of resources during new plant construction are generally similar to that of any small-scale medical facility construction project. Unlike previous industrial construction, asbestos and other materials considered hazardous are not used or are used sparingly and in accordance with safety regulations and practices. Materials consumed during the construction phase are shown in Table 19.2.0-1. These materials are irretrievable unless they are recycled at decommissioning. Additionally, approximately 24,587gallons of diesel fuel (as a bounding assumption all fuel is assumed to be diesel) is expected to be used on an average monthly basis (Subsection 19.2.0). Use of construction materials in the quantities associated with the facility has a SMALL impact with respect to the availability of such resources. | 19.6.3.1.5Historic and Cultural ResourcesNo known historic or cultural resources are irreversibly altered due to the SHINE facility.19.6.3.1.6Air Quality Dust and other emissions, such as vehicle exhaust, are released to the air during construction activities. Implementation of controls and limits at the source of emissions on the construction site result in reduction of impacts off-site. The dust control program reduces dust due to construction activities to minimize dust reaching site boundaries. Specific mitigation measures are discussed in Subsection 19.4.2.1.1. During operations, emissions will be a product of vehicle exhaust, isotope production, and fuel combustion resulting in very low levels of gaseous pollutants and particulates released from the facility into the air. Contractors, vendors, and subcontractors are required to adhere to appropriate federal and state occupational health and safety regulations to protect workers from adverse conditions, including air emissions. Emissions during operations are in compliance with applicable Federal and State regulations, minimizing their impact on public health and the environment.19.6.3.1.7Irretrievable Commitments of ResourcesIrretrievable commitments of resources during new plant construction are generally similar to that of any small-scale medical facility construction project. Unlike previous industrial construction, asbestos and other materials considered hazardous are not used or are used sparingly and in accordance with safety regulations and practices. Materials consumed during the construction phase are shown in Table 19.2.0-1. These materials are irretrievable unless they are recycled at decommissioning. Additionally, approximately 24,587gallons of diesel fuel (as a bounding assumption all fuel is assumed to be diesel) is expected to be used on an average monthly basis (Subsection 19.2.0). Use of construction materials in the quantities associated with the facility has a SMALL impact with respect to the availability of such resources. | ||
| Line 1,456: | Line 2,944: | ||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
US Census Bureau, | US Census Bureau, 2012 MineralsYear2000200820092010Inventory in 1000 Metric Tons by Year Aluminum3688265817271720Copper1450131011801120 Lead449399406385 Titanium300200200200 Zinc796748710699Inventory in Million Metric Tons by YearIron Ore61542850 Portland Cement84836261 Masonry Cement4322 Construction Sand and Gravel11201040844760 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTable of ContentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.7-iRev. 0SECTION | ||
==19.7REFERENCES== | ==19.7REFERENCES== | ||
Table of | Table of Contents SectionTitlePage | ||
==19.7REFERENCES== | ==19.7REFERENCES== | ||
| Line 1,468: | Line 2,956: | ||
==7.6CONCLUSION== | ==7.6CONCLUSION== | ||
S...........................................................................................19.7-28 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies19.7-iiRev. 0List of | S...........................................................................................19.7-28 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies19.7-iiRev. 0List of Tables NumberTitleNone Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of FiguresSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-iiiRev. 0List of Figures NumberTitleNone Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-1Rev. 0CHAPTER 19 | ||
==19.7REFERENCES== | ==19.7REFERENCES== | ||
| Line 1,474: | Line 2,962: | ||
==7.1INTRODUCTION== | ==7.1INTRODUCTION== | ||
OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWBonet, 2005. Bonet, Henri, David Bernard, and Ponsard, Bernard, Production of | OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWBonet, 2005. Bonet, Henri, David Bernard, and Ponsard, Bernard, Production of Mo 99 in Europe: Status and Perspectives, April 2005.City of Janesville, 2012. Correspondence from Gale Price, Community Development Department, to Timothy Krause, Sargent & Lundy, January 13, 2012. | ||
COE, 2010. Interim Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Northcentral and Northeast Region, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Regulatory Assistance Program, March 1, 2010.Fissile Material, 2010. HFR Reactor at Petten Resumed Operations, Fissile Material, September 9, 2010, Website: http://www.fissilematerials.org/blog/2010/09/hfr_reactor_ar_petten_res.html, Date accessed: November 22, 2011.MSNBC, 2010. Isotope Shortage Makes Vital Medical Scans Costlier, Riskier, MSNBC, Website: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38882222/ns/technology_and_science-science/t/isotope-shortage-makes-vital- | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | COE, 2010. Interim Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Northcentral and Northeast Region, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Regulatory Assistance Program, March 1, 2010.Fissile Material, 2010. HFR Reactor at Petten Resumed Operations, Fissile Material, September 9, 2010, Website: http://www.fissilematerials.org/blog/2010/09/hfr_reactor_ar_petten_res.html, Date accessed: November 22, 2011.MSNBC, 2010. Isotope Shortage Makes Vital Medical Scans Costlier, Riskier, MSNBC, Website: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38882222/ns/technology_and_science-science/t/isotope-shortage-makes-vital-medic al-scans-costlier-riskier, Date accessed: November, 22, 2011.NM, 2012. News Medical, website: http://www.news-medical.net/health/Iodine-131-Medical-Use.aspx, Date accessed: August 9, 2012. | ||
NRCL, 2009. Medical Isotope Production Highly Enriched Uranium, National Academies Press, 2009.OECD, 2010. The Supply of Medical Radioisotopes: Interim Report of the OECD/NEA High-level Group on Security of Supply of Medical Isotopes, Nuclear Energy Agency, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2010.RxList, 2012. RxList, The Internet Drug IndexState of Wisconsin, 2012. License, Permit and Registration Services, Website: http://ww2.wisconsin.gov/state/license/app?COMMAND=gov.wi.state.cpp.license.command.LoadLicenseHome, Date accessed: February 1, 2012.U.S. Government, 1992. Energy Policy Act of 1992, 1992.Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 2012. | |||
Small Business Assistance - Permit Primer, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/permitprimer/, Date accessed: February 3, 2012.WNN, 2009. Restart for Isotope Reactor, World Nuclear News, February 13, 2009, Website: http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/newsarticle.aspx?id=24658, Date accessed: November 22, 2011. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-2Rev. 019.7.2PROPOSED ACTION N/A19.7.3DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENTAASHTO, 2012. Census Transportation Planning Products (CTPP) 3-year Data Based on 2006 -2008 American Community Survey (ACS), American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Website: http://ctpp.transportation.org/Pages/3yrdas.aspx | |||
, Date accessed: May 16, 2012. | |||
AFCCC, 1999. Engineering Weather Data, 2000 Interactive Edition, Air Force Combat Climatology Center, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, 1999.American Society of Mammologists, 2012. Mammals of Wisconsin, American Society of Mammologists, Website: http://www.mammalogy.org/mammals-wisconsin, Date accessed: July 11, 2012. | AFCCC, 1999. Engineering Weather Data, 2000 Interactive Edition, Air Force Combat Climatology Center, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, 1999.American Society of Mammologists, 2012. Mammals of Wisconsin, American Society of Mammologists, Website: http://www.mammalogy.org/mammals-wisconsin, Date accessed: July 11, 2012. | ||
ASCE, 2006. Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, ASCE Standard ASCE/SEI 7-05 Including Supplement No. 1, American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, Virginia, 2006.ASHRAE, 2009. 2009 ASHRAE Handbook - Fundamentals, American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc., IP edition. Chapter 14.6, American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc., Atlanta, Georgia, 2009.Bean, T., 2008. Noise on the Farm Can Cause Hearing Loss, University of Ohio, Agricultural Extension Fact Sheet AEX-590-08, Website: http://ohioline.osu.edu/aex-fact/pdf/AEX_590_08.pdf, Date accessed: August 13, 2012.Bird Nature, 2012. Migration Flyways: Mississippi Flyway, Bird Nature, Website: http://www.birdnature.com/mississippi.html, Date accessed: August 13, 2012.Bing Maps, 2012. Bing Maps Aerial, Microsoft Corporation and its Data Supplies, Website: http://www.esri.com/software/arcgis/arcgisonline/bing-maps.html, Date accessed: August 15, 2012.BLS, 2009. May 2009 Metropolitan and Nonmetropolitan Area Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Website: http://www.bls.gov/oes/2009/may/oes_27500.html, Date accessed: July 19, 2012.BLS, 2011. May 2009 Metropolitan and Nonmetropolitan Area Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Website: http://stat.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_27500.html, Date accessed: June 10, 2012.BLS, 2012a. Local Area Unemployment Statistics, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Website: http://www.bls.gov/data/#unemployment, Date accessed: June 8, 2012.BLS, 2012b. Consumer Price Index (CPI) Inflation Calculator, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Website: http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm, Date accessed: June 14, 2012. | ASCE, 2006. Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, ASCE Standard ASCE/SEI 7-05 Including Supplement No. 1, American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, Virginia, 2006.ASHRAE, 2009. 2009 ASHRAE Handbook - Fundamentals, American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc., IP edition. Chapter 14.6, American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc., Atlanta, Georgia, 2009.Bean, T., 2008. Noise on the Farm Can Cause Hearing Loss, University of Ohio, Agricultural Extension Fact Sheet AEX-590-08, Website: http://ohioline.osu.edu/aex-fact/pdf/AEX_590_08.pdf, Date accessed: August 13, 2012.Bird Nature, 2012. Migration Flyways: Mississippi Flyway, Bird Nature, Website: http://www.birdnature.com/mississippi.html, Date accessed: August 13, 2012.Bing Maps, 2012. Bing Maps Aerial, Microsoft Corporation and its Data Supplies, Website: http://www.esri.com/software/arcgis/arcgisonline/bing-maps.html, Date accessed: August 15, 2012.BLS, 2009. May 2009 Metropolitan and Nonmetropolitan Area Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Website: http://www.bls.gov/oes/2009/may/oes_27500.html, Date accessed: July 19, 2012.BLS, 2011. May 2009 Metropolitan and Nonmetropolitan Area Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Website: http://stat.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_27500.html, Date accessed: June 10, 2012.BLS, 2012a. Local Area Unemployment Statistics, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Website: http://www.bls.gov/data/#unemployment, Date accessed: June 8, 2012.BLS, 2012b. Consumer Price Index (CPI) Inflation Calculator, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Website: http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm, Date accessed: June 14, 2012. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-3Rev. 0BLS, 2012c. Injuries, Illnesses, and Fatalities, Bureau of Labor Statistics, OSHA Recordable Case Rates - Latest Incidence Rates, by Industry, for Nonfatal Work-Related Injuries and Illnesses, Website: http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/osh/os/ostb3191.pdf, Date accessed: February 14, 2013. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | BLS, 2012d. Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries (CFOI) - Current and Revised Data, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Hours-Based Fatal Injury Rates by Industry, Occupation, and Selected Demographic Characteristics, 2011, Website: http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfoi/cfoi_rates_2011hb.pdf, Date accessed: February 14, 2013.Buchwald, Cheryl A., 2011. Water Use in Wisconsin, 2005, U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2009-1076, Version 1.1, USGS, Wisconsin Water Science Center, November 2011.The CADMUS Group, Inc., 2011. Total Maximum Daily Loads for Total Phosphorus and Total Suspended Solids in the Rock River Basin. Columbia, Dane, Dodge, Fond du Lac, Green, Green Lake, Jefferson, Rock, Walworth, Washington, and Waukesha Counties, Wisconsin, Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/TMDLs/RockRiver/Final_Rock_River_TMDL_Report_with_Tables.pdf, Date accessed: June 11, 2012.California Department of Transportation, 1998. Technical Noise Supplement. | ||
Exelon, 2012. Byron Generating Station, Exelon Corporation, Website: http://www.exeloncorp.com/ | http://i80.dot.ca.gov/hq/env/noise/pub/Technical%20Noise%20Supplement.pdf, Date accessed: August 3, 2012. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | CERI, 2012. Seismic Information. Center for Earthquake Research and Information, Website: http://folkworm.ceri.memphis.edu/recenteqs/Quakes/quakes0.html), Date accessed: July25, 2012.Chagnon et al., 2004. Changnon, S. A., J. R. Angel, K. E. Kunkel, C. M. B. Lehmann, Climate Atlas of Illinois, Illinois State Water Survey, Champaign Illinois, March, 2004.City of Janesville, 2010. Water Utility, Water Conservation Plan, Website: http://www.ci.janesville.wi.us/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=573, Date accessed: October 5, 2012.City of Janesville, 2011a. City Ordinance Book. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | http://www.ci.janesville.wi.us/index.aspx?page=359, Date accessed: January 4, 2013City of Janesville, 2011b. Janesville Wisconsin's Park Plac e, Development Guide, City of Janesville, Wisconsin, Community Development, Draft April 6, 2011.City of Janesville, 2012a. Water Utility, Summary of Services, Website: http://www.ci.janesville.wi.us | ||
MHS, 2012b. Mercy Hospital and Trauma Center, Mercy Health System, Website: http://www.mercyhealthsystem.org/body.cfm?xyzpdqabc=0&id=10& | /index.aspx?page=115, Date accessed: December 21, 2012.City of Janesville, 2012b. Bus Transit, Website, http://www.ci.jane sville.wi.us/index.aspx?page=124, Date accessed: June 29, 2012.City of Janesville, 2012c. Janesville Transit System Map and Route Guide, http://www.ci.janesville.wi.us/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=854 | ||
NAIP, 2010a. USDA NAIP Imagery. Website: http://www.fsa.usda.gov/FSA/apfoapp?area=home&subject=prog&topic=nai, Date accessed: August 15, 2012.NAIP, 2010b. The National Map Seamless Server Viewer, U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agriculture Imagery Program. Website: http://seamless.usgs.gov/website/seamless/viewer.htm, Date accessed: April 6, 2012.NCDC, 1960. Storm Data, November 1960, Volume 2 No. 11, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. | , Date accessed: July 26, 2012. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-4Rev. 0City of Janesville, 2012d. Economic Development, Business Climate, Taxes, Website: http://www.ci.janesville.wi.us | ||
NCDC, 1971. Storm Data, November 1971, Volume 13 No. 11, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 1975. Storm Data, June 1975 Volume 17 No. 6, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 1980. Storm Data, June 1980, Volume 22 No. 6, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 1988. Storm Data, May 1988, Volume 30 No. 5, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 1991. Storm Data, March 1991, Volume 33 No. 3, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 1992. Storm Data, June 1992, Volume 34 No. 6, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. | /index.aspx?page=334 | ||
NCDC, 1996a. Daily Weather Maps, Weekly Series, July 15-21, 1996, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: October, 2011.NCDC, 1996b. International Station Meteorological Climate Summary, Ver 4.0, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/.NCDC, 1997. Storm Data, July 1996, Volume 38 No. 7, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 1998. Storm Data, June 1998, Volume 40 No. 6, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. | , Date accessed: June 29, 2012.City of Janesville, 2012e. Water Utility, Summary of Services, Website: http://www.ci.janesville.wi.us | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | /index.aspx?page=115, Date accessed: August 1, 2012.City of Janesville, 2012f. Park Locations and Amenities, Website: http://www.ci.janesville.wi.us | ||
NCDC, 2001b. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Arlington Univ Farm, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 2001c. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Baraboo, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. | /index.aspx?page=218, Date accessed: May 22, 2012.Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe, 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States, U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, FWS/OBS-79/31, December 1979.Del Greco, 2006. S. A. Del Greco and collaborators, Surface Data Integration at NOAA's National Climatic Data Center: Data Format, Processing, QC and Product Generation, 86th AMS Annual Meeting, 29 January - 2 February 2006, Atlanta, Georgia.Design Perspectives Inc, 2009. Rock County, WI 2009-2014 Parks, Outdoor Recreation & Open Space Plan, Website: http://www.co.rock.wi.us/images/web_documents/departments/parks/poros_rock_county_2009_final.pdf | ||
NCDC, 2001d. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Beaver Dam, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 2001e. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Beloit, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. | .DOR, 2011. The WI Corporate Income and Franchise Taxes, Wisconsin Department of Revenue, Division of Research and Policy, November 16, 2011, Website: http://www.revenue.wi.gov/ra/ | ||
NCDC, 2001f. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Brodhead, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 2001g. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Charmany Farm, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 2001h. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Dalton, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. | CorpIncFranchTax.pdf | ||
NCDC, 2001i. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, DeKalb, IL, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 2001j. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Fond du Lac, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. | , Date accessed: June 12, 2012.DOR, 2012. Tax Rates, Wisconsin Department of Revenue, Website: http://www.dor.state.wi.us/faqs/pcs/taxrates.html, Date accessed: July 7, 2012.DPI, 2012. 2011-2012 Public Enrollment by County by District by School by Gender, Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction, Website: http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/lbstat/pubdata2.html, Date accessed: June 4, 2012.DWD, 2012. Local Area Unemployment Statistics and Current Employment Statistics programs, Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development, Website: http://dwd.WI.gov/oea/employment_by_industry/#employment_by_industry, Date accessed: June11, 2012.EDS, 1968. Climatic Atlas of the United States, Environmental Data Service, U. S. Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington D. C., 1968.Ellefson, B.R., G.D. Mueller, and C.A. Buchwald, 2002. Water Use in Wisconsin in 2000. U.S.Geological Survey Open-File Report 02-356, prepared by the USGS in Cooperation with the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | Exelon, 2012. Byron Generating Station, Exelon Corporation, Website: http://www.exeloncorp.com/powerplant s/byron/Pages/profile.aspx, Date accessed: April 4, 2012.FAA, 1992. Non-Federal Navigational Aids and Air Traffic Control Facilities, Federal Aviation Administration Order 6700.20A, December 11, 1992. | ||
NCDC, 2001n. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Lake Geneva, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 2001o. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Lake Mills, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-5Rev. 0FAA, 2011. Automated Weather Observing Systems (AWOS) for Non-Federal Applications, Federal Aviation Administration Advisory Circular AC 150/5220-16D. April 28, 2011.FEMA, 2008. Flood Insurance Rate Map, Rock County, Wisconsin and Incorporated Areas, Map Number 55105C0316D, Federal Emergency Management Agency, August 19, 2008.Fenneman, Nevin Melancthon, 1946. Physical Divisions of the United States. Department of the Interior, Geological Survey.Find the Data, 2012. Unbiased, data-driven comparisons, Website: http://active-mines.findthedata.org/compare/2770-2771-2772-6438-6439-6440/Little-Limestone-Inc-vs-Custom-Ditching-Inc-vs-Frank-Bros-Inc-vs-Janesville-Sand-And-Gravel-Co-vs-Frank-Bros-Inc-vs-Paririe-Ave-Concrete-Inc, Date accessed: January 27, 2012.Flynn, Kathleen M., William H. Kirby, and Paul R. Hummel, 2006. User's Manual for Program PeakFQ, Annual Flood-Frequency Analysis Using Bulletin 17B Guidelines, Techniques and Methods 4-B4, U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey, Chapter 4 of Book4, Section B, Techniques and Methods 4-B4.Fry, J., Xian, G., Jin, S., Dewitz, J., Homer, C., Yang, L., Barnes, C., Herold, N., and Wickham, J., 2011. Completion of the 2006 National Land Cover Database for the Conterminous United States, PE&RS, Vol. 77(9):858-864. | ||
NCDC, 2001p. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Madison Dane Co AP, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 2001q. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Marengo, IL, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 2001r. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Oconomowoc, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 2001s. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Portage, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 2001t. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Prairie du Sac 2 N, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. | Google, 2012. Google Maps, Google, http://maps.google.com/, Date accessed: April 4, 2012.Higgins, J.J; G.E. Larson; and K.F. Higgins, 2001. Floristic Comparisons of Tallgrass Prairie Remnants Managed by Different Land Stewardships in Eastern South Dakota, Proceedings of the 17th North American Prairie Conference: 21-31, 2001, Proceedings of the 17 th North American Prairie Conference Website: http://images.library.wisc.edu/EcoNatRes/EFacs/NAPC/NAPC17/reference/econatres.napc17.jhiggins.pdf, Date accessed: August 15, 2012.Holzworth, G.C., 1972. "Mixing Heights, Wind Speeds, and Potential for Urban Air Pollution throughout the Contiguous United States", U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air Programs, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, January 1972. | ||
NCDC, 2001u. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Rockford, IL, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 2001v. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Stoughton, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. | Hormel, 2013. Hormel Foods Corporation, Locations, Website: http://www.hormelfoods.com/About/DivisionsLocations/Locations.aspx, Date accessed: February 14, 2013.Huff, Floyd A. and James R. Angel, 1992. Rainfall Frequency Atlas of the Midwest, Midwestern Climate Analysis Center, National Weather Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and Illinois State Water Survey, A Division of the Illinois Department of Energy and Natural Resources, Bulletin 71, MCC Research Report 92-03, Midwestern Climate Center and Illinois State Water Survey, Champaign, Illinois.Hughes, Denis A., Pauline Hannart and Deidre Watkins, 2003. Continuous Baseflow Separation from Time Series of Daily and Monthly Streamflow Data, Institute for Water Research, Rhodes University, Water SA Vol. 29 No. 1, January 30, 2003. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-6Rev. 0IAEA, 1987. Siting of Research Reactors, Internati onal Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Report IAEA-TECDOC-403, Vienna, Austria. 1987.IHPA, 2013. Historic Architectural Resource Geographic Information System, Illinois Historic Preservation Agency, Website: http://gis.hpa.state.il.us/hargis/, Date accessed: February 14, 2013.Janesville School District, 2012. Welcome to the School District of Janesville, Contact Us, School/Principal Contacts, Website, http://www.janesville.k12.wi.us/default.aspx | ||
NCDC, 2011d. 2010 Local Climatological Data, Annual Summary with Comparative Data, Springfield, Illinois (KSPI), National Climatic Data Center, Asheville North Carolina, 2011.NCDC, 2011e. Climatological Data Annual Summary Illinois 2010, Volume 115, Number 13, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/.NCDC, 2011f. Climatological Data Annual Summary Wisconsin 2010, Volume 115 Number 13, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/.NCDC, 2011g. NCDC Storm Event Database, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www4.ncdc.noaa.gov/cgi- | , Date accessed: July 26, 2012.Knopf, Chad and Kari Krause, 2012. A Phase I Archaeological Survey of the Proposed SHINE Medical Isotope Production Facility Near Janesville, Rock County, Wisconsin. AMEC, Louisville, Kentucky.Korshover, J., 1967. "Climatology of Stagnating Anticyclones East of the Rocky Mountains 1936-1965", U.S. Department of Health Education and Welfare Public Health Service (PHS), PHS Publication No. 999-AP-34, National Center for Air Pollution Control, Cincinnati, Ohio, 1967.LeRoux E.F., 1963. Geology and Ground-Water Resources of Rock County, Wisconsin, Geological Survey, Water-Supply Paper 1619-X, Prepared in cooperation with the Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey.MacFarlane Pheasants, Inc., 2012. MacFarlane Pheasants, Inc., Website: http://www.pheasant.com/Home/tabid/38/Default.aspx, Date accessed: June 22, 2012.MHS, 2012a. Mercy Clinic South, Mercy Health System, Website: | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | http://www.mercyhealthsystem.org/body.cfm?xyzpdqabc=0&id=10&acti on=detail&ref=42 | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | , Date accessed: April 4, 2012. | ||
MHS, 2012b. Mercy Hospital and Trauma Center, Mercy Health System, Website: | |||
http://www.mercyhealthsystem.org/body.cfm?xyzpdqabc=0&id=10&acti on=detail&ref=54 | |||
, Date accessed: April 4, 2012.Moran, J. M. and E. J. Hopkins, 2002. Wisconsin's Weather and Climate, The University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, Wisconsin, 2002. | |||
NAIP, 2010a. USDA NAIP Imagery. Website: http://www.fsa.usda.gov/FSA/apfoapp?area=home&subject=prog&topic=nai, Date accessed: August 15, 2012.NAIP, 2010b. The National Map Seamless Server Viewer, U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agriculture Imagery Program. Website: http://seamless.usgs.gov/website/seamless/viewer.htm, Date accessed: April 6, 2012. | |||
NCDC, 1960. Storm Data, November 1960, Volume 2 No. 11, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-7Rev. 0NCDC, 1961. Storm Data, September 1961, Volume 3 No. 9, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 1967a. Storm Data, April 1967, Volume 9 No. 4, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 1967b. Storm Data, August 1967, Volume 9 No. 8, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 1970. Storm Data, October 1970, Volume 12 No. 10, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 1971. Storm Data, November 1971, Volume 13 No. 11, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 1975. Storm Data, June 1975 Volume 17 No. 6, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 1980. Storm Data, June 1980, Volume 22 No. 6, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 1988. Storm Data, May 1988, Volume 30 No. 5, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 1991. Storm Data, March 1991, Volume 33 No. 3, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 1992. Storm Data, June 1992, Volume 34 No. 6, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 1996a. Daily Weather Maps, Weekly Series, July 15-21, 1996, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: October, 2011.NCDC, 1996b. International Station Meteorological Climate Summary, Ver 4.0, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
.NCDC, 1997. Storm Data, July 1996, Volume 38 No. 7, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 1998. Storm Data, June 1998, Volume 40 No. 6, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-8Rev. 0NCDC, 1999. Daily Weather Maps, Weekly Series, December 28 1998 - January 3, 1999, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2000. Storm Data, January 1999, Volume 41 No. 1, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 2001a. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Arboretum Univ Wis, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2001b. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Arlington Univ Farm, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2001c. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Baraboo, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2001d. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Beaver Dam, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2001e. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Beloit, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2001f. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Brodhead, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2001g. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Charmany Farm, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2001h. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Dalton, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2001i. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, DeKalb, IL, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 2001j. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Fond du Lac, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-9Rev. 0NCDC, 2001k. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Fort Atkinson, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2001l. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Hartford 2 W, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2001m. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Horicon, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2001n. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Lake Geneva, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2001o. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Lake Mills, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2001p. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Madison Dane Co AP, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2001q. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Marengo, IL, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2001r. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Oconomowoc, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2001s. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Portage, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2001t. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Prairie du Sac 2 N, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2001u. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Rockford, IL, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2001v. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Stoughton, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-10Rev. 0NCDC, 2001w. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Watertown, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2001x. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Wisconsin Dells, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 2002. Climate Atlas of the United States, Version 2.0 CD, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
.NCDC, 2005a. Data Documentation for Data Set 3280 (DSI-3280) Surface Airways Hourly, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, May 4, 2005. | |||
NCDC, 2005b. Storm Data, August 2005, Volume 47 No. 8, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 2006. Federal Climate Complex Data Documentation for Integrated Surface Data, National Climatic Data Center Air Force Combat Climatology Center Fleet Numerical Meteorology and Oceanography Detachment, Asheville, North Carolina, August 25, 2006. | |||
NCDC, 2008. Storm Data, January 2008 Volume 50 No. 1, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 2011a. 2010 Local Climatological Data, Annual Summary with Comparative Data, Madison, Wisconsin (KMSN), National Climatic Data Center, Asheville North Carolina, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2011b. 2010 Local Climatological Data, Annual Summary with Comparative Data, Moline, Illinois (KMLI), National Climatic Data Center, Asheville North Carolina, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2011c. 2010 Local Climatological Data, Annual Summary with Comparative Data, Rockford, Illinois (KRFD), National Climatic Data Center, Asheville North Carolina, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2011d. 2010 Local Climatological Data, Annual Summary with Comparative Data, Springfield, Illinois (KSPI), National Climatic Data Center, Asheville North Carolina, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2011e. Climatological Data Annual Summary Illinois 2010, Volume 115, Number 13, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
.NCDC, 2011f. Climatological Data Annual Summary Wisconsin 2010, Volume 115 Number 13, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ | |||
.NCDC, 2011g. | |||
NCDC Storm Event Database, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: | |||
http://www4.ncdc.noaa.gov/cgi-wi n/wwcgi.dll?wwEvent~Storms | |||
, Date accessed: November, 2011. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-11Rev. 0NCDC, 2011h. TD3280 - Airways Surface Observations, Surface weather observations in TD 3280 digital format from 1948-2009, for NWS-Madison, WI. National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), data purchased from NCDC, Asheville, NC. | |||
NCDC, 2011i. TD 3280 - Airways Surface Observations, Surface weather observations in TD 3280 digital format from 1973-2009, for NWS-Rockford, IL. National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), data purchased from NCDC, Asheville, NC. | |||
NCDC, 2011j. TD3505 - Airways Surface Observations, Surface weather observations in TD 3505 digital format from 2005-2010, for NWS-Madison, WI. National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), data purchased from NCDC, Asheville, NC. | |||
NCDC, 2011k. TD3505 - Airways Surface Observations, Surface weather observations in TD 3505 digital format from 2005-2010, for NWS-Rockford, IL. National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), data purchased from NCDC, Asheville, NC. | |||
NCDC, 2011l. TD3505 - Airways Surface Observations, Surface weather observations in TD 3505 digital format from 2005-2010, for Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, Janesville, WI. National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), data purchased from NCDC, Asheville, NC. | |||
NCDC, 2011m. TD3505 - archive data server. Accessed from: ftp://ftp3.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/noaa/. National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), | |||
data purchased from NCDC, Asheville, NC, Date accessed: December, 2011. | |||
NCDC, 2012a. Data file "anem_elev_inf" referenced in "Data Documentation for Data Set 6421 (DSI-6421) Enhanced hourly wind station data for the contiguous United States" National Climatic Data Center, Asheville North Carolina. Website: | |||
http://www.wcc.nrcs.usda.gov/ftpref/support/climate/wind_daily/td6421.pdf | |||
. NCDC, 2012b. Data file "ISH-HISTORY.TXT" Integrated Surface Database Station History, June 2012. National Climatic Data Center, Asheville North Carolina. Website: ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/inventories/ISH-HISTORY.TXT. Date accessed: July, 2012.NLSI, 2011. Vaisala 5-Year Flash Density Map - U. S. (1996-2000), National Lightning Safety Institute (NLSI), Website: http://www.lightningsafety.com/nlsi_info/lightningmaps/US_FD_Lightning.pdf, Date accessed: December, 2011.NOAA, 1999. Air Stagnation Climatology for the United States (1948-1998), Julian X.L. Wang and J.K. Angell. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Air Resources Laboratory, Environmental Research Laboratories, Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research Silver Spring, MD 20910, April 1999.NOAA, 2012. Summary of Monthly Normals, 1981-2010, Afton, Wisconsin.NPS, 2011. Class I Area Locations, National Park Service, U.S. Department of Interior (NPS). Available from: http://www.nature.nps.gov/air/Maps/classILoc.cfm, Date accessed: December, 2011.NRC, 2012a. Sources of Radiation, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Website: http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/radiat ion/around-us/sources.html, Date accessed: April 4, 2012. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-12Rev. 0NRC, 2012b. Natural Background Sources, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Website: http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/radiation/around-us/sources/nat-bg-sources.html, Date accessed: April 4, 2012.NRC, 2012c. Man-Made Sources, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Website: http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/radiation/around-us/sources/man-made-sources.html, Date accessed: April 4, 2012.Olcott, Perry G., 1968. A Summary of Geology and Mineral and Water Resources of Rock County, Open-File Report 68-4. University of Wisconsin-Extension, Geological and Natural History Survey, Madison, Wisconsin.Olcott, Perry G., 1992. Groundwater Atlas of the United States Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin. HA 730-J, United States Geologic Survey. | |||
Omernik, J.M, S.S. Chapman, R.A. Lillie, and R.T. Dumke, 2008. Ecoregions of Wisconsin. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. May 2008. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/org/water/swims/datasets/omernik_eco/index.htm, Dated accessed: July 24, 2012.Rand McNally, 1982. Goode's World Atlas, 16th edition, Rand McNally & Company, Skokie, Illinois, 1982. | Omernik, J.M, S.S. Chapman, R.A. Lillie, and R.T. Dumke, 2008. Ecoregions of Wisconsin. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. May 2008. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/org/water/swims/datasets/omernik_eco/index.htm, Dated accessed: July 24, 2012.Rand McNally, 1982. Goode's World Atlas, 16th edition, Rand McNally & Company, Skokie, Illinois, 1982. | ||
Rand McNally, 2005. Goode's World Atlas, 21st edition, Rand McNally & Company, Skokie, Illinois, 2005. | Rand McNally, 2005. Goode's World Atlas, 21st edition | ||
Robertson, Ken, 2008. The Tallgrass Prairie in Illinois, Illinois Natural History Survey. Website: http://www.inhs.uiuc.edu/~kenr/tallgrass.html, Date accessed: August 6, 2012.Rock County, 2005. Rock County Floodplain Zoning, Chapter 32 of the Code of Ordinances, Adopted July 14, 2005, Resolution 05-6B-248, Amended June 26, 2008, Resolution 08-6A-024, and Amended August 28, 2008, Resolution 08-8A-060.Rock County, 2009. Rock County Comprehensive Plan 2035, Rock County, WI, http://www.co.rock.wi.us/images/ | , Rand McNally & Company, Skokie, Illinois, 2005. | ||
Rock County, 2012a. County Facts, Rock County, Wisconsin Website: http://www.co.rock.wi.us, Date accessed: January, 2012. | Robertson, Ken, 2008. The Tallgrass Prairie in Illinois, Illinois Natural History Survey. Website: http://www.inhs.uiuc.edu/~kenr/tallgrass.html, Date accessed: August 6, 2012.Rock County, 2005. Rock County Floodplain Zoning, Chapter 32 of the Code of Ordinances, Adopted July 14, 2005, Resolution 05-6B-248, Amended June 26, 2008, Resolution 08-6A-024, and Amended August 28, 2008, Resolution 08-8A-060.Rock County, 2009. Rock County Comprehensive Plan 2035, Rock County, WI, http://www.co.rock.wi.us/images/w eb_documents/departments/pl anning_developm ent/plans/comprehensive_plan_2035/2035_final_II_1_issues_opportunities.pdf | ||
Rock County, 2012b. Magnolia Bluff State Natural Area, Rock County, Wisconsin Website: http://www.co.rock.wi.us/, Date accessed: January, 2012.Rock County, 2012c. Rock County Parks-Happy Hollow Park. State of Wisconsin, Rock County, Website: http://www.co.rock.wi.us/images/web_documents/departments/parks/park_happy_hollow/happy_hollow_brochure.pdf, Date accessed: August 13, 2012 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | .Rock County, 2011. Rock County GIS Website. Website: http://199.233.45.152/Rock/, Date accessed: August 15, 2012. | ||
SSURGO, 2010. Soil Survey Staff, NRCS,USDA, | Rock County, 2012a. County Facts, Rock County, Wisconsin Website: http://www.co.rock.wi.us | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | , Date accessed: January, 2012. | ||
Rock County, 2012b. Magnolia Bluff State Natural Area, Rock County, Wisconsin Website: http://www.co.rock.wi.us/, Date accessed: January, 2012.Rock County, 2012c. Rock County Parks-Happy Hollow Park. State of Wisconsin, Rock County, Website: http://www.co.rock.wi.us/images/web_documents/departments/parks/park_happy_hollow/happy_hollow_brochure.pdf, Date accessed: August 13, 2012 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-13Rev. 0Rock County Development Alliance, 2011. Rock County Bond Rating Data, Website: http://www.rockcountyalliance.com/Portals/1/Aug%202011%20Bond%20Rating%20ED%20Report.pdf | |||
, Date accessed: March 1, 2012.Rock County Planning, Economic & Community Development Agency, 2009 | |||
. Rock County Comprehensive Plan 2035, Map 3.2, Website: http://www.co.rock.wi.us/images/web_documents/departments/planning_development/plans/comprehensive_plan_2035/2035_final_table_of_contents.pdf, Adopted September 9, 2009.Sloto, Ronald A. and Michele Y. Crouse, 1996. HYSEP: A Computer Program for Streamflow Hydrograph Separation and Analysis, U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 96-4040.Smith, Daryl D., 1990. Tallgrass Prairie Settlement: Prelude to Demise of the Tallgrass Ecosystem, Proceedings of the 12th North American Prairie Conference: 195-200, 1990, Proceedings of the 12th North American Prairie Conference, Website: http://images.library.wisc.edu/EcoNatRes/EFacs/NAPC/NAPC12/reference/econatres.napc12.dsmith.pdf, Date accessed: August 15, 2012.Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, 2004. Noise Contour Map, Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, Land Use Drawing, prepared by Mead & Hunt. Latest revision date, August, 2004. Date accessed: July 3, 2012.Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, 2012a. Airport, Facilities and Facts, Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, Website: | |||
http://www.jvlairport.com/Air port/FacilitiesFacts.aspx | |||
, Date accessed: April 2, 2012.Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, 2012b. Airport Facilities and Facts, Website: http://www.jvlairport.com/Airport/FacilitiesFacts.aspx, Date accessed: July 12, 2012.Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, 2012c. General Aviation Terminal Project Advances, Website: http://www.jvlairport.com/NewsUpdates/CapitalImprovementPlans.aspx, Date accessed: July 20, 2012. | |||
SSURGO, 2010. Soil Survey Staff, NRCS,USDA, SSUR GO Database for Rock County, WI. Website: http://soildatamart.nrcs.usda.gov, Date accessed: August 15, 2012.Stern, A.C., 1973. "Fundamentals of Air Pollution", Academic Press, New York, New York, 1973.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.SWWDB, 2009. Rock County Profile, Website: http://www.swwdb.org/PDFs/Region/Rock%20County%20Profile%20-%20Revised%2011-23-09.pdf, Date accessed: June 7, 2012. | |||
TBEES, 2011. Byron Nuclear Generating Station Units 1 and 2: Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report, 1 January Through 31 December 2010, ADAMS Database Accession Number ML11137A061, Exelon Nuclear, May 13, 2011. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-14Rev. 0Trewartha, G. T., 1954. An Introduction to Climate, McGraw Hill Book Company, New York, New York, 1954.Trewartha, G. T., 1961. The Earth's Problem Climates, The University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, Wisconsin, 1961. | |||
Turner, D.B, 1964. A Diffusion Model for an Urban Area, Journal of Applied Meteorology, Vol. 3, pp 83-91. February, 1964. | Turner, D.B, 1964. A Diffusion Model for an Urban Area, Journal of Applied Meteorology, Vol. 3, pp 83-91. February, 1964. | ||
USACE, 2009. Interim Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Northcentral and Northeast Region, ERDC/EL TR-09-19, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, October 2009.USCB, 2000a. Summary File 1, American FactFinder, U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, Website: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml. Date accessed: June 7, 2012.USCB, 2000b. Summary File 3, American FactFinder, U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S.Census Bureau, Website: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml, Date accessed: June 7, 2012.USCB, 2008-2010. Three Year American Community Survey (ACS), American Factfinder, U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, Website: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml, Date accessed: June14, 2012.USCB, 2010a. 2010 Census TIGER/Line Shapefiles. U.S. Census Bureau, Geography Division, Geographic Productions Branch, Website: http://www.census.gov/geo/www/tiger/tgrshp2010/tgrshp2010.html, Date accessed: August 15, 2012.USCB, 2010b. 2010 Census TIGER/Line Shapefiles, United States Census Bureau, Geography Division, Geographic Productions Branch, Website: http://www.census.gov/geo/www/tiger/tgrshp2010/tgrshp2010.html Date Accessed: August 15, 2012.USCB, 2010c. Demographic Profile 1, American Factfinder http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml, Date accessed: April 25, 2012.USCB, 2010d. Summary File 1, American FactFinder, U.S. Department of Commerce, US Census Bureau, Website: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml, Date accessed: June 7, 2012.USCB, 2011. County and City Data Book: 2007, Website: http://www.census.gov/prod/www/abs/ccdb07.html, Date accessed: November, 2011.USCB, 2012. Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) System web page: http://www.census.gov/epcd/ec97brdg/E97B1325.HTM, Date accessed: December 20, 2012.USDA NRCS, 2012a. SSURGO Database for Rock County, WI, Soil Data Mart. Website: http://soildatamart.nrcs.usda.gov, Date accessed: August 15, 2012. | USACE, 2009. Interim Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Northcentral and Northeast Region, ERDC/EL TR-09-19, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, October 2009.USCB, 2000a. Summary File 1, American FactFinder, U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, Website: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | . Date accessed: June 7, 2012.USCB, 2000b. Summary File 3, American FactFinder, U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S.Census Bureau, Website: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml, Date accessed: June 7, 2012.USCB, 2008-2010. Three Year American Community Survey (ACS), American Factfinder, U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, Website: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml, Date accessed: June14, 2012.USCB, 2010a. 2010 Census TIGER/Line Shapefiles. U.S. Census Bureau, Geography Division, Geographic Productions Branch, Website: http://www.census.gov/geo/www/tiger/tgrshp2010/tgrshp2010.html, Date accessed: August 15, 2012.USCB, 2010b. 2010 Census TIGER/Line Shapefiles, United States Census Bureau, Geography Division, Geographic Productions Branch, Website: http://www.census.gov/geo/www/tiger/tgrshp2010/tgrshp2010.html Date Accessed: August 15, 2012.USCB, 2010c. Demographic Profile 1, American Factfinder http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml, Date accessed: April 25, 2012.USCB, 2010d. Summary File 1, American FactFinder, U.S. Department of Commerce, US Census Bureau, Website: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml | ||
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, 1999. PCRAMMET.FOR," FORTRAN program, version 99169. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Technology Transfer Networks Support Center for Regulatory Atmospheric Modeling. Computer code available from: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/metobsdata_procaccprogs.htm, June, 1999.USEPA. 2008. Clean Watersheds Needs Survey, 2008 Data and Reports, Detailed listing of Wastewater Treatment Plant Flows for State of Wisconsin, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Website: http://water.epa.gov/scitech/datait/databases/cwns/2008reportdata.cfm, Date accessed: July 19, 2012.USEPA, 2009. Environmental Radiation Data, Report 139, July - September 2009, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Radiation and Indoor Air. | , Date accessed: June 7, 2012.USCB, 2011. County and City Data Book: 2007, Website: | ||
USEPA, 2011. Non-Attainment Status for Each County by year in Wisconsin as of August 30, 2011. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), Website: http://www.epa.gov/oaqps001/greenbk/anay_wi.html, Date accessed: December, 2011. | http://www.census.gov/prod/www/abs/ccdb07.html, Date accessed: November, 2011.USCB, 2012. Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) System web page: http://www.census.gov/epcd/ec97brdg/E97B1325.HTM, Date accessed: December 20, 2012. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | USDA NRCS, 2012a. SSURGO Database for Rock County, WI, Soil Data Mart. Website: http://soildatamart.nrcs.usda.gov, Date accessed: August 15, 2012. | ||
USEPA, 2012c. Designated Sole Source | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-15Rev. 0USDA NRCS, 2012b. Web Soil Survey. Website: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/HomePage.htm, Date accessed: August 13, 2012USDA, 1998. Rural Utilities Service Summary of Items of Engineering Interest, U. S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), August, 1998.USDA, 2011. Census of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Website: http://www.nass.usda.gov/Dataandstatistics/index.asp. Date accessed: June 24, 2012.USDA-SCS, 1974. Soil Survey of Rock County, Wisconsin. In cooperation with University of Wisconsin Department of Soil Science, Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey and the Wisconsin Agricultural Experiment Station, July 1974. | ||
USEPA, 2012d. Ecoregion Maps and GIS Resources, USEPA Western Ecology Division, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Website: http://www.epa.gov/wed/pages/ecoregions.htm, Date accessed: July 24, 2012.USEPA, 2012e. EnviroMapper for Envirofacts, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Website: http://www.epa.gov/emefdata/em4ef.html?ve=11,42.70109176635742,-89.08168029785156&pText=Janesville,%20WIUSFWS, 2012. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Resource Review and Input Response Letter from Peter J. Fasbender dated January 25, 2012.USGS, 1980. Rockford, Illinois; Wisconsin (Eastern U. S.) 1:250,000 Series (Topographic) Map, U. S. Geological Survey (USGS), Reston, Virginia 1980.USGS, 1981. U.S. Geological Survey Janesville quadrangle,Wisconsin [map].1:24,000. 7.5 Minute Series.Washington D.C.: USGS, 1981. | USDOC, 1978. Probable Maximum Precipitation Estimates, United States East of the 105th Meridian, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of the Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Department of Commerce (USDOC), Hydrometeorological Report No. 51. Washington, D.C. 1978. | ||
USGS, 2007. Protecting Wisconsin's Groundwater Through Comprehensive Planning, Rock County, U.S. Geological Survey, Website: http://wi.water.usgs.gov/gwcomp/find/rock/index_full.html, Date accessed: July 19,2012.USGS, 2012a. Volcano Environments, U.S. Geological Survey, Website: http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/volc/environments.html, Date accessed: September 11, 2012.USGS, 2012b. National Water Information System: Web Interface: http://waterdata.usgs.gov/wi/nwis/sw, Date accessed: August 13, 2012.USGS, 2012c. Protecting Wisconsin's Groundwater Through Comprehensive Planning, Website: (http://wi.water.usgs.gov/gwcomp/find/rock/index_full.html), Date accessed: December 21, 2012.USGS, 2012d. North American Breeding Bird Survey-Route 91320 (Beloit), 1966-2007. United States Geological Survey, Website: http://www.mgr-pwrc.usgs.gov/cgi-bin.rtena226.pl?91320, Date accessed: February 2, 2012.UWNR, 2011a. University of Wisconsin - Issuance of Renewed Facility License No. R-74 for the University of Wisconsin Nuclear Reactor (TAC. No. ME1585), ADAMS Database Accession Number ML102370104, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, March 25, 2011. | USDOI-BIA, 2012. Agency Letter: Map of All Ho-Chunk Trust Lands within a 50-Mile Radius of the Proposed SHINE Isotope Facility of Janesville WI, U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Great Lakes Agency, March 2012. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | USDOI-BLM, 1984. Visual Resource Inventory Manual H-8410-1, U.S. Department of Land Management, Bureau of Land Management, January 1986. | ||
Walker, J.F. and W.R. Krug, 2003. Flood-Frequency Characteristics of Wisconsin Streams, Water-Resources Investigations Report 03-4250. U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Wisconsin Department of Transportation.WBBA, 2012. Wisconsin Breeding Bird Atlas, Breeding Birds from the Janesville East Quad and the Janesville West Quad, 1995-2000. University of Wisconsin-Green Bay, Website: http://www.uwgb.edu/birds/wbba/quadlist.asp, Date accessed: February 2, 2012.WDNR, 2009. State Wildlife Areas, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | 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, 1999. PCRAMMET.FOR," FORTRAN program, version 99169. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Technology Transfer Networks Support Center for Regulatory Atmospheric Modeling. Computer code available from: | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | http://www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/metobsdata_procaccprogs.htm, June, 1999. | ||
California Energy Commission, 2009. Orange Grove Energy, L.P., Orange Grove Project, Application for Certification (08-AFC-4), San Diego County, Volume 3, Appendix 6.12 B, April 2009.Chepesiuk, Ron, 2009. Missing the Dark, Health Effects of Light Pollution, Environmental Health Perspectives, Volume 117, Number 1, January 2009.City of Janesville, 2012a. Tax Increment Finance District No. 35 Project Plan, Adopted August 22, 2011, Amendment No. 1, February 13, 2012.City of Janesville, 2012b. Tax Increment Finance District No. 35 Project Plan. Amendment No. 1, Website: | USEPA. 2008. Clean Watersheds Needs Survey, 2008 Data and Reports, Detailed listing of Wastewater Treatment Plant Flows for State of Wisconsin, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Website: http://water.epa.gov/scitech/datait/databases/cwns/2008reportdata.cfm, Date accessed: July 19, 2012. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies19.7-20Rev. 1CEQ, 1997. Considering Cumulative Effects Under the National Environmental Policy Act, Council on Environmental Quality, Executive Office of the President.DOE, 2012. Environmental Assessment for Northstar Medical Technologies LLC Commercial Domestic Production of the Medical Isotope Molybdenum-99 (DOE/EA-1929), U.S. Department of Energy, Website: http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/EA-1929-FEA-2012.pdf, Date accessed: October 9, 2012. | USEPA, 2009. Environmental Radiation Data, Report 139, July - September 2009, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Radiation and Indoor Air. | ||
DOR, 2012. County and Municipal Revenues and Expenditures 2010, Bulletin No. 110, January 2012, Website: http://www.revenue.wi.gov/slf/cotvc/cmreb10.pdf, Date accessed: August 19, 2012.DPI, 2012a. 2011-2012 Staff to Students Ratio, Website: http://data.dpi.state.wi.us/data/StaffPage.aspx?OrgLevel=st&GraphFile=BlankPageUrl&, Date accessed: October 22, 2012.DPI, 2012b. 2011-2012 Public Enrollment by County by District by School by Gender, Website: http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/lbstat/pubdata2.html, Date accessed: June 4, 2012.Fry, J., Xian, G., Jin, S., Dewitz, J., Homer, C., Yang, L., Barnes, C., Herold, N., and Wickham, J., 2011. National Land Cover Database 2006, Land Cover Change 2001/2006, National Land Cover Database for the Conterminous United States, PE&RS, Volume 77(9):858-864, September 2011.Hastings, 2011. Hastings HVAC Bulletin No. IRHS-1. | |||
NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, 2012. NorthStar Medical Technologies, Hendricks Commercial Properties Sign Agreement for Beloit Facility Development, Website: http://www.northstarnm.com/index.php?module=cms&page=31, Date accessed: October 9, 2012.NRC, 1977. Methods for Estimating Atmospheric Transport and Dispersion of Gaseous Effluents in Routine Releases from Light-Water-Cooled Reactors, Regulatory Guide 1.111, Revision 1, U.S.Nuclear Regulatory Commission, July 1977. | USEPA, 2011. Non-Attainment Status for Each County by year in Wisconsin as of August 30, 2011. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), Website: | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies19.7-21Rev. 1NRC, 2004. Policy Statement on the Treatment of Environmental Justice Matters in NRC Regulatory and Licensing Actions (69 FR 52040), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, August 24, 2004.NRC, 2009. Office Instruction No. LIC 203, Revision 2, Procedural Guidance for Preparing Environmental Assessments and Considering | http://www.epa.gov/oaqps001/greenbk/anay_wi.html, Date accessed: December, 2011. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-16Rev. 0USEPA, 2012a. Level III and IV Ecoregions of the Wisconsin U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Western Ecology Division, Level III and IV Ecoregions of the Continental United States, Website: http://www.epa.gov/wed/pages/ecoregions/level_iii_iv.htm, Date accessed: March 7, 2012.USEPA, 2012b. | ||
http://cfpub.epa.gov/surf/huc.cfm?huc_code=07090001. Date accessed: August 13, 2012. | |||
USEPA, 2012c. Designated Sole Source Aqui fers in EPA Region V, Website: | |||
(http://www.epa.gov/safewater/sourcewater/pubs/qrg_ssamap_reg5.pdf), Date accessed: October 5, 2012. | |||
USEPA, 2012d. Ecoregion Maps and GIS Resources, USEPA Western Ecology Division, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Website: http://www.epa.gov/wed/pages/ | |||
ecoregions.htm, Date accessed: July 24, 2012. | |||
USEPA, 2012e. EnviroMapper for Envirofacts, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Website: http://www.epa.gov/emefdata/em4ef.html?ve=11,42.70109176635742,-89.08168029785156&pText=Janesville,%20WIUSFWS, 2012. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Resource Review and Input Response Letter from Peter J. Fasbender dated January 25, 2012.USGS, 1980. Rockford, Illinois; Wisconsin (Eastern U. S.) 1:250,000 Series (Topographic) Map, U. S. Geological Survey (USGS), Reston, Virginia 1980.USGS, 1981. | |||
U.S. Geological Survey Janesville quadrangle,Wisconsin [map].1:24,000. 7.5 Minute Series.Washington D.C.: USGS, 1981. | |||
USGS, 2007. Protecting Wisconsin's Groundwater Through Comprehensive Planning, Rock County, U.S. Geological Survey, Website: http://wi.water.usgs.gov/gwcomp/find/rock/ | |||
index_full.html, Date accessed: July 19,2012.USGS, 2012a. Volcano Environments, U.S. Geological Survey, Website: http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/volc/environments.html, Date accessed: September 11, 2012.USGS, 2012b. National Water Information System: Web Interface: http://waterdata.usgs.gov/wi/ | |||
nwis/sw, Date accessed: August 13, 2012.USGS, 2012c. Protecting Wisconsin's Groundwater Through Comprehensive Planning, Website: | |||
(http://wi.water.usgs.gov/gwcomp/find/rock/index_full.html), Date accessed: December 21, 2012.USGS, 2012d. North American Breeding Bird Survey-Route 91320 (Beloit), 1966-2007. United States Geological Survey, Website: | |||
http://www.mgr-pwrc.usgs.gov | |||
/cgi-bin.rtena226.pl?91320 | |||
, Date accessed: February 2, 2012.UWNR, 2011a. University of Wisconsin - Issuance of Renewed Facility License No. R-74 for the University of Wisconsin Nuclear Reactor (TAC. No. ME1585), ADAMS Database Accession Number ML102370104, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, March 25, 2011. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-17Rev. 0UWNR, 2011b. University of Wisconsin - Madison Nuclear Reactor Laboratory Ltr. Enclosing Copy of 2010-2011 Annual Report as Required by Technical Specification 6.7.1 (1), ADAMS Database Accession Number ML11216A303, University of Wisconsin Nuclear Reactor, August 1, 2011.Vandewalle & Associates, 2006. City of Beloit 2006-2010 Parks and Open Space Plan, Adopted: November 20, 2006. Website: http://www.ci.beloit.wi.us/vertical/sites/%7B4AECD64A-01FA-4C24-8F53-D3281732C6AB%7D/uploads/%7B6900F9BC-BC53-49B3-99F4-B0C1670991FA%7D.PDF, Date accessed: July 26, 2012.Vandewalle & Associates, 2009a. City of Janesville Comprehensive Plan, Volume 1: Existing Conditions Report | |||
, Adopted on March 9, 2009, Website: http://www.ci.janesvi lle.wi.us/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=1449, Date accessed: July 26, 2012.Vandewalle & Associates, 2009b. City of Janesville Comprehensive Plan, Volume 2: Policies and Recommendations, 2009, March 2009. | |||
Walker, J.F. and W.R. Krug, 2003. Flood-Frequency Characteristics of Wisconsin Streams, Water-Resources Investigations Report 03-4250. U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Wisconsin Department of Transportation. | |||
WBBA, 2012. Wisconsin Breeding Bird Atlas, Breeding Birds from the Janesville East Quad and the Janesville West Quad, 1995-2000. University of Wisconsin-Green Bay, Website: http://www.uwgb.edu/birds/wbba/quadlist.asp, Date accessed: February 2, 2012. | |||
WDNR, 2009. State Wildlife Areas, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: | |||
http://dnr.wi.gov/org/land/wildlife/wildlife_areas/ | |||
, Date accessed: June 14, 2012. | |||
WDNR, 2010a. DNR Managed Lands web mapping application. Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/Lands/DMLmap/, Date accessed: August 15, 2012. | |||
WDNR, 2010b. Regulated Terrestrial Invasive Plants in WI, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, DNR PUB-FR-464-2010, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/files/pdf/pubs/fr/FR0464.pdf, Date accessed: August 6, 2012. | |||
WDNR, 2011a. Air Monitoring Network Plan 2012, June 2011. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR), Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/air/pdf/2012_Network_Plan_FINAL.pdf | |||
, Date accessed: December, 2012 | |||
.WDNR, 2011b. Water Use Registration and Reporting, June 2011, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: | |||
http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/WaterUse/documents/RegReportFactSheet.pdf, Date accessed: February 14, 2013. | |||
WDNR, 2012a. Ozone Non Attainment Areas, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR), Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/air/aq/ozone/nonattainment.htm#2007request, Date accessed: January, 2012. | |||
WDNR, 2012b. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Wisconsin Lakes web page - maps and inventory, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/lakes/, Date accessed: August 15, 2012. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-18Rev. 0WDNR, 2012c. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Endangered Resources Review (ERR#12-020), Proposed SHINE Medial Technologies Industrial Development, Town of Janesville, Rock County, WI. | |||
WDNR, 2012d. Rock River Prairie State Natural Area, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/org/land/er/sna/index.asp?SNA=289, Date accessed: August13, 2012 WDNR, 2012e. WDNR Fish Mapping Application. Search Criteria: >1980, Rock River, Rock County. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: http://infotrek.er.usgs.gov/ | |||
fishmap, Date accessed: July 11, 2012. | |||
WDNR, 2012f. Wisconsin Wildlife Primer: Reptiles and Amphibians. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/org/land/wildlife/PUBL/wildlifeprimam.pdf, Date accessed: August 15, 2012. | |||
WDNR, 2012g. Blanding's Turtle (Emydoidea blandingii). Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/EndangeredResources/Animals.asp?mode=detail&SpecCode=ARAAD04010. Date accessed: August 14, 2012. | |||
WDNR, 2012h. Invasives Rule - NR 40, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/invasives/classification.html, Date accessed: August 6, 2012.WHS, 2012a. Response to AMEC GIS Data Information Request for Properties within 10-mile Radius of SHINE Site, Wisconsin Historical Society.WHS, 2012b, Request for SHPO Comment and Consultation on a Federal Undertaking, Wisconsin Historical Society February 16, 2012.WHS, 2013. Wisconsin National Register of Historic Properties, Wisconsin Historical Society, Website: http://www.wisconsinhistory.org/hp/register/, Date accessed: February 13, 2013.Will-Wolf, S, and T.C. Montague, 1994. Landscape and Environmental Constraints on the Distribution of Presettlement Savannas and Prairies in Southern Wisconsin, Proceedings, North American Conference on Savannas and Barrens. Website: http://www.epa.gov/ecopage/upland/oak/oak94/Proceedings/Will-wolf.html, Date accessed: August 6, 2012.Wisconsin Department of Health Services, 2010. Rock County Environmental Health Profile, 2010, Website: http://www.dhs.wisconsin.gov/epht/CHP/Rock_profile.pdf | |||
.Wisconsin Department of Health Services, 2012. Rock County Environmental Health Profile, Website: http://www.dhs.wisconsin.gov/epht/CHP/Rock_profile.pdf, October 2010.Wisconsin Geological Survey, 2011. Educational Series 51, Available at: | |||
http://wisconsingeologicalsurvey.org/pdfs/espdf/ES51.pdf, Date accessed: November 8, 2012Wisconsin State Climatology Office, 2006. Monthly Historical State Climate Summaries, South Central Wisconsin Divisional Average Precipitation (inches), Website: | |||
http://www.aos.wisc.edu/~sco/clim-history/division/4708-R.html, Date accessed: August 15, 2012. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-19Rev. 0WisDOT, 2010. 2010, Lower Half, City of Janesville, Rock County, Daily Traffic Volume Map, Wisconsin Department of Transportation, Website: | |||
http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/travel/counts/docs/rock/janesville-2-2010.pdf | |||
, Date accessed: March 1, 2012.Woods, A.J., J.M. Omernik, C.L. Pederson, and B.C. Moran. 2006. Level III and IV Ecoregions of Illinois, September 2006.Zaporozec, Alexander, 1982. Ground-Water Quality of Rock County, Wisconsin, Information Circular Number 41, Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey in cooperation with Rock County Division Of Environmental Health, March 1982.19.7.4IMPACTS OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION, OPERATIONS, AND DECOMMISSIONINGAirNav, 2013. Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, Website: http://www.airnav.com/airport/KJVL, Date accessed: January 16, 2013.Beloit Daily News, 2011. High-tech firm picks Beloit for $194 million development, Website: http://www.beloitdailynews.com/news/top_news/high-tech-firm-picks-beloit-for-million-d/, Date accessed: August 21, 2012.BLS, 2009. May 2009 Metropolitan and Nonmetropolitan Area Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Website: http://www.bls.gov/oes/2009/may/oes_27500.html, Date accessed: July 19, 2012.BLS, 2011. May 2009 Metropolitan and Nonmetropolitan Area Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Website: http://stat.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_27500.html, Date accessed: June 10, 2012.Bureau of Indian Affairs, 2012. Indian Reservations in the Continental United States, Website: | |||
http://www.nps.gov/nagpra/DOCUMENTS/RESERV.PDF, Date accessed: August 30, 2012. | |||
California Energy Commission, 2009. Orange Grove Energy, L.P., Orange Grove Project, Application for Certification (08-AFC-4), San Diego County, Volume 3, Appendix 6.12 B, April 2009.Chepesiuk, Ron, 2009. Missing the Dark, Health Effects of Light Pollution, Environmental Health Perspectives, Volume 117, Number 1, January 2009.City of Janesville, 2012a. Tax Increment Finance District No. 35 Project Plan, Adopted August 22, 2011, Amendment No. 1, February 13, 2012.City of Janesville, 2012b. Tax Increment Finance District No. 35 Project Plan. Amendment No. 1, Website: | |||
http://www.ci.janesville.wi.us/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=1463, Date accessed: October 9, 2012. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies19.7-20Rev. 1CEQ, 1997. Considering Cumulative Effects Under the National Environmental Policy Act, Council on Environmental Quality, Executive Office of the President.DOE, 2012. Environmental Assessment for Northstar Medical Technologies LLC Commercial Domestic Production of the Medical Isotope Molybdenum-99 (DOE/EA-1929), U.S. Department of Energy, Website: http://energy.gov/sites/prod | |||
/files/EA-1929-FEA-2012.pdf | |||
, Date accessed: October 9, 2012. | |||
DOR, 2012. County and Municipal Revenues and Expenditures 2010, Bulletin No. 110, January 2012, Website: http://www.revenue.wi.gov/ | |||
slf/cotvc/cmreb10.pdf, Date accessed: August 19, 2012.DPI, 2012a. 2011-2012 Staff to Students Ratio, Website: http://data.dpi.state.wi.us/data/StaffPage.aspx?OrgLevel=st&GraphFile=BlankPageUrl&, Date accessed: October 22, 2012.DPI, 2012b. 2011-2012 Public Enrollment by County by District by School by Gender, Website: http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/lbstat/pubdata2.html, Date accessed: June 4, 2012.Fry, J., Xian, G., Jin, S., Dewitz, J., Homer, C., Yang, L., Barnes, C., Herold, N., and Wickham, J., 2011. National Land Cover Database 2006, Land Cover Change 2001/2006, National Land Cover Database for the Conterminous United States, PE&RS, Volume 77(9):858-864, September 2011.Hastings, 2011. | |||
Hastings HVAC Bulletin No. IRHS-1. Ha stings HVAC, Hastings, NE, December 2011, 20 pp, Website: http://www.hastingshvac.com/UserFiles/File/Bulletin%20IRHS-1%20December%202011.pdf | |||
, Date accessed: October 3, 2012.JSD, 2011a. Janesville School District Strategic Plan, Website: | |||
http://www.janesv ille.k12.wi.us/Portals/1/Strategic_Plan_Action_Steps_and_Dates_Final_w-o_Action_Steps%5B1%5D.pdf | |||
, Date accessed: October 18, 2012.JSD, 2011b. School District of Janesville, 2011-12 Budget, Website, http://www.janesville.k12.wi.us/Portals/1/Budget%202011-12.pdf,Date accessed: March 1, 2013.Karl, T. R., J.M. Melillo, and T.C. Peterson, eds., 2009. Global Climate Change Impacts, Cambridge University Press.Mercy Health System, 2012a. Mercy Clinic South, Website: | |||
http://www.mercyhealthsystem.org/body.cfm?xyzpdqabc=0&id=10&action=detail&ref=42 | |||
, Date accessed: October 16, 2012.Mercy Health System, 2012b. Mercy Hospital and Trauma Center, Website: | |||
http://www.mercyhealthsystem.org/body.cfm?xyz pdqabc=0&id=10&action=detail&ref=54, Date accessed: October 16, 2012. | |||
NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, 2012. NorthStar Medical Technologies, Hendricks Commercial Properties Sign Agreement for Beloit Facility Development, Website: http://www.northstarnm.com/index.php?module=cms&page=31, Date accessed: October 9, 2012. | |||
NRC, 1977. Methods for Estimating Atmospheric Transport and Dispersion of Gaseous Effluents in Routine Releases from Light-Water-Cooled Reactors, Regulatory Guide 1.111, Revision 1, U.S.Nuclear Regulatory Commission, July 1977. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies19.7-21Rev. 1NRC, 2004. Policy Statement on the Treatment of Environmental Justice Matters in NRC Regulatory and Licensing Actions (69 FR 52040), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, August 24, 2004. | |||
NRC, 2009. Office Instruction No. LIC 203, Revision 2, Procedural Guidance for Preparing Environmental Assessments and Considering Envi ronmental Issues, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, February 17, 2009.Ogden, L.J.E., 1996. Collision Course: The Hazards of Lighted Structures and Windows to Migrating Birds, Published by World Wildlife Fund Canada and the Fatal Light Awareness Program, September 1996.Olcott, Perry G., 1969. A Summary of Geology and Mineral and Water Resources of Rock County, Open-File Report 69-3, Geological and Natural History Survey.PNNL, 2012. GENII Version 2 Users' Guide, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, PNNL-14583, Revision4, September 2012.Reznor, 2002. The Reznor Gas-Fired Space Heating Handbook, Thomas & Betts Corp., 76 pp., Website: | |||
www.rezspec.com, Date accessed: October 3, 2012.State of Wisconsin Bureau of Migrant Labor Services, 2011. | |||
Migrant Population Report, Website: http://dwd.wisconsin.gov/migrants/pdf/migrantpoprep2011.pdf, Date accessed: September 4, 2012.Town of Rock, 2006. | |||
Official Zoning Map, Rock County Geographic Information Systems (GIS), Planning, Economic, and Community Development Agency, Website: http://199.233.45.158/images/web_documents/departments/planning_development/zoning_maps/trockzoning.pdf | |||
, Date accessed: October 03, 2012.Town of Rock, 2008. Zoning Ordinance Town of Rock, Rock County, Wisconsin, Website: | |||
http://www.tn.rock.wi.gov/docview.asp?docid=4000&locid=181, Date accessed: October 29, 2012.University of Wisconsin, 2009. Environmentally friendly upgrade planned for Charter Street plant, Website: | |||
http://www.news.wisc.edu/16755, Date accessed: October 9, 2012.USCB, 2006-2010. Table B17017, Poverty Status in the Past 12 Months by Household Type by Age of Householder, 2010 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, American Factfinder, Website: | |||
http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml, Date accessed: August 20, 2012. USCB, 2010a. Demographic Profile 1, American Factfinder, Website: http://factfinder 2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml, Date accessed: April 25, 2012. | |||
USCB, 2010b. Summary File 1: Table P14, Sex by Age for the Population under 20 Years, American FactFinder, Website: | |||
http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/js f/pages/index.xhtml, Date accessed: October 22, 2012. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-22Rev. 0USCB, 2010c. Demographic Profile 1, Profile of General Population and Housing Characteristics: 2010, American Factfinder, Website: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml. Date accessed: August 20, 2012. | |||
USEPA, 1995. Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors - Volume I: Stationary Point and Area Sources (AP-42), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Fifth Edition, January 1995. | |||
USEPA, 2012. U.S. Greenhouse Gas Inventory Report, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Website: http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/usinventoryreport.html | |||
, Date accessed: September 5, 2012.USFWS, 2012. Resource Review and Input Response Letter from Peter J. Fasbender dated January 25, 2012.USGS, 2012. The USGS Water Science School, Website: http://ga.water.usgs.gov/edu/qa-home-percapita.html, Date accessed: October 18, 2012. | |||
WDNR, 2010a. Air Pollution Control Operation Permit. West Campus Cogeneration Facility, Permit No. 113151500-P01, September 8, 2010. | |||
WDNR, 2010b. Air Pollution Control Operation Permit, Generac Power Systems-Whitewater, Permit No. 128105230-P20, November 22, 2010. | WDNR, 2010b. Air Pollution Control Operation Permit, Generac Power Systems-Whitewater, Permit No. 128105230-P20, November 22, 2010. | ||
WDNR, 2011a. PM2.5 Regional Background Concentrations (Draft) Memorandum from John Roth, dated April 15, 2011. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/AirPermits/documents/RegionalBackgroundConcentrationsIncDRAFTPM25.pdf, Date accessed: August 2012.WDNR, 2011b. Air Pollution Control Operation Permit, Alliant Energy- WP&L Turtle Generating Facility, Permit No. 154121880-P20, June 30, 2011.WDNR, 2011c. Air Pollution Control Operation Permit, University of Wisconsin Madison-Charter St., Permit No. 113008390-P04, November 8, 2011.WDNR, 2012a. Policy for Dispersion Modeling of Intermittent Operating Units, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Memorandum from Andrew Stewart dated March 6, 2012, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/AirPermits/documents/IntermittentSources2012.pdf, Date accessed: October 1, 2012.WDNR, 2012b. Endangered Resources Review (ERR #12-020), Proposed SHINE Medial Technologies Industrial Development, Town of Janesville, Rock County, WI. WDNR, 2012c. Air Pollution Control Construction Permit, University of Wisconsin Madison-Charter St., Permit No. 11-SDD-099, February 8, 2012. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | WDNR, 2011a. | ||
City of Chippewa Falls, 2011. Zoning Map, Chippewa Falls Website: http://www.chippewafalls-wi.gov/Maps/Zoning_map.pdf, Date accessed: December 2011.City of Stevens Point, 2011a. Comprehensive Plan, Stevens Point Website: http://www.co.portage.wi.us/Comprehensive%20Plan/Planning%20Program/Stevens%20Point/Stevens%20Point.html, Date accessed: December 2011.City of Stevens Point, 2011b. Report of City Plan Commission, Website: http://stevenspoint.com/archives/47/minutesPlan20111205.pdf, Date accessed: December 2011.City of Stevens Point, 2012a. City Plan Commission, Website: http://stevenspoint.com/archives/36/agendaPlan20120103b.pdf, Date accessed: September 2012.City of Stevens Point, 2012b. Stevens Point receives $225,640 from Focus on Energy, Website: http://www.ci.stevens-point.wi.us/CivicAlerts.aspx?AID=799&ARC=1671, Date accessed: September 2012. | PM2.5 Regional Background Concentrations (Draft) Memorandum from John Roth, dated April 15, 2011. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/AirPermits/documents/RegionalBackgroundConcentrationsIncDRAFTPM25.pdf, Date accessed: August 2012. | ||
HI, 2011. Health Imaging, Northstar chooses Wisconsin for isotope production, June 23, 2011, Website: http://www.healthimaging.com/index.php?option=com_articles&view=article&id=28423:northstar-chooses-wisconsin-for-isotope-production, Date accessed: April 17, 2012.iMakeSense, LLC, 2010. Revelations Architects/Builders Corporation News, Website: http://www.revarch.com/news.html, Date accessed: September 17, 2012.Jerde, 2011. Columbia Energy Center state's number 1 mercury emitter, Website: http://www.wiscnews.com/portagedailyregister/news/ | WDNR, 2011b. Air Pollution Control Operation Permit, Alliant Energy- WP&L Turtle Generating Facility, Permit No. 154121880-P20, June 30, 2011. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | WDNR, 2011c. Air Pollution Control Operation Permit, University of Wisconsin Madison-Charter St., Permit No. 113008390-P04, November 8, 2011. | ||
NRCS, 2012. Natural Resource Conservation Service Soil Survey Website: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/HomePage.htm, Date accessed: July 2012.Portage County, 2012a. Zoning Maps, Portage County Website: http://www.co.portage.wi.us/planningzoning/zoning_maps.htm, Date accessed: July 2012.Portage County, 2012b. Comprehensive Plan, Portage County Website: http://www.co.portage.wi. | WDNR, 2012a. Policy for Dispersion Modeling of Intermittent Operating Units, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Memorandum from Andrew Stewart dated March 6, 2012, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/AirPermits/documents/IntermittentSources2012.pdf | ||
Rubenzer, 2011. City of Chippewa Falls Board of Public Works Meeting Minutes, Website: http://www.chippewafalls-wi.gov/ | , Date accessed: October 1, 2012. | ||
WDNR, 2012b. Endangered Resources Review (ERR #12-020), Proposed SHINE Medial Technologies Industrial Development, Town of Janesville, Rock County, WI. | |||
WDNR, 2012c. Air Pollution Control Construction Permit, University of Wisconsin Madison-Charter St., Permit No. 11-SDD-099, February 8, 2012. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-23Rev. 0WDNR, 2012d. Air Pollution Control Construction Permit, United Ethanol, LLC, Permit No. 11-DCF-056, May 2, 2012. | |||
WDNR, 2012e. Air Pollution Control Construction a nd Operation Permit, Kraft Foods Global, Inc.-Madison, Permit Nos. 09-SSS-127-R1 and 113004650-P13, June 27, 2012.WHS, 2012. Wisconsin Historical Society, Response Received from Mr. Dan Duchrow re "Request for SHPO Comment and Consultation on a Federal Undertaking," dated March 7, 2012.Wisconsin Golf Courses, 2013. Glen Erin Golf Course Janesville WI, Website: http://www.gleneringolf.com/index.shtml, Date accessed: January 16, 2013.19.7.5ALTERNATIVESAmerican Engineering Testing, Inc., 2011. Report of Subsurface Exploration.B&W TSG, 2009a. B&W and Covidien to develop U.S. source of key medical isotope, Babcock & Wilcox Technical Services Group Inc., January 26, 2009, Website: http://www.babcock.com/news_and_events/2009/20090126a.html, Date accessed: February 3, 2012.B&W TSG, 2009b. Medical Isotope Production System, Babcock & Wilcox Technical Services Group Inc., 2011, Website: | |||
http://www.babcock.com/library/pdf/PS-301-110.pdf, Date accessed: February 3, 2012.B&W TSG, 2009c. B&W Medical Isotope Production System, Meeting with USNRC, Babcock & | |||
Wilcox Technical Services Group Inc., July 2009, Obtained from NRC Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS), ML091900270.Broihahn, 2011. Historic and Archaeological Resource Identification, Correspondence from John Broihahn, Wisconsin State Archeologist, to Katrina Pitas, SHINE Medical Technologies, November 1, 2011. | |||
City of Chippewa Falls, 2011. Zoning Map, Chippewa Falls Website: | |||
http://www.chippewafalls-wi.gov/Maps/Zoning_map.pdf, Date accessed: December 2011.City of Stevens Point, 2011a. Comprehensive Plan, Stevens Point Website: | |||
http://www.co.portage.wi.us/Comprehensive%20Plan/Planning%20Program/Stevens%20Point/ | |||
Stevens%20Point.html, Date accessed: December 2011.City of Stevens Point, 2011b. Report of City Plan Commission, Website: http://stevenspoint.com/archives/47/minutesPlan20111205.pdf | |||
, Date accessed: December 2011.City of Stevens Point, 2012a. City Plan Commission, Website: http://stevenspoint.com/archives/36/agendaPlan20120103b.pdf | |||
, Date accessed: September 2012.City of Stevens Point, 2012b. Stevens Point receives $225,640 from Focus on Energy, Website: http://www.ci.stevens-point.wi.us/CivicAlerts.aspx?AID=799&ARC=1671 | |||
, Date accessed: September 2012. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-24Rev. 0City of Stevens Point, 2012c. Website: http://stevenspoint.com, Date accessed: September 2012. CLS, 2012. Canadian Light Source, Inc., Medical Isotopes Backgrounder: Producing medical isotopes using X-rays, January 19, 2012, Website: http://www.lightsource.ca/medicalisotopes/ | |||
, Date accessed: April 17, 2012. | |||
DOE, 2012. Environmental Assessment for NorthStar Medical Technologies LLC Commercial Domestic Production of Medical Isotope Molybdenum-99 (EA-1929), U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation/Global Threat Reduction Initiative, August 2012.EDI, 2011. New "aftermarket services" facility will increase EDI's flat dies rework capabilities and reduce lead times for customers, Website: http://www.extrusiondies.com/news_leterature.phtml#1, Date accessed: September 17, 2012.Environmental Leader, LLC, 2008. Neenah paper to use biomass at Whiting Mill, Website: http://www.environmentalleader.com/2008/08/20/neenah-paper-to-use-biomass-at-whiting-mill/ | |||
, Date accessed: September 17, 2012. EOG Resources, 2012. EOG resources reports first quarter 2012 results and raises 2012 liquids production growth target, Website: http://investor.shareholder.com/eogresources/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=671644, Date accessed: September 17, 2012. | |||
GEH, 2010. Moly-99 Project Update for the US NRC August 2011, GE Hitach i Nuclear Energy, Obtained from NRC ADAMS, ML112240806.Greenberg and Brown, 1986. Bedrock Geology of Portage County, Wisconsin, Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey (WGNHS) Map 86-3. | |||
HI, 2011. Health Imaging, Northstar chooses Wisconsin for isotope production, June 23, 2011, Website: http://www.healthimaging.com/index.php?option=com_articles&view=article&id=28423:northstar-chooses-wisconsin-for-isotope-production, Date accessed: April 17, 2012.iMakeSense, LLC, 2010. | |||
Revelations Architects/Builders Corporation News, Website: http://www.revarch.com/news.html, Date accessed: September 17, 2012.Jerde, 2011. Columbia Energy Center state's number 1 mercury emitter, Website: http://www.wiscnews.com/portagedailyregister | |||
/news/article_bdc dca56-11a5-11e1-886d-001cc4c03286.html, Date accessed: September 17, 2012. Knolls, 2002. Nuclides and Isotopes, 16th edition, Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory, 2002.McCarthy, 2011. United State EPA Memorandum: Implementation of the Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard, Website: http://www.4cleanair.org/Documents/ImplementationoftheOzoneNAAQS92211.pdf | |||
, Date accessed: September 17, 2012.Mudrey et al., 1982. Bedrock Geologic Map of Wisconsin, University of Wisconsin Extension, Geological and Natural History Survey. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-25Rev. 0NAIP, 2010a. USDA NAIP Imagery. Website: http://www.fsa.usda.gov/FSA/apfoapp?area=home&subject=prog&topic=nai, Date accessed: August 15, 2012.National Atlas of the United States, 2012. Wisconsin Federal Lands and Indian Reservations, Website: http://nationalatlas.gov/printable/fedlands.html, Date accessed: September 14, 2012.NM, 2010. Nuclear Monitor, Medical Radioisotopes Production without a Nuclear Reactor, No.710/711, June 4, 2010. | |||
NRC, 2004. | |||
Policy Statement on the Treatment of Environmental Justice Matters in NRC Regulatory and Licensing Actions, 69 FR 52040, August 24, 2004. | |||
NRC, 2011. NRC Background Information, Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors Annual Meeting, May 2011. | |||
NRCS, 2012. Natural Resource Conservation Service Soil Survey Website: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/HomePage.htm, Date accessed: July 2012.Portage County, 2012a. Zoning Maps, Portage County Website: http://www.co.portage.wi.us/planningzoning/zoning_maps.htm, Date accessed: July 2012.Portage County, 2012b. Comprehensive Plan, Portage County Website: | |||
http://www.co.portage.wi.u s/Comprehensive%20Plan/Pl anning%20Program/Index.html, Date accessed: July 2012. | |||
Rubenzer, 2011. City of Chippewa Falls Board of Public Works Meeting Minutes, Website: http://www.chippewafalls-wi.gov/m eeting%20minutes/2011/B oard%20of%20Public%20Works/May%209%20%202011.pdf, Date accessed: September 17, 2012.The Chippewa Herald, 2009. County Loses $1.8 million on Wissota Green foreclosure, Website: http://chippewa.com/news/county-loses-million-on-wissota-green-foreclosure/article_08701daa-ea8f-54af-ad5b-f8dfbe1b7f97.html, Date accessed: September 17, 2012. The Chippewa Herald, 2012. EOG sand operation underway, Website: http://chippewa.com/news/local/eog-sand-operation-underway/article_8f360c64-398f-11e1-91cf-001871e3ce6c.html | |||
, Date accessed: September 17, 2012. | |||
ThinkResources, Inc. 2008. Wisconsin Power Plants, Website: http://www.powerplantjobs.com/ppj.nsf/powerplants1?openform&cat=wi&Count=500, Date accessed: September 17, 2012.UM, 2006a. Redacted - Safety Analysis Report for the University of Missouri-Columbia Application for License Renewal Application - (Volume 1 of 2), University of Missouri-Columbia, August 18, 2006. Obtained from NRC ADAMS, ML092110573.UM, 2006b. MURR Environmental Report for License Renewal, Facility License No. R-103, Docket No. 50-186, University of Missouri-Columbia, August 2006. Obtained from NRC ADAMS, ML062540121. | ThinkResources, Inc. 2008. Wisconsin Power Plants, Website: http://www.powerplantjobs.com/ppj.nsf/powerplants1?openform&cat=wi&Count=500, Date accessed: September 17, 2012.UM, 2006a. Redacted - Safety Analysis Report for the University of Missouri-Columbia Application for License Renewal Application - (Volume 1 of 2), University of Missouri-Columbia, August 18, 2006. Obtained from NRC ADAMS, ML092110573.UM, 2006b. MURR Environmental Report for License Renewal, Facility License No. R-103, Docket No. 50-186, University of Missouri-Columbia, August 2006. Obtained from NRC ADAMS, ML062540121. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-26Rev. 0USCB, 2012a. Demographic Profile 1: | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | Profile of General Population and Housing, American Factfinder, Website: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml | ||
UW, 1964. Ice Age Deposits of Wisconsin, | , Date accessed: August 19, 2012.USCB, 2012b. Chippewa County Quick Facts | ||
UW, 1989. Groundwater Contamination Susceptibility in Wisconsin, University of Wisconsin Extension Office. U.S. Government, 1992. Energy Policy Act of 1992, 1992.Vetter, 2012. Designs proposed for Irvine park Zoo addition, Website: http://www.leadertelegram.com/news/front_page/article_e30b61d6-5799-11e1-8b33-0019bb2963f4.html, Date accessed: September 17, 2012. WBN, 2011. NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, LLC moving to Beloit, Wisconsin, Wisconsin BrokerNET, June 22, 2011, Website: http://www. | , Website:http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/55/55017.html, Date accessed: September 6, 2012.USCB, 2012c. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | Five Year American Community Survey Estimates, Table 17017: Poverty Status in the Past 12 Months by Household Type by Age of Householder, Summary File Retrieval Tool, Website: http://www.census.gov/acs/www/data_documentation | ||
WDOT, 2012. US 10 (WIS 13 - I-39) expansion Marshfield to Stevens Point Portage and Wood counties, Website: http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/projects/us10/, Date accessed: September 17, 2012. WDPI, 2012. 2011-2012 Enrollment by County by District by School by Gender, Website: http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/lbstat/pubdata2.html, Date accessed: August 19, 2012.WGNHS, 2004. Scanned Images of Wisconsin Well Constructor's Reports- Chippewa County 1936-1989, Open File Report 2001-02 CH. WGNHS, 2005. Scanned Images of Wisconsin Well Constructor's Reports- Portage County 1936-1989, Open File Report 2001-02 PT. WGNHS, 2012. Wisconsin Carbonate Bedrock Map Website; http://wisconsingeologicalsurvey.org/karstbedrock.htm, Date accessed: July 2012.WNN, 2011. Clinton moving into molybdenum production, September 14, 2011, World Nuclear News, Website: http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS-Clinton_moving_into_molybdenum_production-1409118.html, Date accessed: February 2, 2012.19. | /summary_file/, Date accessed: August 22, 2012.USCB, 2012d. Summary File 1, P5: Hispanic or Latino Origin by Race, American Factfinder, Website: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml, Date accessed: August 19, 2012.USCB, 2012e. Portage County Quick Facts | ||
, Website:http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/55/55097.html, Date accessed: September 6, 2012. | |||
USEPA, 2012a. Non-Attainment Status for Each County by year in Wisconsin as of July 20 2012. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), Website: | |||
http://www.epa.gov/oaqps001/greenbk/anay_wi.html, Date accessed: July, 2012. | |||
USEPA, 2012b. Non-Attainment Status for Each County by year in Minnesota as of July 20, 2012. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), Website: | |||
http://www.epa.gov/oaqps001/greenbk/anay_mn.html, Date accessed: July, 2012. | |||
USEPA, 2012c. Cross-State Air Pollution Rule, Website: http://www.epa.gov/airtransport | |||
, Date accessed: September 17, 2012. USFWS, 2012a. Possible Industrial Development, City of Chippewa Falls, Chippewa County, Wisconsin, Correspondence from Jill Utrup, Field Supervisor of the USFWS, to Katrina Pitas, SHINE Medical Technologies, January 19, 2012. USFWS, 2012b. Possible Industrial Development Project Site and Vicinity Portage County, Wisconsin, Correspondence from Peter Fasbender, Field Supervisor of the USFWS, to Katrina Pitas, SHINE Medical Technologies, March 5, 2012. | |||
USGS, 2006. National Land Cover Dataset, Website: http://viewer.nationalmap.gov/viewer, Date accessed: July 2012. ESRI ArcGIS 9.3.1 software.USGS, 2012a. National Seismic Hazard Maps, Website: http://gldims.cr.usgs.gov/website/nshmp2008/viewer.htm, Date accessed: July 2012.USGS, 2012b. National Seismic Hazard Maps, Website: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/states/wisconsin/history.php, Date accessed: July 2012.USGS, 2012c. EHP Quaternary Faults, Website: http://geohazards.usgs.gov/qfaults/map.php | |||
, Date accessed: July 2012. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-27Rev. 0USGS, 2012d. Water Site: http://wi.water.usgs.gov/gwcomp/find/chippewa/brrts.html | |||
, Date accessed: July 2012.USGS, 2012e. Water Site: http://wi.water.usgs.gov/gwcomp/find/portage/brrts.html, Date accessed: July 2012. | |||
UW, 1964. Ice Age Deposits of Wisconsin, Univer sity of Wisconsin Extension Office. UW, 1983. Thickness of Unconsolidated Material in Wisconsin, University of Wisconsin Extension Office. | |||
UW, 1989. Groundwater Contamination Susceptibility in Wisconsin, University of Wisconsin Extension Office. U.S. Government, 1992. Energy Policy Act of 1992, 1992.Vetter, 2012. Designs proposed for Irvine park Zoo addition, Website: http://www.leadertelegram.com/news/front_page/article_e30b61d6-5799-11e1-8b33-0019bb2963f4.html | |||
, Date accessed: September 17, 2012. WBN, 2011. NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, LLC moving to Beloit, Wisconsin, Wisconsin BrokerNET, June 22, 2011, Website: | |||
http://www.wisconsinbroker net.com/2011/northstar-radiosotopes-llc-moving-to-beloit-wisconsin/, Date accessed: February 7, 2012. | |||
WDNR, 2011a. Endangered Resources Review (ERR Log # 11-491) Proposed Industrial Development Project in Chippewa County, WI, Correspondence from Emma Pelton, Endangered | |||
Resources Program WDNR, to Timothy Krau se, Sargent & Lundy, December 12, 2011. | |||
WDNR, 2011b. Endangered Resources Review (ERR Log # 11-492) Proposed Industrial Development Project in Portage County, WI, Correspondence from Lori Steckervetz, Endangered Resources Program WDNR, to Timothy Krause, Sargent & Lundy, December 7, 2011.WDNR, 2012a. Air Monitoring Network Plan 2013, June 2012. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR), Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/AirQuality/documents/2013NetworkPlanProposed.pdf, Date accessed: July, 2012 | |||
.WDNR, 2012b. WisconsinDNRWebView, Website: http://dnrmaps.wi.gov/imf/imf.jsp?site=webview, Date accessed: September 14, 2012. | |||
WDNR, 2012c. Air Management Program, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/cias/am/amexternal/AM_PermitTracking.aspx?id=3001907, Date accessed: September 17, 2012. | |||
WDNR, 2012d. Air Management Program, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/cias/am/amexternal/AM_PermitTracking.aspx?id=10641 | |||
, Date accessed: September 17, 2012. | |||
WDNR, 2012e. Air Management Program, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/cias/am/amexternal/AM_PermitTracking.aspx?id=19054951 | |||
, Date accessed: September 17, 2012. | |||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-28Rev. 0WDNR, 2012f. Air Management Program, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/cias/am/amexternal/AM_PermitTracking.aspx?id=17105222 | |||
, Date accessed: September 17, 2012. | |||
WDNR, 2012g. Air Management Program, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/cias/am/amexternal/AM_PermitTracking.aspx?id=3001987 | |||
, Date accessed: September 17, 2012. | |||
WDNR, 2012h. Air Management Program, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/cias/am/amexternal/AM_PermitTracking.aspx?id=3002320, Date accessed: September 17, 2012. | |||
WDNR, 2012i. Air Management Program, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/cias/am/amexternal/AM_PermitTracking.aspx?id=3002137 | |||
, Date accessed: September 17, 2012. | |||
WDNR, 2012j. Air Management Program, Websites: http://dnr.wi.gov/cias/am/amexternal/AM_PermitTracking.aspx?id=4003218 and http://dnr.wi.gov/cias/am/amexternal/AM_PermitTracking.aspx?id=13797133 | |||
, Date accessed: September 17, 2012.WDOR, 2012a. County and Municipal Revenues and Expenditures 2010, Bulletin No. 110, January 2012, Website: http://www.revenue.wi.gov/slf/cotvc/cmreb10.pdf, Date accessed: August 19, 2012.WDOT, 2011. Annual average hourly traffic counts, Website: http://transportal.cee.wisc.edu | |||
, Date accessed: August 2012, Wisconsin Hourly Traffic Data of The WisTransPortal Project. | |||
WDOT, 2012. US 10 (WIS 13 - I-39) expansion Marshfield to Stevens Point Portage and Wood counties, Website: http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/projects/us10/ | |||
, Date accessed: September 17, 2012. WDPI, 2012. 2011-2012 Enrollment by County by District by School by Gender, Website: http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/lbstat/pubdata2.html, Date accessed: August 19, 2012. | |||
WGNHS, 2004. Scanned Images of Wisconsin Well Constructor's Reports- Chippewa County 1936-1989, Open File Report 2001-02 CH. | |||
WGNHS, 2005. Scanned Images of Wisconsin Well Constructor's Reports- Portage County 1936-1989, Open File Report 2001-02 PT. | |||
WGNHS, 2012. Wisconsin Carbonate Bedrock Map Website; http://wisconsingeologicalsurvey.org/karstbedrock.htm, Date accessed: July 2012.WNN, 2011. Clinton moving into molybdenum production, September 14, 2011, World Nuclear News, Website: | |||
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS-Clinton_moving_into_molybdenum_production-1409118.html, Date accessed: February 2, 2012.19. | |||
==7.6CONCLUSION== | ==7.6CONCLUSION== | ||
S US Census Bureau, 2012. The 2012 Statistical Abstract: Mining, Mineral Industries, Website, http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/cats/forestry_fishing_and_mining/mining_mineral_industries.html, Date accessed: January 18, 2013. | S US Census Bureau, 2012. The 2012 Statistical Abstract: Mining, Mineral Industries, Website, http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/cats/forestry_fishing_and_mining/mining_mineral_industries.html, Date accessed: January 18, 2013. | ||
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical | Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-29Rev. 0World Nuclear Association, 2012. Supply of Uranium-August 2012, Website: http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf75.html, Date accessed: December 28, 2012.}} | ||
Revision as of 15:49, 30 June 2018
{{Adams | number = ML15351A233 | issue date = 08/27/2015 | title = Official Exhibit - NRC-006H-MA-CM01 - Shine Medical Technologies, Inc., Construction Permit Application - Environmental Report, [PSAR] Chapter 19, Beginning Through End of Text and Chapter 19, Figure 19.2.1-1 Through Figure 19.2.3-1 (August | author name = | author affiliation = NRC/OGC | addressee name = | addressee affiliation = NRC/OCM | docket = 05000608 | license number = | contact person = SECY RAS | case reference number = Mandatory Hearing 2, RAS 28638, 50-608-CP | document type = Legal-Exhibit | page count = 543 }}
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTable of ContentsSHINE Medical Technologies 19-iRev. 0CHAPTER 19ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWTable of Contents SectionTitlePage
19.1INTRODUCTION
OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT....................................19.1-119.1.1PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION.................................19.1-119.1.2REGULATORY PROVISIONS, PERMITS, AND REQUIREDCONSULTATIONS.............................................................................................19.1-319.2PROPOSED ACTION...........................................................................................19.2-119.2.1SITE LOCATION AND LAYOUT........................................................................19.2-619.2.2RADIOISOTOPE FACILITY DESCRIPTION......................................................19.2-1119.2.3WATER CONSUMPTION AND TREATMENT...................................................19.2-12 19.2.4COOLING AND HEATING DISSIPATION SYSTEMS........................................19.2-1319.2.5WASTE SYSTEMS............................................................................................19.2-14 19.2.6STORAGE, TREATMENT, AND TRANSPORTATION OF RADIOACTIVEAND NONRADIOACTIVE MATERIALS, INCLUDING LEU, WASTE, RADIOISOTOPES, AND ANY OTHER MATERIALS.........................................19.7-2119.3DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT........................................19.3-119.3.1LAND USE AND VISUAL RESOURCES...........................................................19.3-119.3.2AIR QUALITY AND NOISE................................................................................19.3-919.3.3GEOLOGIC ENVIRONMENT............................................................................19.3-65 19.3.4WATER RESOURCES.......................................................................................19.3-7119.3.5ECOLOGICAL RESOURCES............................................................................19.3-9619.3.6HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES......................................................19.3-12019.3.7SOCIOECONOMICS.........................................................................................19.3-13419.3.8HUMAN HEALTH...............................................................................................19.3-16419.4IMPACTS OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION, OPERATIONS, AND DECOMMISSIONING...........................................................................................19.4-119.4.1LAND USE AND VISUAL RESOURCES...........................................................19.4-119.4.2AIR QUALITY AND NOISE................................................................................19.4-619.4.3GEOLOGIC ENVIRONMENT............................................................................19.4-3119.4.4WATER RESOURCES.......................................................................................19.4-3419.4.5ECOLOGICAL RESOURCES............................................................................19.4-40 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTable of ContentsSHINE Medical Technologies 19-iiRev. 0Table of Contents (cont'd) SectionTitlePage19.4.6HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES......................................................19.4-4919.4.7SOCIOECONOMICS.........................................................................................19.4-5019.4.8HUMAN HEALTH...............................................................................................19.4-6119.4.9WASTE MANAGEMENT....................................................................................19.4-81 19.4.10TRANSPORTATION..........................................................................................19.4-8319.4.11POSTULATED ACCIDENTS.............................................................................19.4-9219.4.12ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE............................................................................19.4-105 19.4.13CUMULATIVE EFFECTS...................................................................................19.4-11219.5ALTERNATIVES...................................................................................................19.5-119.5.1NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE.............................................................................19.5-119.5.2REASONABLE ALTERNATIVES.......................................................................19.5-219.5.3COST-BENEFIT OF THE ALTERNATIVES.......................................................19.5-72 19.5.4COMPARISON OF THE POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS...............19.5-93
19.6CONCLUSION
S....................................................................................................19.6-119.6.1UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS...............................19.6-119.6.2RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SHORT-TERM USES AND LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY OF THE ENVIRONMENT.......................................................19.6-1319.6.3IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCES....................................................................................................19.6-15
19.7REFERENCES
......................................................................................................19.7-119.
7.1INTRODUCTION
OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW..................................19.7-119.7.2PROPOSED ACTION........................................................................................19.7-219.7.3DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT.....................................19.7-2 19.7.4IMPACTS OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION, OPERATIONS, AND DECOMMISSIONING........................................................................................19.7-2019.7.5ALTERNATIVES................................................................................................19.7-23 19.
7.6CONCLUSION
S.................................................................................................19.7-28 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTable of ContentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.1-iRev. 0SECTION
19.1INTRODUCTION
OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTTable of Contents SectionTitlePage
19.1INTRODUCTION
OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT...............................19.1-119.1.1PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION........................19.1-119.1.2REGULATORY PROVISIONS, PERMITS, AND REQUIREDCONSULTATIONS....................................................................................19.1-3 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies19.1-iiRev. 0List of Tables NumberTitle19.1.2-1Permits and Approvals Required for Construction and Operation19.1.2-2Consultations Required for Construction and Operation Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of FiguresSHINE Medical Technologies 19.1-iiiRev. 0List of Figures NumberTitleNone Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.1-ivRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations Acronym/AbbreviationDefinition CFRCode of Federal Regulations COEU.S. Army Corps of Engineers CPConstruction Permit DOEU.S. Department of Energy EAEnvironmental Assessment EREnvironmental Report ERREndangered Resources ReviewFAAFederal Aviation Administration FDAU.S. Food and Drug Administration FWSU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service HEUhighly enriched uranium HFRHigh Flux ReactorI-131iodine-131 IREInstitut National des Radioéléments LEUlow enriched uranium Mo-99molybdenum-99NEPANational Environmental Policy Act NRCU.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission NRCLNational Research Council NRUNational Research Universal NTPNuclear Technology Products Radioisotopes OLOperating License SHINESHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. SHPOState Historic Preservation Office SPCCSpill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.1-vRev. 0Tc-99mtechnetium-99m U-235uranium-235WNNWorld Nuclear NewsXe-133xenon-133Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd) Acronym/AbbreviationDefinition Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies 19.1-1Rev. 0CHAPTER 19
19.1INTRODUCTION
OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTIn accordance with the provisions of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 50 "Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities," and supporting guidance, SHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. (SHINE) is providing this Environmental Report (ER) in support of an application to construct and operate a radioisotope facility in Janesville, Wisconsin. SHINE is providing this comprehensive ER as required with its application. The ER provides information to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to facilitate preparation of an Environmental Assessment (EA) in accordance with the provisions of 10CFR 51 Subpart A, National Environmental Policy Act - Regulations Implementing Section102 (2). This chapter provides an introduction to the assessment of the environmental effects of construction, operation, and decommissioning of this facility on the site and surrounding areas.This ER follows the content and organization of the Final Interim Staff Guidance Augmenting NUREG-1537, Part 1, Chapter 19 (NRC, 2012). This ER supports the regulat ory review that is performed by the NRC under 10 CFR 51. This regulation requires that environmental impacts from the project be evaluated and described in a concise, clear, and analytical manner. This ER describes the project, potential alternatives, and the methods and sources used in the environmental impact analysis.This ER discusses the existing environment at the proposed Janesville, Wisconsin site (referred to throughout the ER as the SHINE site) and vicinity, and summarizes the environmental impacts of construction, operation, and decommissioning. In addition, this ER considers appropriate impact mitigation measures, and reviews alternative sites and technologies. The SHINE facility produces molybdenum-99 (Mo-99), iodine-131 (I-131), and xenon-133 (Xe-133). The decay product of Mo-99, technetium-99m (Tc-99m), is used for diagnostic nuclear medicine procedures. The purpose and need for the proposed action is provided in Section 19.1.1 and a description of the proposed action is provided in Section19.2.19.1.1PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTIONThe proposed federal action is the issuance of a Construction Permit (CP) and Operating License (OL), under the provisions of 10 CFR 50, that would allow SHINE to construct and operate a radioisotope facility to produce Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133. Further discussion of the proposed action is provided in Section 19.2.Molybdenum-99There is currently no domestic production of Mo-99 and its daughter isotope technetium-99m (Tc-99m). The U.S. is forced to import its entire supply of these isotopes, which are used in 80percent of nuclear medicine procedures. Tc-99m is an essential ingredient in diagnostic radiopharmaceuticals used for:*Bone scans*Lung perfusion imaging*Kidney scans and functional imaging*Liver scans Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies 19.1-2Rev. 0*Sentinel lymph node localization*Cardiac perfusion imaging*Brain perfusion imaging*Gall bladder function imaging
- Blood pool imaging*Thyroid and salivary gland imaging*Meckel's scansBetween 95 and 98 percent of the world's supply of Mo-99 is produced by just four organizations (NRCL, 2009):*MDS Nordion (Canada).
- Covidien (Netherlands).
- Institut National des Radioéléments (IRE) (Belgium).*Nuclear Technology Products Radioisotopes (Pty) Ltd. (NTP) (South Africa).Two of these companies (MDS Nordion [approximately 60 percent of the U.S. supply] and Covidien [approximately 40 percent of U.S. supply]) supply nearly all of the Mo-99 used in the U.S. These two companies obtain the vast majority of their Mo-99 from two reactors (NRCL, 2009):*National Research Universal (NRU) reactor in Chalk River, Ontario, Canada.*High Flux Reactor (HFR) in Petten, the Netherlands.The NRU reactor has been in operation since 1957 and HFR has been in operation since 1961.
Due to the age of these reactors, disruption of the supply of Mo-99 is an ongoing concern.The most recent disruptions of Mo-99 supply resulted from the shutdown of HFR from August 2008 to February 2009 and again from February 2010 to September 2010 for repairs. Concurrent with the HFR shutdown, the NRU reactor was also shut down for repairs from May 2009 to August 2010 (WNN, 2009; Fissile Material, 2010; MSNBC, 2010). While both reactors were shut down, there was an increase in production from other Mo-99 producers in Europe and South Africa; however, the U.S. experienced a shortage of Mo-99/Tc-99m, resulting in hospitals and clinics postponing or cancelling diagn ostic imaging procedures (NRCL, 2009).In addition to the age of the HFR and NRU reactors, there are three other supply reliability concerns:*Increasing demand, both domestically and globally, for Mo-99.*Increasing difficulty of transporting Mo-99 across international borders, especially by air, due to security concerns.*The short half-life of Mo-99 (2.75 days) and Tc-99m (6.01 hours).Because of these supply reliability concerns and national security concerns, U.S. government policy and law is to encourage the domestic production of Mo-99. The SHINE facility makes a significant contribution toward accomplishing these goals.Current U.S. demand for Mo-99 is between 5000 and 7000 6-day curies per week, and this demand is projected to grow in the range of 3 to 10 percent per year (NRCL, 2009). The SHINE facility can produce up to 8200 6-day curies of Mo-99 per week. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies 19.1-3Rev. 0The SHINE facility also helps achieve U.S. government nonproliferation objectives. Most of the world's production of Mo-99 is achieved by irradiating highly enriched uranium (HEU) targets in research and test reactors. The U.S. is the primary supplier of HEU for Mo-99 production. In 1992 Congress passed the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (U.S. Government, 1992). One of the nonproliferation objectives of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 was to create a strategy to phase out U.S. exports of HEU for radioisotope production. Based on this, the U.S. is encouraging Mo-99 producers to eliminate use of HEU in medical isotope production. The SHINE facility uses LEU (less than 20 percent enrichment) to produce Mo-99.Iodine-131There are two methods used to produce I-131: irradiation of tellerium-130 in a nuclear reactor, and generation as a by-product of the irradiation of uranium-235 (U-235) for Mo-99 production. Both methods are used to supply the U.S. I-131 is used for (NM, 2012):*Radiation therapy.
- Radioactive labeling for di agnostic radiopharmaceuticals.Currently, there is no commercial production of I-131 in the U.S. The U.S. supply of I-131 is provided by DRAXIMAGE (66 percent), Covidien (26 percent), and MDS Nordion (8 percent).
These companies obtain their I-131 for U.S. consumption from two reactors (OECD, 2010):*NRU reactor in Chalk River, Ontario, Canada.
- SAFARI-1, Pelindaba, South Africa.The SAFARI-1 reactor has been in operation since 1965 (OECD, 2010). As discussed above for Mo-99, due to the ages of the reactors, disruption of the supply of I-131 is an ongoing concern.Xenon-133Xe-133 gas is produced as a by-product of the irradiation of U-235 for Mo-99 production. Xe-133 is used for (RxList, 2012):*Lung imaging.
- Diagnostic evaluation of pulmonary function.
- Assessment of cerebral blood flow.19.1.2REGULATORY PROVISIONS, PERMITS, AND REQUIREDCONSULTATIONSThis section lists and summarizes the status of federal, state, local, and other permits and consultations required for the construction and operation of the proposed SHINE radioisotope facility. The applicable law, ordinance, or regulation that governs each permit and/or consultation is also identified.Table 19.1.2-1 lists the permits and other approvals required for construction and operation of the SHINE facility. The table provides the following information for each permit or approval, as applicable:*Name of the responsible regulatory agency*Applicable law, ordinance, or regulation Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies 19.1-4Rev. 0*Name of the permit or approval*Activity covered by the permit or approval*Current statusTable 19.1.2-2 lists the consultations required for construction and operation of the SHINE facility. The table provides the following information for each consultation, as applicable:*Name of the responsible regulatory agency
- Applicable law, ordinance, or regulation*Required consultation
- Summary of any surveys required to complete the consultation*Current statusIn addition to the formal consultations listed in Table 19.1.2-2, SHINE has made informal contacts with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the National Nuclear Security Administration, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Wisconsin Department of Health Services, and the City of Janesville Community Development Department. The purpose of these informal consultations was to inform the agencies about the project and to coordinate project planning.An on-site field delineation completed in accordance with U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) guidance (COE, 2010) found no jurisdictional wetlands or waters of the United States on the SHINE site. Therefore, no permitting or consultation with the COE is expected to be required.No potential administrative delays or other problems have been identified that would prevent any required agency consultations or approvals. The SHINE facility is designed and planned to comply with all applicable environmental quality standards and regulatory requirements. The facility also will comply with current Good Manufacturing Practices followed by the pharmaceutical industry.
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies 19.1-5Rev. 0Table 19.1.2-1 Permits and Approvals Required for Construction and Operation (Sheet 1 of 5)AgencyRegulatory AuthorityPermit or ApprovalActivity CoveredStatusU.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atomic Energy Act10 CFR 50.50Construction PermitConstruction of the SHINE facilityAddressed in this license application10 CFR 50.57Operating LicenseOperation of the SHINE facilityAddressed in this license application10 CFR 40Source Material LicensePossession, use, and transfer of radioactive source materialAddressed in this license application10 CFR 30By-Product Material LicenseProduction, possession, and transfer of radioactive by-product materialAddressed in this license application10 CFR 70Special Nuclear Material LicenseReceipt, possession, use, and transfer of special nuclear materialAddressed in this license applicationNational Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)10 CFR 51Environmental Assessment or Environmental Impact Statement in accordance with NEPASite approval for construction and operation of a radioisotope facilityAddressed in this license applicationFederal Aviation Administration (FAA)Federal Aviation Act14 CFR 77Construction NoticeConstruction of structures that potentially may impact air navigation SHINE submitted structure evaluation requests on October 26, 2011. The FAA issued Determinations of No Hazard to Air Navigation on November 9 and 15, 2011.U.S. Environmental Protection AgencyResource Conservation and
Recovery Act40 CFR 261 and 262Acknowledgement of Notification of Hazardous Waste ActivityGeneration of hazardous
wasteNotification not yet submittedClean Water Act40 CFR 112, Appendix FSpill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plans for Construction and OperationStorage of oil during construction and operationSPCC Plans not yet preparedU.S. Department of TransportationHazardous Material Transportation Act40 CFR 107Certificate of RegistrationTransportation of hazardous materialsRegistration application not yet submitted Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies 19.1-6Rev. 0Wisconsin Department of Natural ResourcesFederal Clean Air ActWisconsin Statutes Chapter 285Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapter NR 406Air Pollution Control Construction PermitConstruction of an air pollution emission source that is not specifically exemptedPermit application not yet
submittedFederal Clean Air ActWisconsin Statutes Chapter 285Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapter NR 407Air Pollution Control Operation PermitOperation of an air pollution emission source that is not specifically exemptedPermit application not yet submittedTable 19.1.2-1 Permits and Approvals Required for Construction and Operation (Sheet 2 of 5)AgencyRegulatory AuthorityPermit or ApprovalActivity CoveredStatus Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies 19.1-7Rev. 0Wisconsin Department of
Natural Resources, continuedFederal Clean Water ActWisconsin Statutes Chapter 283Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapter NR 216Construction Storm Water Discharge PermitDischarge of storm water runoff from the construction
siteNotice of Intent to be covered by general permit not yet
submittedFederal Clean Water ActWisconsin Statutes Chapter 283 Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapter NR 216Industrial Storm Water Discharge PermitDischarge of storm water runoff from the site during facility operationNotice of Intent to be covered by general permit not yet submitted. The facility may be eligible for an industrial Storm Water Discharge Permit exclusion under Wisconsin Admistrative Code NR 216.21(3)Wisconsin Statutes Chapters 280 ad 281Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapter NR 809Approval LettersConstruction by the City of Janesville of water and sanitary sewer extensions to the SHINE facilityPlans and specifications not yet submittedWisconsin Statutes Chapter 291Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapter NR 660, 662, and/or 666Compliance with hazardous waste notification, record keeping, and reporting requirementsGeneration of hazardous
waste Notification not yet submitted; other requirements become applicable during operation Wisconsin Department of Safety and Professional ServicesWisconsin Statutes Chapter 101Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapters SPS 361 and 362Building Plan ReviewCompliance with state building codes; required before a local building permit can be issued for a commercial buildingPlans not yet submitted Wisconsin Department of TransportationWisconsin Statutes Chapter 85Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapters Trans 231Permit for Connection to State Trunk HighwayConstruction of driveway connection to U.S. Route 51Permit application not yet
submittedTable 19.1.2-1 Permits and Approvals Required for Construction and Operation (Sheet 3 of 5)AgencyRegulatory AuthorityPermit or ApprovalActivity CoveredStatus Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies 19.1-8Rev. 0Wisconsin Department of Transportation continuedWisconsin Statutes Chapter 85Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapters Trans 231Right of Entry PermitConstruction by the City of Janesville of utility extensions
across U.S. Route 51Permit application not yet
submittedWisconsin Statutes Chapter 114Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapters Trans 56Variance from Height Limitation Zoning Ordinances Construction of structures that exceed height limitations established for Southern Wisconsin Regional AirportPlans not yet submitted for reviewCity of Janesville Community Development DepartmentCity of Janesville Ordinance 18.24.050.ASite Plan Approval (includes
Building Site Permit for the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport Overlay District)Administrative approval of the site layout and plans for parking, lighting, landscaping, etc.Plans not yet submitted for reviewCity of Janesville Ordinance 15.06.070Storm Water Plan Approval (may be included in Site Plan Approval)Administrative approval of grading and drainage plansPlans not yet submitted for
reviewCity of Janesville Ordinance 15.05.080Erosion Control Permit (may be included in Site Plan Approval)Administrative approval of erosion control plans Plans not yet submitted for
reviewCity of Janesville Ordinance 15.01.100.ABuilding PermitConstruction of buildingsPermit application not yet submittedCity of Janesville Ordinance 15.01.100.APlumbing Plan ApprovalInstallation of plumbing systemsPermit application not yet
submittedCity of Janesville Ordinance 15.04.010.AHVAC Plan ApprovalInstallation of heating, ventilation, and air conditioning systemsPermit application not yet submittedCity of Janesville Ordinance 8.32.010Fire Sprinkler and Alarm PermitInstallation of sprinkler and alarm systemsPermit application not yet
submittedCity of Janesville Ordinance 15.01.190.AOccupancy PermitOccupancy of completed buildings Permit application not yet
submittedTable 19.1.2-1 Permits and Approvals Required for Construction and Operation (Sheet 4 of 5)AgencyRegulatory AuthorityPermit or ApprovalActivity CoveredStatus Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies 19.1-9Rev. 0City of Janesville Community Development Department continuedCity of Janesville Ordinance 13.16Sanitary Sewer and Water Supply Facility ApprovalsAdministrative approval of construction, installation, and operation of connections to the municipal sewer and water supply systemsPermit application not yet
submittedCity of Janesville Plan CommissionCity of Janesville Ordinance 18.24.040Conditional Use Permit (when the site property is annexed by the City, the property will automatically be zoned for industrial use)Construction of multiple buildings on the same sitePermit application not yet
submitted Rock County Highway DepartmentWisconsin Statutes Chapter 84Rock County Utility Accommodation Policy 96.00Permit to Construct, Maintain, and Operate Utilities within Highway Right-of-WayConstruction by the City of Janesville of utility extensions across County Trunk Highway GPermit application not yet
submittedNote: No jurisdictional wetlands or waters of the United States have been identified on the SHINE site; therefore, authorization under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act is not expected to be required for construction or operation.Sources for identification of permit requirements: City of Janesville, 2012; State of Wisconsin, 2012; Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 2012.Table 19.1.2-1 Permits and Approvals Required for Construction and Operation (Sheet 5 of 5)AgencyRegulatory AuthorityPermit or ApprovalActivity CoveredStatus Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies19.1-10Rev. 0Table 19.1.2-2 Consultations Required for Construction and Operation (Sheet 1 of 2)AgencyRegulatory AuthorityRequired ConsultationSurveys RequiredStatusU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS)Endangered Species Act, 16 USC 1536Consultation regarding potential to adversely impact protected species; concurrence with no adverse impact or consultation on appropriate mitigation measuresNoneConsultation letter was submitted to the FWS on December 16, 2011; FWS issued a response on January 25, 2012, stating no further action required.Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, 16 USC 668-668cConsultation regarding potential to adversely impact eagles; concurrence with no adverse impact or consultation on appropriate mitigation measuresNoneConsultation letter and response as above.Wisconsin State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)National Historic Preservation Act, Section 106Consultation regarding potential to adversely impact historic resources; concurrence with no adverse impact or consultation on appropriate mitigation measuresPhase I archaeological
surveyPhase I survey was completed on December 15, 2011. Consultation letter was submitted to the SHPO on February 15, 2012; response was received on March 12, 2012 stating agreement with finding that no historic properties will be affected. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Wisconsin Statutes Chapter 29, Section 604Endangered Resources Review (ERR) to document recorded occurrence of protected species or rare natural habitatsNoneRequest for ERR was submitted on January 16, 2012; ERR response was issued on February 1, 2012, stating no further action required. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies19.1-11Rev. 0Native American Nations:-Citizen Potawatomi Nation, Oklahoma-Flandreau Santee Sioux Tribe of South Dakota-Forest County Potawatomi Community, Wisconsin-Hannahville Indian Community,
Michigan-Ho-Chunk Nation of Wisconsin-Lower Sioux Indian Community, Minnesota-Prairie Band of Potawatomi Nation,
Kansas-Prairie Island Indian Community, Minnesota-Santee Sioux Nation, Nebraska-Sisseton-Wahpeton Oyate, South Dakota-Spirit Lake Tribe, North Dakota-Upper Sioux Community, Minnesota-Winnebago Tribe of NebraskaNational Environmental Policy ActNational Historic Preservation ActNative American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act Consultation regarding protection of traditional Native American religious and cultural resourcesNoneConsultation letters were sent to the Native American tribes on July 26, 2012. The Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska responded on August 2, 2012, requesting notification if any burial sites are discovered. No other responses have been received.Table 19.1.2-2 Consultations Required for Construction and Operation (Sheet 2 of 2)AgencyRegulatory AuthorityRequired ConsultationSurveys RequiredStatus Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTable of ContentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.2-iRev. 0SECTION 19.2PROPOSED ACTIONTable of Contents SectionTitlePage19.2PROPOSED ACTION.....................................................................................19.2-119.2.1SITE LOCATION AND LAYOUT..................................................................19.2-619.2.2RADIOISOTOPE FACILITY DESCRIPTION................................................19.2-11 19.2.3WATER CONSUMPTION AND TREATMENT.............................................19.2-1219.2.4COOLING AND HEATING DISSIPATION SYSTEMS..................................19.2-1319.2.5WASTE SYSTEMS......................................................................................19.2-14 19.2.6STORAGE, TREATMENT, AND TRANSPORTATION OF RADIOACTIVEAND NONRADIOACTIVE MATERIALS, INCLUDING LEU, WASTE, RADIOISOTOPES, AND ANY OTHER MATERIALS...................................19.2-21 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies19.2-iiRev. 0List of Tables NumberTitle19.2.0-1Estimated Materials Consumed During Construction Phase19.2.0-2Proposed Construction/Demolition Equipment Used in the Construction, Preoperational, and Decommissioning Phases 19.2.1-1Sensitive Populations, Nearest Resident, and Landmarks within 5 Miles (8 km) of the Site19.2.5-1Estimated Type and Quantity of Radioactive Wastes Associated with the SHINE Facility Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of FiguresSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-iiiRev. 0List of Figures NumberTitle19.2.1-1SHINE Facility Site Layout19.2.2-1Isotope Production System High-Level Flow Diagram19.2.3-1Water Balance Diagram Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-ivRev. 2[Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]Acronyms and AbbreviationsAcronym/Abbreviation Definition °Fdegrees Fahrenheit °Cdegrees Celsius µS/cmmicro-Siemens per centimeter AEAAtomic Energy Act of 1954 ac.acreAHAacetohydroxamic acid[Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information]Btu/hrbritish thermal units per hour Btu/scfbritish thermal units per standard cubic feet CeCeriumcfmcubic feet per minute CFRCode of Federal Regulations CicuriesCO2carbon dioxideCPConstruction PermitCs-137cesium-137d or Ddeuterium D-Tdeuterium-tritium DSSIDiversified Scientific Services, Inc.EPAU.S. Environmental Protection Agency EREnvironmental Report ESEnergySolutions FDAU.S. Food and Drug Administrationft.feet Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.2-vRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition ft3cubic feetFPfission productg/Lgrams/liter gpmgallons per minute GTCCgreater than Class CgU/Lgrams of uranium per liter H2hydrogen4Heheliumhahectare HNO3nitric acidhrhourHVACheating, ventilation, and air conditioning IiodineI-129iodine-129I-131iodine-131 IUirradiation unit
keffeffective multiplication factorkgkilogramskmkilometerkVkilovolts lbspounds LELlower explosive limit LEUlow enriched uranium Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-viRev. 0[Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition LSAlow specific activity mmetersMmolarMBtu/hrmillion british thermal units per hour MeVmillion electron volts mi.mileMLLWmixed low level waste MomolybdenumMo-99 or 99Momolybdenum-99nneutronNOxnitrogen oxidesNRCU.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission O2oxygenOLOperating LicensePPEpersonal protective equipment PSARPreliminary Safety Analysis Report psigpound-force per square inch gaugePuplutoniumRCAradiologically controlled area RCRAResource Conservation and Recovery Act scfstandard cubic feet SHINESHINE Medical Technologies, Inc.sol'nsolution[Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information] t or Ttritium Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.2-viiRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition TBPtri-butyl phosphate Tctechnetium Tc-99mtechnetium-99m TCLPToxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure TDNthermal denitration TRCSTSV Reactivity Control System TRPSTSV Reactivity Protection System TStarget solution TSVtarget solution vessel UuraniumU-235uranium-235 U3O8triuranium octoxide (yellowcake) UO3uranium trioxide (yellowcake)UREXuranium extractionUSGSUnited States Geological SurveyWCSWaste Control Specialists WIWisconsin Xe-133xenon-133 yryear Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-1Rev. 0CHAPTER 1919.2PROPOSED ACTIONThe proposed federal action is issuance of a Construction Permit (CP) and Operating License (OL) to SHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. (SHINE) for a radioisotope production facility to produce molybdenum-99 (Mo-99), iodine 131 (I-131), and xenon-133 (Xe-133). The decay product of Mo-99, technetium-99m (Tc-99m), is used for diagnostic medical isotope procedures.The applicant for this CP and the OL and owner of the radioisotope facility is SHINE Medical Technologies, Inc., a Wisconsin corporation. SHINE has the necessary authority, control, and rights related to the construction and operation of the isotope production facility once the CP and the OL are approved.The projected schedule for the SHINE facility is as follows:*Start date of construction: January 2015.*End date of construction: December 2015.
- Date of commercial operation: June 2016.
- Date of decommissioning: June 2046.SHINE plans on performing activities in accordance with 10 CFR 50.10(a)(2) prior to receiving the CP. The construction phase of this project requires an average of 248 workers (421 at peak times) and a monthly average of 303 truck deliveries and 9 off-site waste shipments. Materials consumed are shown in Table 19.2.0-1 and also include approximately 24,587 gallons of diesel fuel (as a bounding assumption fuel is assumed to be diesel) on an average monthly basis. The different types of construction equipment used during the construction phase are shown in Table19.2.0-2. These construction activities affect 51.0 acres (ac.) (20.6 hectares [ha]) of land of which approximately 25.1 ac. (10.2 ha) of land are only temporarily affected.Prior to full commercial operation, the SHINE facility equipment undergoes a thorough commissioning phase involving a series of test operations designed to ensure the facility is functioning as designed. Once the equipment has been commissioned, it is used to produce and ship quantities of Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133 for customer qualification and input to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval process. This preoperational phase requires an average of 390 workers (451 at peak times) and a monthly average of 190 truck deliveries and 9 off-site waste shipments. Materials consumed include approximately 11,721 gallons of diesel fuel (as a bounding assumption fuel is assumed to be diesel) on a monthly basis. The different types of construction equipment used during the preoperational phase are shown in Table 19.2.0-2.After the FDA approves SHINE's customer's final products for commercial use, the facility produces and ships several batches of Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133 per week. Production devices are normally operated on a weekly basis and the operation schedules for the devices are normally staggered to accommodate customer requirements. Operational activities require an Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-2Rev. 0average of 150 workers and a monthly average of 36 truck deliveries and 1 off-site waste shipment. Materials to be stored on-site in small quantities include 55 gallon drums of lubricating oil and grease for fans, pumps, hoists, trolleys and rotating equipment and hydraulic oil for heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) dampers and hydraulically operated equipment.
Limited on-site storage of acid and caustic chemicals for regeneration of the water treatment demineralizer beds and processes are required. A bounding value of approximately 30,000 gallons (113,562 liters) of diesel fuel for the standby diesel generator are contained in an outside, underground storage tank. Approximately 25.9 acres (10.5 hectares) of land are permanently affected due to operational activities.Once the facility reaches the end of its useful life, it will be decommissioned. Any radioactive equipment and materials will be disposed of according to local and federal laws and regulations. Post-operational decommissioning activities require an average of 205 workers (257 at peak times) and a monthly average of 72 truck deliveries and 191 off-site waste shipments. Materials consumed include approximately 28,607 gallons (108,290 liters) of diesel fuel (as a bounding assumption fuel is assumed to be diesel) on a monthly basis. The different types of construction equipment used during the decommissioning phase are shown in Table 19.2.0-2. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-3Rev. 0Table 19.2.0-1 Estimated Materials Consumed During Construction PhaseMaterialAmountConcrete27,700 cubic yardsStructural Steel140 tonsMisc. Steel30 tonsSteel Liner100 tonsAsphalt2200 cubic yards Stone Granular Material16,000 cubic yards Roofing150 tons Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-4Rev. 0Table 19.2.0-2 Proposed Construction/Demolition Equipment Used in the Construction,Preoperational, and Decommissioning Phases (Sheet 1 of 2)EquipmentPresent During Construction (Y or N)Present During Preoperation (Y or N)Present During Decommissioning (Y or N)Asphalt Compactor, Cat CB434C, 107 HpYYNAsphalt Paver, Barber Greene AP-1000, 174 HpYYNBackhoe/Loader, Cat 430, 105 HpYYYBoom Lift, JLG 800AJ, 65 HpYYYConcrete Pump, Putzmeister 47Z-Meter, 300 HpYNNCrane, Lattice Boom, Manitowoc 8000, 80t, 205 HpYNYCrane, Picker, Grove RT530E-2 30t, 160 HpYNYCrane, Picker, Grove RT600E-2 50t, 173 HpYNYDump, Duel Axel (15 cy)
Mack, 350 HpYYYExcavator, Large, Cat 345D L, 380 HpYNYExcavator, Medium, Cat 321D LCR,148 HpYNYExtended Forklift, Lull 1044C-54, 115 HpYYYFuel Truck, Mack MP6, 150 HpYNYMaterial Truck, 21/2 ton, F-650, 270 HpYYYMechanic's Truck, 21/2 ton, F-650, 270 HpYYY Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-5Rev. 0Table 19.2.0-2 Proposed Construction/Demolition Equipment Used in the Construction,Preoperational, and Decommissioning Phases (Sheet 2 of 2)EquipmentPresent During Construction (Y or N)Present During Preoperation (Y or N)Present During Decommissioning (Y or N)Motor Grader, Cat 140M, 183 HpYYYPickup Truck, F-250, 300 HpYYYSemi Tractor & Trailer (20 cy), Mack MP8, 450 HpYNYSkidsteer Loader, Case SR200, 75 HpYYYTracked Dozer, Cat D6, 150 HpYYYTracked Dozer, Cat D7, 235 HpYYYTracked Dozer, Cat D8, 310 HpYNYTracked Loader, Cat 973C, 242 HpYYYVibratory Soil Compactor, Cat CS74, 156 HpYYYWater Truck, Mack MP6, 150 HpYYYPortable Air Compressors, <50 HpYYYPortable Generators, <50 HpYYYPortable Welders, <50
HpYYYWalk Behind Compactor, <50 HpYYY Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-6Rev. 019.2.1SITE LOCATION AND LAYOUT19.2.1.1Site LocationThe SHINE site is located approximately 4 miles (mi.) (6.4 kilometers [km]) south of Janesville, Rock County, Wisconsin. The SHINE facility is centered at approximately 42° 37' 26.9" N latitude, and 89° 1'29.5" W longitude.The sensitive populations (e.g., schools, daycare facilities, hospitals), nearest resident, and landmarks (including highways, transportation facilities, rivers and other bodies of water) within 5mi. (8 km) of the site are provided in Table 19.2.1-1. There are no daycare centers or retirement homes located within 5 mi. (8 km) of the SHINE facility.19.2.1.2Site LayoutFigure 19.2.1-1 shows the layout of major structures and the site boundary. The site boundaries cover approximately 91 ac. (36.8 ha). The following structures shown in Figure 19.2.1-1 are located on the site: *Production facility building*Support facility building*Waste staging and shipping building
- Diesel generator building
- Administration building*Security station19.2.1.2.1Chemical, Diesel Fuel, and Hazardous and Radioactive Material Receipt, Holding, and Storage AreasThe following buildings and areas receive, store, hold, retain or process chemicals used in the facility and support buildings on the site:*Production facility building-Rejected material -Receiving area
-Receipt inspection-Target solution preparation -Materials lab -Caustics room -Acids room-Hot cell -CO2-compressed gases room-Mechanical room -Boiler room-HVAC chiller room-Trade spaces -General storage Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-7Rev. 0-Fire brigade -Health physics (hot)-Health physics (cold)-Ion exchange assembly -FDA lab-Hot lab-Isolation pack room -Radioactive waste packaging-Product packing-Material shipping -High voltage breakers-Diesel generator room-Day tank room -Janitorial closet *Diesel generator building-Diesel room -Underground storage tank*Waste staging and shipping facility building*Support facility building-Receiving area -Chemicals room -General storage-Janitorial closet -Propane canister storage (for fork lifts)19.2.1.2.2Underground, Stormwater, and Sewage FeaturesAn underground storage tank near the diesel generator building provides storage for the diesel generator. A sanitary sewer pipeline carries wastewater from the SHINE facility to the city main sewage pipeline. A natural gas pipeline provides commercial natural gas to the SHINE facility. An underground electrical distribution line connecting to the electric transformers provides electricity to the SHINE site. A municipal water line lateral is accessed to provide the SHINE facility with water supply. Infrastructure improvements are discussed in Subsection 19.4.13.7.1.Per Figure 19.2.1-1, the SHINE facility buildings, storage, and miscellaneous structures/areas are surrounded by an exterior stormwater runon diversion berm with an interior and exterior ditch. The exterior ditch directs stormwater and farm field runoff to flow spreaders, which direct the excess water to the surrounding fields. The interior ditch directs excess water to the stormwater vegetated swale, which slopes towards an existing road side drainage. A stormwater overflow storage area is provided for beyond-design events. The stormwater systems are Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-8Rev. 0designed to address 1-year, 2-year, 24-hour storm events per state regulations, and are also designed to address 10-year and 100-year events, as required by the City of Janesville.19.2.1.2.3Monitoring StationsRefer to Figure 19.4.8-1 for environmental monitoring station locations. The need for monitoring stations is discussed in the following subsections: *Air monitoring - Subsection 19.4.2*Groundwater monitoring - Subsection 19.4.4*Surface water monitoring - Subsection 19.4.4
- Meteorological monitoring - Subsection 19.4.2*Ecological monitoring - Subsection 19.4.5*Radiological monitoring - Subsection 19.4.8.3 Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-9Rev. 0Table 19.2.1-1 Sensitive Populations, Nearest Resident, and Landmarks within 5 Miles (8 km) of the Site(Sheet 1 of 2)Facility Type Location of InterestDistance to Project Site BoundaryResidentialNearest Full-Time Resident0.33 mi. (0.53 km) northwest ParkAirport Park0.30 mi. (0.48 km) northwest Paw Print Park1.16 mi. (1.87 km) northwestMedicalFirst Choice Women's Health Center1.37 mi. (2.20 km) northMercy Clinic South1.58 mi. (2.54 km) northMercy Hospital4.21 mi. (6.78 km) northEducationalBlackhawk Technical College Aviation Center0.89 mi. (1.43 km) southwestRock County Christian School1.14 mi. (1.83 km) southJackson Elementary School1.28 mi. (2.06 km) southCommunity CenterCaravilla Education and Rehabilitation Comm Center1.62 mi. (2.61 km) southAnimal ProductionDairy Production0.51 mi. (0.82 km) eastHorse Pasture0.52 mi. (0.84 km) eastGoat Production0.69 mi. (1.11 km) northwestMacFarland Pheasants, Inc.0.86 mi. (1.38 km) northBeef Production Area0.97 mi. (1.56 km) southwest Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-10Rev. 0Table 19.2.1-1 Sensitive Populations, Nearest Resident, and Landmarks within 5 Miles (8 km) of the Site(Sheet 2 of 2)Facility Type Location of InterestDistance to Project Site BoundaryRivers/Creeks Rock River1.9 mi. (3.1 km) westSpring Brook3 mi. (4.8 km) northTurtle Creek4.5 mi. (7.2 km) southeastFisher Creek3 mi. (4.8 km) northwest Markham Creek2.5 mi. (4.0 km) northwestAirportsSouthern Wisconsin Regional Airport0.4 mi. (0.6 km) westRailroadUnion Pacific Railroad1.7 mi. (2.7 km) northwestHighwaysU.S. Highway 51Adjacent to the site boundaryU.S. Highway 143.75 mi. (6.0 km) northeastInterstate 39/902.1 mi. (3.4 km) east Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-11Rev. 0[Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]19.2.2RADIOISOTOPE FACILITY DESCRIPTIONSHINE proposes to build a radioisotope facility. This facility produces Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133. The SHINE facility consists of eight irradiation units (IUs) capable of producing up to 8200 6-day curies per week of Mo-99. Figure 19.2.2-1 provides a flow diagram of the isotope production process.[Proprietary Information]19.2.2.1General Description of the Isotope Production ProcessThe SHINE facility produces Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133 as fission products of uranium-235 (U-235) in a subcritical, low enriched uranium (LEU) target solution. The subcritical solution is located in an annular target solution vessel (TSV) and driven by an accelerator-based neutron source located on the center axis of the TSV annulus. The neutron source consists of a deuterium (d or D) beam impacting a tritium (t or T) gas target which produces energetic neutrons via the d(t, 4He)n reaction. The neutron source is supplied with tritium gas from a tritium purification system.The neutron population from the driver is increased as it travels through a neutron multiplier on its way to the TSV, and then further multiplied in the target solution itself via subcritical fission reactions. As the target solution is irradiated, radiolysis and fission will create off-gases that are handled by a system designed to recombine hydrogen and oxygen and trap certain volatile fission products.During normal operation, the IUs are operated on a weekly basis. At the end of each irradiation cycle, the target solution is removed from the TSV and transferred to a hot cell where isotopes are selectively extracted. Purified Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133 are tested by quality control, packaged, and shipped to customers.After the target solution passes through the extraction column, it is evaluated for re-use. In most cases, the solution is returned to the TSV with minimal adjustment. At some point, however, certain fission products that have built up over time may need to be removed from the solution, in which case the solution undergoes a clean-up process.Target solution preparation and clean-up, isotope extraction and purification, and any tanks containing target solution (besides the TSV) generate radioactive off-gases that are captured by a radioactive gas treatment system. The neutron generator, target solution preparation, tritium purification, TSV off-gas handling, radioactive gas treatment, target solution clean-up, isotope extraction, and isotope purification generate radioactive waste in various forms that is processed, packaged, (in some cases) staged, and disposed of according to its classification. Subsection 19.2.5 provides additional information on the radioactive waste treatment systems. Refer to Figure 19.2.2-1 for a flow diagram of the radioisotope production process.
Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-12Rev. 019.2.3WATER CONSUMPTION AND TREATMENT19.2.3.1Water ConsumptionThe Janesville municipal water system will supply the water needs of the SHINE facility. A water use diagram for the facility is provided in Figure 19.2.3-1. Water uses for the facility include the following:*Isotope production*Isotope processing
- Potable water*Fire protection*Facility heating and coolingFor isotope production, water is required for the preparation of the target solution. Water required for isotope production amounts to 175 gallons/day (gpd) (662 liters/day [lpd]). Processing including isotope extraction and purification, target solution clean-up, and waste processing requires 1051 gpd (3979 lpd) of water. There will be no liquid discharges from the radiologically controlled area (RCA) to the Janesville municipal sanitary system.Wastewater from outside the RCA will be discharged to the Janesville municipal sanitary system.Potable water demand is 3270 gpd (12,378 lpd) and blowdown and makeup to the facility heating water system is 2580 gpd (9766 lpd). The makeup requirement to the fire protection system is 5gallons per minute (gpm) (19 liters per minute [lpm]). The largest automatic fire suppression system demand in the event of a fire is 390 gpm (1476 lpm). The automatic fire suppression demand will be supplied by a fire water tank. The makeup water requirement for the facility chilled water supply and distribution system is 5 gpm (19 lpm). The makeup water requirement for the facility heating water system is 5 gpm (19 lpm).19.2.3.2Water TreatmentThe SHINE facility includes the following water treatment processes:*Demineralization (i.e., deionization).*Cooling water treatment.
- Facility heating water system treatment.19.2.3.2.1Water DemineralizationWithin the SHINE facility, most of the water used within the process is demineralized in order to control the addition of chemicals within the water to process streams. This is particularly important given the radiological nature of some parts of the process (and the resultant potential for the formation of activation products), and the necessity of a highly pure Mo-99 product.
Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-13Rev. 019.2.3.2.2Cooling Water TreatmentWater for use in the closed-loop cooling water system is typically treated prior to addition to the loop, and then dosed periodically. The dosing is determined by testing. The types of chemicals added to the water are:*Biocides - added to inhibit microbial growth in the water, which can lead to fouling.*Corrosion inhibitors - added to inhibit corrosion of piping and components the cooling water flows through. Often corrosion is inhibited by halogen-based biocides.*Scale inhibitors - added to reduce scale formation, particularly within heat exchangers. The specific inhibitor(s) is selected based on the chemistry of the makeup water for the cooling water system.19.2.3.2.3Facility Heating Water System TreatmentThe SHINE facility uses a closed-circuit heated water system for building heating. This is referred to as a boiler by HVAC engineers, but the water does not change phases. The feedwater for this system is treated to reduce corrosion and to reduce scaling.The magnitude of corrosion and scaling in any specific application is a function of the feedwater chemistry and the operating conditions of the boiler system. In some instances, feedwater is demineralized prior to being fed to the boiler.The boiler capacity is calculated based on 100 pound-force per square inch gauge (psig) steam, and using a combined 5 percent blowdown and losses (i.e., make-up water is 5 percent of steam flow). The peak annual facility HVAC heat load (Btu/hr) is used as the sizing criteria for the required steam flow rate with a 50 percent margin included for other facility heating usage. 19.2.4COOLING AND HEATING DISSIPATION SYSTEMS19.2.4.1Cooling SystemsWater used for SHINE facility cooling is produced at a central location by multiple air-cooled chillers. The chilled water is circulated in primary-secondary fashion, utilizing heat exchangers (shell and tube type) to isolate the process and HVAC loops from the central chilled water loop. This allows for temperature regulation of the water loops. Chillers have N+1 redundancy (i.e.,there will be one redundant unit). They shut down upon a loss of power event.*Cooling water is used in the SHINE facility for process cooling. A water supply temperature of 85 degrees Fahrenheit (°F) (29 degrees Celsius [°C]) with a return average temperature of 100°F (38°C) is assumed.*Chilled water may be used in the facility for process cooling and is used for HVAC cooling. A chilled water supply temperature of 40°F (4°C) with a 50°F (10°C) return temperature is assumed. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-14Rev. 0The air-cooled chillers operate year-round, rejecting heat directly to the atmosphere through a sensible heat transfer process (forced air blowing over coils). No water is consumed or lost by evaporation in this arrangement. The total estimated heat of rejection witnessed by the chillers:*Estimated peak process load: 2.64 x 10 6 british thermal units per hour (Btu/hr) (2.79 x 10 6 kilojoules per hr [kJ/hr]).*Estimated peak HVAC load: 4.66 x 10 6 Btu/hr (4.92 x 10 6 kJ/hr).*Estimated heat of compression: 1.83 x 10 6 Btu/hr (1.93 x 10 6 kJ/hr).*Estimated total heat rejection load: 9.13 x 10 7 Btu/hr (9.63 x 10 6 kJ/hr).For bounding purposes, the units are considered to run continuously (i.e., 24 hrs per day, 7 days per week).Being a closed-loop system, makeup water is periodic and minimal (less than 10 percent of the system capacity per year). Makeup water is treated. Water treatment is standard chemical treatment.The chillers contain non-chlorofluorocarbon refrigerant and are located outdoors. The SHINE facility does not use cooling towers.19.2.4.2Heating SystemMultiple natural gas fired boilers provide heating water to the HVAC air handlers. The peak boiler load is 6.6 MBtu/hr (6.3 kJ/hr), with a total annual natural gas consumption of 7.67 x 10 7 standard cubic feet (scf) (2.17 x 10 6 cubic meters [m 3]). Ultimately, all of this heat ends up in the environment.This assumes a natural gas heat content of 900 Btu/scf, an 80 percent efficient boiler, no recirculation, operation 24 hours per day and 7 days per week, supply air volume of 156,000 cubic feet per minute (4417 cubic meters per minute) at site altitude and a reheat capability up to 75°F (24°C).19.2.5WASTE SYSTEMS19.2.5.1Sources of Radioactive Liquid, Solid, and Gaseous Waste Material 19.2.5.1.1FacilityThe sources of radioactive liquid, solid, gaseous waste generated by the operation of the SHINE facility are as follows:*Neutron generators.*Waste generated by the TSV solution preparation process includes used cans in which new uranium metal is received, personnel protective equipment (PPE), and spent filters.*Waste generated by the operation of the TSV off-gas system includes spent zeolite beds. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-15Rev. 0[Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]*Waste generated by operation of the Mo-99 recovery system includes the spent extraction columns, spent wash solution, and rotovap condensate.*Waste generated by the target vessel solution cleanup process includes [Proprietary Information] UREX raffinate, non-RCRA (Res ource Conservation and Recovery Act) spent solvent when replaced infrequently, spent resin columns, and spent caustic scrubber solution.*Routine waste from maintenance activities.*The Mo-99 purification process produces waste consisting of glassware and liquid waste.19.2.5.1.2Nearby Operating FacilitiesFacilities that handle and store radioactive materials in the area of the SHINE facility are discussed in Subsection 19.3.8.5.19.2.5.2Type and Quantity of Radionuclides and Hazardous MaterialsThe type and quantity of radionuclides and hazardous materials is provided in Table 19.2.5-1.19.2.5.3Description of Waste Systems19.2.5.3.1Solid Radioactive Waste Handling SystemClass A solid waste consists of Class A trash (e.g., personal protective equipment [PPE], Mo-99 purification glassware, filters), extraction columns, and the neutron generators. The Class A trash is consolidated for low specific activity (LSA) shipment. Extraction columns are replaced after each TSV processing batch. After a two week decay period in the Mo extraction cell, the columns are stored within the facility for further decay and consolidated for LSA shipment. The neutron generators are planned to be replaced on an approximately yearly basis. After replacement, the neutron generators are size-reduced and consolidated for shipment as LSA. The Class A trash, extraction columns, and the neutron generators are shipped approximately yearly to EnergySolutions' (ES) disposal site.The zeolite beds are associated with the TSV off-gas system. The toxicity characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP) may or may not result in th e classification of zeolite beds as Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) waste; however, testing of untreated silver mordenite at Hanford indicated the material ex ceeds TCLP limits prior to solidification. The waste is also radioactive and would be a mixed low level waste (MLLW). Tritium, iodine, xenon, and krypton enters these beds. Only iodine is adsorbed in the zeolite beds. The waste classification for this material is a function of both the efficiency of the zeolite beds and the change out frequency of the beds. It is likely the beds, in terms of operational lifetime, could build up enough iodine-129 to be greater than Class C (GTCC) waste. The zeolite is shipped to an off-site processor. The shipment is a Type B shipment and occurs infrequently. The processor for the zeolite beds is Waste Control Specialists (WCS) in Andrews, Texas. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies19.2-16Rev. 2[Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]The ion exchange resin used for removal of cesium-137 (Cs-137) and cerium (Ce) has a high capacity for Cs-137 capture and will be changed out based on curie limits at the receiving facility and also based on shipping limits. The spent resins are solidified in a shielded waste processing hot cell. The used resin is classified as GTCC waste and is shipped as Type B to an off-site location for long-term storage at WCS.As discussed above, the target solution cleanup system uses an anion exchange column to remove technetium and iodine. When the anion exchange resin is replaced, the spent resin is solidified on-site and sent off-site for disposal (WCS in Andrews, Texas). There will be no solid waste disposal at the SHINE site.19.2.5.3.2Liquid Radioactive Waste System Liquid waste discharged from the various processes at the SHINE facility (other than spent solvent) are combined into one of two tanks. Two tanks are needed to allow liquid waste to decay and also so that a somewhat consistent radiological environment exists for waste processing. Once the first tank is filled the other tank will begin to fill. At this point the pH is adjusted so that the waste can be passed through an ion exchange resin for removal of Cs-137 and Ce-144/ Pr-144. This allows the majority of the liquid stream to become Class A waste. This cleaned-up material is then sent to an evaporator for volume reduction. The evaporator overheads are reused and the bottoms are solidified and shipped to ES for final disposal. The spent resin treatment is discussed in the section above. No liquid radioactive waste is discharged from the
SHINE facility.The spent solvent is not a RCRA waste and is replaced once per year. The solvent is sent to a processor (Diversified Scientific Services, Inc [DSSI], in Kingston, Tennessee) for thermal treatment.[Proprietary Information] This waste is classified as Class B waste and is shipped as Type B to WCS in Andrews, Texas. [Proprietary Information] The waste is solidified in a hot cell using Portland cement. Some additives may be required based on the final chemistry of incoming resin and precipitate. These shipments are Type B shipments. There will be no liquid waste disposal at the SHINE site.19.2.5.4Proposed Hazardous Material Disposal ActivityThe only hazardous (or potentially hazardous) materials are [Proprietary Information] and the zeolite beds. Although small quantities of [Proprietary Information] is expected to pass TCLP, and is not considered hazardous waste. Waste streams with a hazardous component are mixed low-level waste such as the zeolite beds and are handled as described in Subsection 19.2.5.3.1. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-17Rev. 019.2.5.5Direct Radiation Sources Stored On-Site or near the SHINE Facility19.2.5.5.1Direct Radiation Sources Stored On-SiteThe wastes listed in Table 19.2.5-1 are stored on-site for a period of time before they are shipped off-site. The frequency of shipment of each type of waste is provided in Table19.2.5-1.LEU metal is stored in the target solution preparation area. Medical isotopes will not be stored for any significant time period as they must be shipped to clients as quickly as possible.19.2.5.5.2Direct Radiation Sources Stored near the SHINE FacilityThere are no direct radiation sources stored near the SHINE facility. Facilities that handle and store radioactive materials in the area of the SHINE facility are discussed in Subsection 19.3.8.5.19.2.5.6Pollution Prevention and Waste Minimization 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 SHINE facility will have a program for pollution prevention and waste minimization that includes the following:*Waste minimization and recycling for the various phases of the SHINE facility 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. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewProposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies19.2-18Rev. 2 [Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]Table 19.2.5-1 Estimated Type and Quantity of Radioactive Wastes Associated with the SHINE Facility(Sheet 1 of 3)DescriptionMatrixClass as GeneratedContentsVolume Volume as shipped (ft 3)55-gallon drum equivalent as shippedShipmentTypeNumber of Shipments/yrDestinationNeutron GeneratorSolidAActivated metal parts4338ft3/yr4338590LSA3.00ESExtraction ColumnsSolidAStainless resin columnsClass A TrashSolidAPPE, Mo-99 purification glassware, filters, etcSpent SolventLiquid(a)An-dodecane, tributyl phosphate22 gallons/ yr--0.4LSA1.00DSSITc/I columnsResinCResin16 gallons/ yr233.1Type B0.3WCSZeolite BedsSolidGTCCSilver coated beds0.4 ft3/yr0.40.05Type B1.00WCSCs/Ce MediaResinGTCCResin16 gallons/ yr233.1Type B0.3WCS[Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information]B[Proprietary Information]295 gallons/yr 7911Type B1.00WCS Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewProposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies19.2-19Rev. 0 [Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]Table 19.2.5-1 Estimated Type and Quantity of Radioactive Wastes Associated with the SHINE Facility(Sheet 2 of 3)DescriptionMatrixClass as GeneratedContentsVolume Volume as shipped (ft 3)55-gallon drum equivalent as shipped Shipment TypeNumber of Shipments/yrDestinationSpent WashesLiquid(a)A[Proprietary Information]59,708 gallons/yr97381324LSA18ESRotvap CondensateLiquid(a)A[Proprietary Information]UREX RaffinateLiquid(a)B[Proprietary Information]Decontamination WasteLiquid(a)ADecon fluid unknownSpent Eluate SolutionLiquid(a)A[Proprietary Information] NOx Scrubber SolutionLiquid(a)A[Proprietary Information] Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewProposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies19.2-20Rev. 0Table 19.2.5-1 Estimated Type and Quantity of Radioactive Wastes Associated with the SHINE Facility(Sheet 3 of 3)a)Liquid waste discharged from the various processes at the SHINE facility is either solidified and then shipped to a waste depository or reused. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-21Rev. 019.2.6STORAGE, TREATMENT, AND TRANSPORTATION OF RADIOACTIVE AND NONRADIOACTIVE MATERIALS, INCLUDING LEU, WASTE, RADIOISOTOPES, AND ANY OTHER MATERIALSThere are no storage needs for enriched uranium fuel, irradiated enriched uranium, or medical isotope product. LEU metal (not fuel) is stored in the target solution preparation area. Medical isotopes will not be stored for any significant time period as these items will be transported to clients as quickly as possible. Irradiated enriched uranium is not stored, as the facility cleans up and recycles this material. The radiological wastes listed in Table 19.2.5-1 are stored on-site for a period of time before they are shipped off-site. The frequency of shipment of each type of waste is provided in Table 19.2.5-1. Enough storage capacity is provided on-site to accommodate the amount of waste between shipments to the off-site repositories. Subsections 19.2.5.3.1 and 19.2.5.3.2 discuss solid and liquid radioactive waste handling. Radioactive waste gases are discussed in Subsection 19.4.8.2.The treatment and packaging for shipment of radioactive and nonradioactive wastes and medical isotopes are controlled with SHINE facility procedures.The packaging systems used to transport enriched uranium, radioactive wastes, and medical isotopes are licensed for the class and type of material that is being transported.The target solution for the SHINE irradiation unit is made on-site at the SHINE facility from LEU metal purchased from Y-12, located in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Y-12 is approximately 650 miles by road from Janesville, Wisconsin.The radioactive wastes will be transported to the destinations listed on Table 19.2.5-1. The distances from the SHINE facility to these facilities are provided in Subsection 19.4.10.1.1.The medical isotopes produced by SHINE are shipped to three processing facilities, as discussed in Subsection 19.4.10.1.1. The distances from the SHINE facility to these facilities are provided in Subsection 19.4.10.1.1. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Site Location and Layout SHINE Medical Technologies Rev. 0 Figure 19.2.1 SHINE Facility Site Layout
Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Radioisotope Facility DescriptionSHINE Medical Technologies Rev. 1Figure 19.2.2 Isotope Production System High-Level Flow Diagram Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water Consumption and Treatment SHINE Medical Technologies Rev. 0 Figure 19.2.3 Water Balance Diagram
Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4) Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTable of ContentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-iRev. 0SECTION 19.3 DESCRIPTION OF THE A FFECTED ENVIRONMENTTable of Contents SectionTitlePage19.3DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT..................................19.3-119.3.1LAND USE AND VISUAL RESOURCES.....................................................19.3-119.3.2AIR QUALITY AND NOISE..........................................................................19.3-919.3.3GEOLOGIC ENVIRONMENT.......................................................................19.3-6519.3.4WATER RESOURCES.................................................................................19.3-7119.3.5ECOLOGICAL RESOURCES......................................................................19.3-9619.3.6HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES................................................19.3-12019.3.7SOCIOECONOMICS....................................................................................19.3-13419.3.8HUMAN HEALTH.........................................................................................19.3-164 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-iiRev. 0List of Tables NumberTitle19.3.1-1Summary of 2006 Land Use/Land Cover within SHINE Site and Region19.3.1-2Crop Production Estimates for SHINE Site and Rock County, Wisconsin19.3.1-3City of Janesville Land Use19.3.2-1Selected Characteristics of Wisconsin Physiographic Provinces19.3.2-2Madison, Wisconsin Climatic Means and Extremes19.3.2-3Rockford, Illinois Climatic Means and Extremes 19.3.2-4Madison, Wisconsin and Rockford, Illinois Additional Climatic Means and Extremes19.3.2-5List of NOAA ASOS Stations Located within the Site Climate Region19.3.2-6List of NOAA COOP Stations in the Site Climate Region for which Clim-20 Summaries are Available19.3.2-6List of NOAA COOP Stations in the Site Climate Region for which Clim-20 Summaries are Available19.3.2-7Nearest Federal Class I Areas to the SHINE Site 19.3.2-8Regional Tornadoes and Waterspouts 19.3.2-9Details of Strongest Tornadoes in Rock County, Wisconsin19.3.2-10 Details of Strongest Tornadoes in Surrounding Counties Adjacent to Rock County, Wisconsin19.3.2-11Precipitation Extremes at Local and Regional NOAA COOP Meteorological Monitoring Stations within the Site Climate Region19.3.2-12Mean Seasonal and Annual Hail or Sleet Frequencies at Rockford, Illinois and Madison, Wisconsin19.3.2-13Ice Storms that have Affected Rock County, Wisconsin19.3.2-14Mean Seasonal Thunderstorm Frequencies at Rockford, Illinois and Madison, Wisconsin Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-iiiRev. 0List of Tables(Continued) NumberTitle19.3.2-15Design Wet and Dry Bulb Temperatures19.3.2-16Estimated 100-Year Return Maximum and Minimum DBT, MCWB coincident with the 100-Year Return Maximum DBT, Historic Maximum WBT and Estimated 100-Year Annual Maximum Return WBT19.3.2-17Dry Bulb Temperature Extremes at Local and Regional NOAA COOP Meteorological Monitoring Stations within the Site Climate Region19.3.2-18FAA Specifications for Automated Weather Observing Stations19.3.2-19Annual Data Recovery Rates (in Percent) of Dry Bulb Temperatures, Relative Humidity, Wind Speed, and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport for 2005-201019.3.2-20Historical Dry Bulb Temperatures, Relative Humidity, and Wind Speed from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport for 2005-201019.3.2-21Annual Joint Data Recovery Rates of Wind Speed, Wind Direction, and Computed Pasquill Stability Class from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport19.3.2-22Pasquill Stability Class Frequency Distributions from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (Percent) 2005-201019.3.2-23Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class A)19.3.2-24Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class B)19.3.2-25Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class C)19.3.2-26Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class D)19.3.2-27Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class E)19.3.2-28Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class F) Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-ivRev. 0List of Tables(Continued) NumberTitle19.3.2-29Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class G)19.3.2-30Representative Environmental Noise Levels19.3.4-1Rockford, Illinois Climatic Means and Extremes19.3.4-2Rainfall Depth-Duration-Frequency Data for Janesville Vicinity19.3.4-3USGS Streamflow Monitoring Stations in Rock County, Wisconsin19.3.4-4Flood Discharge Frequency Data - Rock River at Afton, Wisconsin19.3.4-5Annual Minimum Low Flows - Rock River at Afton19.3.4-6Groundwater Monitoring Well Water Table Elevations19.3.4-7Surface Water Analytical Results19.3.4-8SHINE Medical Surface Water Field Data - Janesville19.3.4-9Groundwater Analytical Results for Monitoring Wells19.3.4-10SHINE Medical Groundwater Field Data - Janesville19.3.5-1Fish Potentially Occurring near the SHINE Site 19.3.5-2Benthic Macroinvertebrates Collected in an Unnamed Stream (Tributaryof the Rock River) near the SHINE Site19.3.5-3Terrestrial Plants Observed on or near the SHINE Site19.3.5-4Mammals Potentially Occurring on or near the SHINE Site19.3.5-5Avifaunal Species Potentially Occurring on or near the SHINE Site 19.3.5-6Reptiles and Amphibians Potentially Occurring on or near the SHINE Site19.3.5-7Protected Species near the SHINE Site19.3.6-1Previously Recorded Cultural Resources Surveys within 1-mi. (1.6-km) of the Site Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-vRev. 0List of Tables(Continued) NumberTitle19.3.6-2Eligible or Listed Archaeological Sites within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site, Rock County, Wisconsin19.3.6-3Historic Structures and Districts Listed on the NRHP within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site19.3.7-1Rock County Labor Force Distribution by County of Employee Residence19.3.7-2Comparison of Estimated Major SHINE Labor Force Needs with Estimated Rock County Available Work Force19.3.7-3Population and Growth Rates of Municipalities within Rock County19.3.7-4Resident Population Distribution, Growth Rates, and Projections for Rock County 19.3.7-5Estimated Transient Population within 5 mi. (8 km) of the SHINE Site (2010)19.3.7-6Demographic (Race and Ethnicity) Characteristics of Rock County19.3.7-7Median Household and Per Capita Income Levels within RockCounty 19.3.7-8Civilian Labor Force and Unemployment Rates within Rock County, 2002-201219.3.7-9Employment by Industry within Rock County 19.3.7-10Top 10 Employers within the ROI (Rock County), City of Janesville 19.3.7-11Percent of Individuals and Families Living Below the Census PovertyThreshold within Rock County19.3.7-12Housing Unit Characteristics within Rock County19.3.7-13Tax Rates in Rock County and State of Wisconsin 19.3.7-14Major Municipal Water Suppliers in Rock County 19.3.7-15Rock County Community Water Supply Characteristics (2010)19.3.7-16Public Wastewater Treat ment Systems in Rock County 19.3.7-17Public School Enrollment (2012) within Rock County Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-viRev. 0List of Tables(Continued) NumberTitle19.3.7-18Recreation Facilities within Rock County 19.3.8-1Distance to Nearest Agricultural and Urban Facilities19.3.8-2Chemicals Used/Stored Within Five Miles of the Site Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of FiguresSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-viiRev. 0List of Figures NumberTitle19.3.1-1Aerial View of the SHINE Site19.3.1-2Major Land Uses within the Region19.3.1-3Janesville Site Region19.3.1-4Special Land Use Classifications within the Region 19.3.1-5Prime Farmland within the Site19.3.1-6Prime Farmland within the Region19.3.1-7Other Land Use Features near the SHINE Site19.3.1-8Major Population Centers and Infrastructure19.3.1-9Site Visual Setting 19.3.2-1Principle Tracks of Winter Synoptic Cyclones that Potentially Affect Wisconsin Weather19.3.2-2Physiographic Provinces of Wisconsin19.3.2-3Mean Wisconsin Winter Month Temperatures19.3.2-4Mean Wisconsin Spring Month Temperatures 19.3.2-5Mean Wisconsin Summer Month Temperatures19.3.2-6Mean Wisconsin Autumn Month Temperatures19.3.2-7Mean Wisconsin Winter Month Precipitation 19.3.2-8Mean Wisconsin Spring Month Precipitation19.3.2-9Mean Wisconsin Summer Month Precipitation19.3.2-10Mean Wisconsin Autumn Month Precipitation 19.3.2-11NOAA COOP Network Climate Divisions of Wisconsin19.3.2-12Outline of Climate Region Representative of the Site19.3.2-13Illinois Annual Mean Water Equivalent Precipitation Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of FiguresSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-viii Rev. 0List of Figures(Continued) NumberTitle19.3.2-14Illinois Annual Mean Snowfall19.3.2-15Illinois Annual Mean Dry Bulb Temperatures19.3.2-16NOAA ASOS Stations Located within the Site Climate Region19.3.2-17NOAA COOP Stations Located within the Site Climate Region 19.3.2-18Wisconsin and Illinois Counties within Site Climate Region Selected for Investigation of Severe Weather Phenomena19.3.2-19Annual Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-20January Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-21February Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-22March Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-23April Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010) 19.3.2-24May Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-25June Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-26July Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010) 19.3.2-27August Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-28September Wind Rose Souther n Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-29October Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-30November Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-31December Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-32Winter Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010) 19.3.2-33Spring Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-34Summer Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010) Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of FiguresSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-ixRev. 0List of Figures(Continued) NumberTitle19.3.2-35Autumn Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-36Annual Wind Roses Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (Janesville, WI) and Regional Stations19.3.3-1Geotechnical Investigation Boring Locations19.3.3-2Generalized Geologic Cross Section of Rock County, West-East19.3.3-3Wisconsin Stratigraphic Column19.3.3-4Regional Structural Geology19.3.3-5Site Cross Section19.3.3-6Seismic Hazard Map19.3.3-7Capable Fault Zones19.3.4-1Project Area Watershed - Tributary to Rock River 19.3.4-2Project Area Local Drainage19.3.4-3Long-Term Annual Streamflows and Precipitation in Rock County19.3.4-4Project Water Monitoring Locations 19.3.4-5Groundwater Elevation Isopleth, Fourth Quarter, 201119.3.4-6Groundwater Elevation Isopleth, First Quarter, 201219.3.4-7Groundwater Elevation Isopleth, Second Quarter, 2012 19.3.4-8Groundwater Elevation Isopleth, Third Quarter, 201219.3.5-1Ecoregions within a 50-Mi. (80 Km) Radius of the SHINE Site19.3.5-2Ecological Resource Entities of Special Interest in Rock County 19.3.5-3Ecology Sampling Locations19.3.6-1Historic Properties Listed on the National Register of Historic Places Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of FiguresSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-xRev. 0List of Figures(Continued) NumberTitle19.3.7-1Population Centers within Rock County19.3.7-2Existing Transportation Network within Rock County19.3.7-3Existing Transportation Network in Proximity to the SHINE Site19.3.7-4Major Recreation Facilities within Rock County 19.3.8-1Janesville Features and Distances from Site Boundary (1-6Mile Range)19.3.8-2Janesville Features and Distances from Site Boundary (0-1Mile Range) Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-xiRev. 0Acronyms and AbbreviationsAcronym/Abbreviation Definition °Cdegrees Celsius °Fdegrees Fahrenheit µS/cmmicro-Siemens per centimeter/Qrelative atmospheric concentration AASHTOAmerican Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials ac.acreAFCCCAir Force Combat Climatology Center ASCEAmerican Society of Civil Engineers ASHRAEAmerican Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc.ASOS Stationautomated surface observing station AWOSautomated weather observing station BIABureau of Indian Affairs BLMBureau of Land Management BLSBureau of Labor Statistics BTOCbelow top of casing Bu.bushelCCelciusC-14carbon-14 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-xiiRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition CFRCode of Federal Regulations cfscubic feet per second CFUcolony-forming units Clim-20Climatography of the United States No. 20 cmcentimeter cm/scentimeters per second cm/hrcentimeters per hour cm/yr.centimeters per year cmscubic meters per second COOP(National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) cooperative observing station dBAA-weighted decibels DBTdry bulb temperaturedegdegreesDORDepartment of Revenue DPIDepartment of Public Instruction DWDDepartment of Workforce Development EeastE[M]expected moment magnitude E-coliEscherichia coli Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-xiii Rev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition EDSEnvironmental Data Service ENEeast-northeast EPRIElectric Power Research Institute ESEeast-southeast FFahrenheit FAAFederal Aviation Administration FEMAFederal Emergency Management Agency fpsfeet per second ft.feetgthe acceleration of an object due to the force of gravityGISgeographical information system GMGeneral Motorsgpdgallons per daygpd/ftgallons per day per foot GHGgreenhouse gases Hhighhahectarehr.hourHSGHydrologic Soil Group Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-xivRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition HUCHydrologic Unit CodeI-39Interstate Highway 39I-43Interstate Highway 43I-90Interstate Highway 90I-131iodine-131 IAEAInternational Atomic Energy Agency IDOAIllinois Department of Agriculture IHPAIllinois Historic Preservation Agency ILIllinoisin.inch(es)in. Hginches of mercury in/hrinches per hour in/yrinches per year ISMCSinternational station meteorological climate summaryJFDjoint frequency distribution K-40potassium-40 kg/m2kilograms per square meterKJVLmeteorological station identifier for Janesville, Wisconsin Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-xvRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition kmkilometer(s) KMSNmeteorological station identifier for Madison, Wisconsin KRFDmeteorological station identifier for Rockford, IllinoisKYKentuckyLlowlb/ft2pounds per square foot LCDlocal climatological dataLdnday night average sound level lpdliters per day lpmliters per minute LU/LCland use/land cover MmoderateMmoment magnitude mmeter(s)m/smeters per secondmax.maximumMCWBmean coincident wet bulb temperature Mgdmillion gallons per day mg/Lmilligrams per liter Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-xviRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition mg/m3milligrams per cubic meterMHSMercy Health SystemMIMichigan mi.mile(s) mi.2square milesminminutesmin.minimum mLmilliliters Mldmillion liters per dayMNMinnesotaMOMissouri mphmiles per hour MPNmost probable number mrem/yrmillirem per yearMSAMSA Professional Services, Inc.MSLabove mean sea level mSV/yrmillisievert per year mVmillivoltMWemegawatt electric Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-xviiRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition MWtmegawatt thermal NnorthNAICSNorth American Industry Classification System NAIPNational Agricultural Imagery Program NAVD 88North American Vertical Datum of 1988 NCDCNational Climatic Data Center NDnot detected above the detection limit NEnortheast NHINational Heritage Inventory NLCD2006National Land Cover Database 2006 NLSINational Lightning Safety Institute NNEnorth-northeast NNWnorth-northwest NOAANational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NPDESNational Pollutant Discharge Elimination SystemNPSNational Park Service NRNatural Resources NRCU.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-xviii Rev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition NRCSNatural Resources Conservation Service NRHPNational Register of Historic Properties NTUnephelometric turbidity unit NWnorthwest NWSNational Weather Service NWSFONational Weather Service Forecast Office PCBpolychlorinated biphenyl PMPprobable maximum precipitation PWRpressurized water reactor remroentgen equivalent man RMSEroot mean square error ROIregion of influence SEsoutheast secsecondsSHstate highway SHINESHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. SICStandard Industrial Classification sq. kmsquare kilometer sq. mi.square mile SSEsouth-southeast Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-xixRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition SSURGOSoil Survey Geographic Database SSWsouth-southwest Sv/yrsievert per year SWsouthwest SWRASouthern Wisconsin Regional Airport (Janesville, Wisconsin) SWWDBSouthwest Wisconsin Workforce Development BoardTBEESTeledyne Brown Engineering Environmental ServicesTMDLtotal maximum daily load TOCtop of casing USU.S. Highway USACEU.S. Army Corps of Engineers USAFU.S. Air Force USCBU.S. Census Bureau USDAU.S. Department of Agriculture USDOCU.S. Department of Commerce USDOIU.S. Department of the Interior USEPAU.S. Environmental Protection Agency USFWSU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-xxRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition USGSU.S. Geological Survey UTCUniversal Time, Coordinated UWNRUniversity of Wisconsin Nuclear Reactor vpdvehicles per day WBANWeather Bureau Army Navy WBBAWisconsin Breeding Bird Atlas WBTwet bulb temperature WDNRWisconsin Department of Natural Resources WHSWisconsin Historical Society WIWisconsin WISCLANDWisconsin Initiative for Statewide Cooperation on Landscape Analysis and Data WisDOTWisconsin Department of Transportation WNWwest-northwest WPDESWisconsin Pollutant Discharge Elimination SystemWSWwest-southwest yd.yardyryear Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-1Rev. 0CHAPTER 1919.3DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT19.3.1LAND USE AND VISUAL RESOURCESThis subsection describes the characteristics of the land use of the SHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. (SHINE) site and the region. In addition, a description of the visual resources of the site is provided. The land use for the site and region is analyzed using the National Land Cover Database 2006 (NLCD2006) (Fry, et al., 2011) land use/land cover (LU/LC) database. This provides a more recent and unified database than use of both the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) Wisconsin Initiative for Statewide Cooperation on Landscape Analysis and Data (WISCLAND) database and the Illinois Department of Agriculture (IDOA) Land Cover of Illinois database. The visual resources are rated using the U.S. Department of the Interior (USDOI) - Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Visual Resource Management System.19.3.1.1Land Use19.3.1.1.1SiteThe SHINE site consists of a 91.27-acre (ac.) (36.9hectare [ha]) parcel located south of the City of Janesville in Rock County, Wisconsin (Figure19.3.1-1). Given the undeveloped nature of the site, there are no existing structures or infrastructure located within the site boundary. The approximate limits of the proposed restricted area are located near the center of the site as shown on Figure 19.3.1-1. Due to the nature of the facility, there are no exclusion areas on either the proposed site or adjacent properties. Facilities proposed to be located on the developed SHINE site are described in Section 19.2 and illustrated in Figure19.2.1-1LU/LC as mapped by the National Land Cover Database (Fry, et al., 2011) within the property site consists almost entirely of undeveloped cultivated crop lands (Figure 19.3.1-2). Table 19.3.1-1 presents the acreage and percent coverage of the 15 mapped land uses within the site and region. LU/LC on-site consists of 99.8percent cultivated agricultural land and 0.2 percent developed/open space. U.S. Highway(US) 51 borders the western boundary of the SHINE site, and the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (SWRA) is located immediately to the west of US51 (Figure19.3.1-1). 19.3.1.1.2RegionThe "region" of the SHINE site is defined as the area within a 5-mile (mi.) (8-kilometer[km]) radius of the site centerpoint (Figure 19.3.1-3). The entire region is contained within Rock County, Wisconsin. Major land uses within the region are listed in Table 19.3.1-1 and depicted in Figure 19.3.1-2. The dominant land use in the region is agricultural/crops (50.2percent). Pasture/hay fields (11.7percent), low intensity developed lands (11.7percent), deciduous forest areas (6.6percent), and open space developed lands (6.1percent) make up the other major land uses. The remaining land uses within the region include open water, medium intensity developed lands, high intensity developed lands, barren lands, evergreen forest, mixed forest, shrub/scrub, grassland, woody wetlands, and emergent herbaceous wetlands. The City of Janesville is located directly to the north and is within the region. The northern limits of the City of Beloit are located approximately 3.7 mi. (6.0km) to the south of the site. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-2Rev. 019.3.1.1.3Special Land UsesFederal and State special land use classification areas within the region are shown in Figure 19.3.1-4. According to the USDOI-Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) (2012) there is no federal land held in trust for an American Indian tribe within the 5 mi. (8 km) region. The WDNR manages two parcels of land in the region, both located southwest of the site. Located south of the airport and 1.9 mi. (3.0 km) from the site is a 112 ac. (45.3 ha) parcel that was gifted to the WDNR, but has no designated use. Rock River Prairie is a 37 ac. (15.0 ha) State Natural Area located 3.5 mi. (5.6 km) from the SHINE site and is accessed from US 51. There are no military reservations, federal designated wild and scenic rivers, national parks, national forests or federal designated coastal zone areas within the region.19.3.1.1.4Agricultural Resources and Facilities As is illustrated in Figure 19.3.1-5, both prime farmland and farmland of statewide importance occur within the site boundaries. Warsaw silt loam is the prime farmland soil type, whereas Lorenzo loam is the soil type of state-wide importance. Prime farmland and farmland of state-wide importance located within the region are shown in Figure 19.3.1-6. Approximately 41,950ac. (16,977ha) of the area within the region are lands having soils classified as prime farmland or farmland of statewide importance. The principal agricultural products produced within the area, as estimated by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), consist of corn, oats, winter wheat, soybeans, and corn silage (USDA, 2011). The potential relative value of the 91.27 ac. (36.9ha) of farmland acquired for the site would be 13,771 bushels (Bu.) of grain corn or 3947 bushels (Bu.) of soybeans annually (Table 19.3.1-2). These values are based on the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) crop production estimates for Rock County, WI during the period from 2001-2010.Other agricultural resources in the immediate area of the SHINE site include farms that are used for dairy production, beef production, and other livestock production (Figure 19.3.1-7). There are also commercial game harvest farms in the region of the site, which are owned by MacFarlane Pheasants, Inc. MacFarlane Pheasants Inc. is the largest pheasant farm in North America and has been in operation since 1929. The company specializes in the production of a variety of game birds including pheasants and Hungarian partridge (MacFarlane Pheasants, Inc., 2012). Hormel Foods has a food processing plant located in Beloit, WI, just outside of the region (Hormel, 2013).19.3.1.1.5Mineral ResourcesAccording to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Western Ecology Division's Ecoregions of Wisconsin (USEPA, 201 2a), the SHINE site is part of the Rock River Drift Plain Level IV ecoregion, which is located within the Southeastern Wisconsin Till Plains Level III ecoregion. The Rock River Drift Plain has generally steeper topography than surrounding ecoregions, with broad glacial drift outwash plains characterized by loamy deposits over sandy and gravelly soils with moderate to very rapid permeability. The most important mineral resources in this ecoregion are sand, gravel, and crushed stone (Zaporozec, Alexander, 1982). There are no gravel or sand mining operations on-site, however two sand and gravel operations occur within the region (Find the Data, 2012). No other mineral resources are known to be present in the region. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-3Rev. 019.3.1.1.6Major Population Centers and InfrastructurePopulation centers and the major infrastructure of Rock County are shown on Figure19.3.1-8. The only major population centers (> 25,000 residents) located within Rock County are Janesville and Beloit. Subsection 19.3.7 provides a description of the demographics of these centers and their community characteristics. The major transportation corridors within Rock County include Interstate Highways 39 (I-39) and 90 (I-90), US 14 and 51, and State Highway (SH) 11. Major rail lines or rail systems within the county are owned by Chicago and Northwestern Railroad and Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul, and Pacific Railroad. The only public airport located within the county is the SWRA in Janesville, Wisconsin. No major transportation waterways occur within the region.19.3.1.1.7Land Use PlansCurrent and future land use plans for the area immediately adjacent to the SHINE site and region are represented by the comprehensive plans for the City of Janesville (Vandewalle & Associates, 2009a and 2009b.) Land uses within the City of Janesville are characterized in the City's comprehensive plan (Vandewalle & Associates, 2009a). Land use categories included in the Janesville Comprehensive Plan include the following:
- Residential, Exurban - generally single-family residential development on private well and on-site waste treatment systems, generally at densities between one dwelling unit per acre (0.4 ha) and one dwelling unit per 35 ac. (14.2ha).
- Residential, Single-Family Urban - publicly sewered singl e family residential development.
- Residential, Two-Family/Townhouse - attached single family, two-family, and walk-up townhouse residential development.
- Residential, Multi-Family - a variety of residential units focused in particular on multiple family housing (3+ units per building).
- Office - Office, institutional, research, and office-support land uses.
- Commercial - indoor commercial, retail, institutional and service uses with moderate landscaping and signage.
- Light Industrial - indoor industrial land uses and controlled outdoor storage areas with moderate landscaping and signage.
- Heavy Industrial - carefully controlled heavy industrial, storage, and disposal land uses, with limited landscaping and signage.
- Community Facilities - large-scale public buildings, hospitals, youth and elderly service facilities, and special-care facilities. Small community facilities uses may be located in lands designated as other land use categories.
- Parks and Open Space - park and public open space facilities devoted to playgrounds, play fields, trails, picnic areas, and related recreational activities, and conservation areas.
- Extraction - quarries, gravel pits, clay extraction, peat extraction, and extraction-related land uses.
- Vacant - undeveloped land within the City limits.
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-4Rev. 0*Agriculture - agricultural and related uses, including cropland, farmsteads, operations, and single family residential development with maximum development densities of one dwelling unit per 35 ac. (14.2 ha).
- Surface Water - lakes, rivers, creeks, and perennial streams.
- Rights-of-Way - publicly owned land for roads, highways, and railroads.The total acreage of lands within the 2007 city limits that are classified in each of the land use categories are summarized in Table 19.3.1-3. Dominant land use categories include single family residential (24percent), rights of way (17percent), vacant lands (16percent), community facilities (11percent), and parks and open space (11percent) (Vandewalle & Associates, 2009a). Subsection 19.3.7.2 provides additional information regarding major employers (including industrial and commercial) in Janesville.The lands containing the SHINE site and its immediate environs to the east and south are listed as being agricultural lands on the existing land use map (Vandewalle & Associates, 2009a). The adjacent airport and associated lands west of US 51 are identified as "community facilities," and lands immediately to the northeast of the site are listed as "vacant." These "vacant" lands correspond to the parcels included as part of a Tax Increment Financing district proposed for development. However, according to the future land use plan of the City of Janesville, the site and its environs east of US 51 are proposed for development as light industrial land uses (Vandewalle & Associates, 2009b).19.3.1.2Visual Resources The visual setting of the area affected by the construction of the new SHINE facility is represented by agricultural viewsheds to the north and east that consist of predominately flat or a slightly rolling terrain dominated by cultivated fields (Figure 19.3.1-9). The site itself is composed completely of land used for agricultural purposes and has no established structures. The viewshed to the south of the SHINE site consists of both agricultural fields with some light development. Immediately adjacent to the southern border of the site are two large warehouses that support local agricultural operations and provide storage for large farming equipment. The viewshed to the west of the site is a light industrial development landscape that consists of the SWRA and its associated facilities. Specific elements of this landscape include the airport control tower, associated runways, and several large warehouses and hangers. The SWRA supports approximately 50,000 flight operations annually, and the site is in view of the persons utilizing the airport and visitors traveling to the area (Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, 2012a). The new SHINE facility is described and illustrated in Section 19.4.1.2 and is visible to motorists traveling to and from Janesville, WI, on US 51. The new facility is also visible from Airport Park, which is located northwest of the site across US 51. Residential neighborhoods are located north and northwest of the site, but presently there are trees and other vegetation bordering these neighborhoods that obstruct the view of the site.The visual resources and scenic quality of the existing site are rated using the USDOI-BLM Visual Resource Management System (USDOI-BLM, 1984). The Scenic Quality Classification is the rating of the visual appeal of the land designated for the site and is based on an evaluation of seven key factors: landform, vegetation, water, color, adjacent scenery, scarcity, and cultural modifications. The Scenic Quality is classified as either an "A," "B," or "C," with "A" as a high quality visual classification and "C" as a low quality visual rating. The site rates as a "C" classification for low Scenic Quality due to a lack of notable features, uniform landform, low vegetation diversity, an absence of water, mute colors, cultural modifications to adjacent Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-5Rev. 0scenery, and a commonality within the physiographic province. The Sensitivity Level, a measurement of the public concern for scenic quality, was also analyzed using six different indicators of public concern: types of users, amount of use, public interest, adjacent land uses, special areas, and other factors. The Sensitivity Level of the public concern for scenic quality is rated on a High (H), Moderate (M), or Low (L) scale. The site has an L sensitivity rating, as an area with low scenic values resulting from a low sensitivity to changes in visual quality by the type of users in the area, a low amount of use by viewers, low public interest in changes to the visual quality of the site, and a lack of special natural and wilderness areas.
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-6Rev. 0Table 19.3.1-1 Summary of 2006 Land Use/Land Cover within SHINE Site and Regiona) Total may add up to more or less than 100 percent due to rounding.
Reference:
Fry, et al., 2011. NLCD2006 Land Cover Class SHINE Site Regionac.haPercentac.haPercentOpen Water7963221.6%Developed, Open Space0.180.070.2%304312316.1%Developed, Low Intensity5858237111.7%Developed, Medium Intensity19687963.9%Developed, High Intensity9924012.0% Barren43170.1%Deciduous Forest329813356.6%Evergreen Forest68280.1%Mixed Forest100.0%Shrub/Scrub5052041.0% Grassland10494252.1%Pasture/Hay5896238611.7%Cultivated Crops91.0936.8699.8%25,23610,21350.2% Woody Wetlands7222921.4%Emergent Herbaceous Wetland7873181.6% Total(a)91.2736.94100.0%50,26220,339100.0% Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-7Rev. 0Table 19.3.1-2 Crop Production Estimates for SHINE Site and Rock County, Wisconsin YearPlantedHarvestedProductionYieldac.haac.haBu.Bu./ac. Corn2001140,60056,901128,00051,80217,920,0001402002160,50064,954149,70060,58417,664,6001182003151,50061,312140,80056,98219,571,2001392004155,00062,729141,00057,06323,124,0001642005166,00067,180150,00060,70522,200,0001482006152,00061,514141,00057,06322,419,0001592007174,00070,418165,00066,77625,740,0001562008161,00065,157152,00061,51422,192,0001462009162,00065,561153,00061,91925,245,0001652010158,50064,145142,00057,46724,679,600173.8Ten Year Avg., Rock County, WI158,11063,987146,25059,18722,075,540150.9Site Avg.91.2736.9491.2736.9413,771150.9Soybeans2001106,30043,020104,30042,2104,484,90043200299,20040,14697,90039,6203,524,400362003101,70041,158101,40041,0372,535,00025200487,60035,45286,90035,1683,736,70043200588,60035,85687,40035,3714,020,40046200689,20036,09989,00036,0184,539,00051200771,90029,09871,70029,0173,369,90047200881,10032,82181,00032,7812,956,50036.5200980,00032,37679,90032,3363,875,15048.5201086,00034,80485,50034,6024,822,20056.4Ten Year Avg., Rock County, WI89,16036,08388,50035,8163,786,41543.2Site Avg.91.2736.9491.2736.94394743.2
Reference:
USDA, 2011 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-8Rev. 0Table 19.3.1-3 City of Janesville Land UseLand Use CategoryPercentResidential-Single Family Urban24% Residential-Two-Family/Townhouse2%Residential-Multi-Family2%Office1% Commercial4%Office1%Light Industrial4% Heavy Industrial4%Community Facilities11%Parks and Open Space11% Extraction2% Vacant16%Agricultural0%Surface Water2% Right of Way17% Total(a)100%a) Total may add up to more or less than 100 percent due to rounding.
Reference:
Vandewalle & Associates, 2009a. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-9Rev. 019.3.2 AIR QUALITY AND NOISE19.3.2.1Regional Climatology19.3.2.1.1IntroductionClimate is a statistical description of the weather conditions that occur during a long period of time, usually several decades. Weather refers to short-term variations (minutes to months) in the atmosphere.Sources of data typically used to analyze the climate at a site include weather maps (depictions of areal weather phenomena at one instant of time), atlas maps summarizing long-term climate, records of weather at specific monitoring stations at single instants of time, and long-term climatic statistics at specific monitoring stations.The purpose of analysis of regional climate is to understand the local climate at the SHINE site in the context of the climate of the surrounding area. Climate phenomena are then analyzed at progressively smaller scales and within progressively smaller areas. As the area being analyzed decreases, some monitoring stations that are considered initially in the broad analysis are excluded because these stations are found to be unrepresentative of the site climate. The end result is a documented, systematic approach that defines local climate within a context that includes a broad surrounding region.19.3.2.1.2Regional ClimateThe SHINE site is located in south-central Wisconsin. The following discussion summarizes a variety of information that describes the general region in which the SHINE site is located. Because the information is derived from a variety of sources, the geographic area implied by the term "region" is somewhat variable in this introductory discussion. Subsection 19.3.2.1.3 defines a more specific region considered to have a climate representative of the SHINE site, and the subsequent subsections present detailed climatological data for that specific region. The SHINE site is located in a region with the Kppen classification "Daf", which is a humid continental climate with warm summers, snowy winters, and humid conditions (Trewartha, 1954). The climate features a large annual temperature range and frequent short duration temperature changes (NCDC, 2011a). Although there are no pronounced dry seasons, most precipitation occurs during the warmer months. During the autumn, winter, and spring, strong synoptic-scale surface cyclones and anticyclones frequently move across the site region. During the summer, synoptic-scale cyclones are usually weaker and pass north of the site region. Most air masses that affect the site region are generally of polar origin. However, air masses occasionally originate from arctic regions, or the Gulf of Mexico. Air masses originating from the Gulf of Mexico generally do not reach the site region during winter months. There are occasional episodes of extreme heat or high humidity during the summer. The windiest months generally occur during the spring and autumn. The annual average number of days with thunderstorms varies from approximately 45 at the southwest corner of the state of Wisconsin, to approximately 35 at the northeast corner of the state (Moran, J.M. and E.J. Hopkins, 2002). Hail is most frequent in the southwestern and west-central portions of the state, and is most common during summer months, peaking in late July. Tornadoes are relatively infrequent. Winter storms that affect the region generally follow one of three tracks shown in Figure19.3.2-1: Alberta, Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-10Rev. 0Panhandle, and Gulf Coast tracks. During an average winter, the ground is covered with snow about 60 percent of the time (NCDC, 2011a). Regional land use is primarily cropland (corn and beans) and dairy (Rand McNally, 1982 and 2005). The natural vegetation includes broadleaf deciduous trees (oak and hickory), evergreen trees, and medium height prairie grass. There are also several urban areas. The soil at the SHINE site is well-drained silt loam.The landforms of Wisconsin are described by the five physiographic provinces plotted on the map in Figure 19.3.2-2. Details of vegetation, topography, and elevations for those provinces are described in Table19.3.2-1 (Moran, J.M. and E.J. Hopkins, 2002). Most of the surface water impoundments in Wisconsin are located in the Northern Highland and Eastern Ridges and Lowlands physiographic provinces. Water also flows through extensive wetlands in the form of marshes and swamps. The Northern Highland province has the highest elevations, from which water drains northward to Lake Superior; eastward to Lake Michigan via the Menominee and Wolf Rivers; and westward to the Mississippi River via the St. Croix, Chippewa, Black, and Wisconsin Rivers. The Western Uplands province, which comprises most of the western border of the state with Minnesota, escaped recent glaciation. This allowed streams and rivers to form deeply incised valleys over geologic time. Portions of the uplands are referred to as the "driftless area" due to the lack of glacial debris, or "drift".Lake breeze phenomena occur near the shorelines of large bodies of water, such as Lake Michigan, which borders Wisconsin on the east (Moran, J.M. and E.J. Hopkins, 2002). These phenomena feature a circulation system in which air rises over the land and descends over the water, flows from the water toward the land near the ground surface, and flows from land toward the lake aloft. At the surface, the lake breeze appears as a relatively cool and humid wind that sweeps inland. The leading edge of a lake breeze is a miniature cold front and is referred to as the lake breeze front. As the lake breeze front moves inland, it lifts warmer air upward, sometimes causing clouds, or showers. The inland penetration of the lake breeze front varies from a few hundred yards to as much as 25 mi. (40.2 km) (Moran, J.M. and E.J. Hopkins, 2002). Since the SHINE site is located approximately 60 mi. (96.6 km) west of Lake Michigan, it is located too far from the lake be affected by lake breezes. Inland lakes that are located in the SHINE site region are too small to be associated with lake breeze circulations. Therefore, lake breeze circulations are not expected to affect the SHINE site.The local radiation balance and winds determine temperatures across the state. Movement of air masses, synoptic-scale fronts, and synoptic-scale cyclones and anticyclones strongly influence local temperature and precipitation. Seasonal changes in the intensity and movements of air masses and synoptic-scale weather systems, plus changes in radiation exposure at the ground bring about seasonal changes in temperature and precipitation. North and northwest winds generally bring cold, dry air. South and southeast winds typically bring warm, humid air. Calm wind conditions allow pooling of colder, denser air at locations with lower elevations such as valleys. Unequal rates of diurnal heating of the ground cause some local valley and hillside
airflows.Maps of monthly mean dry bulb temperatures in Wisconsin are presented in Figures19.3.2-3 through 19.3.2-6 (Moran, J.M. and E.J. Hopkins, 2002). Mean monthly temperatures for winter (Figure19.3.2-3) show cooler temperatures at the northern end of the state, warmer temperatures near Lake Michigan, and slightly warmer temperatures near Lake Superior. Figure19.3.2-4 presents mean monthly temperatures in the spring. The springtime monthly Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-11Rev. 0temperature pattern in Figure19.3.2-4 is similar to the wintertime temperature pattern in Figure19.3.2-3, with colder temperatures in the north. The counties that border the Great Lakes have cooler temperatures during spring, since the water warms at a slower rate than the land and thereby cools the air near the shorelines.Mean monthly temperatures for summer (Figure 19.3.2-5) show a pattern similar to springtime monthly mean temperatures in Figure 19.3.2-4, with warmer interior temperatures in the south. Counties adjacent to Lakes Michigan and Superior are slightly cooler because the lake surfaces are relatively cooler than the land during the summer.Mean monthly temperatures for autumn (Figure 19.3.2-6) show warmer conditions in the southern interior. The temperatures show a pattern similar to those in the winter, with warmer temperatures at counties near the lake, since the land cools more quickly than the water.Wisconsin counties that border Lakes Michigan and Superior experience somewhat cooler summers, milder winters, and longer agricultural growing seasons than those counties at greater distances from the lakes. The lakes also occasionally produce lake effect snow during late autumn through winter.Maps of monthly mean water-equivalent precipitation in Wisconsin are presented in Figures 19.3.2-7 through 19.3.2-10 (Moran, J.M. and E.J. Hopkins, 2002). Generally, the average annual precipitation is higher in southern portions of the Midwest due to the proximity of the Gulf of Mexico, which is a major source of moisture (EDS, 1968). That same general pattern is observed over the state of Wisconsin. Superimposed over that general pattern is a local pattern of periodic lake-effect precipitation. During lake-effect precipitation events, Lakes Superior and Michigan are local sources of moisture that can cause precipitation adjacent to and downwind of the lake shorelines. Those periods of precipitation enhancement tend to occur when the lake water is warmer than the air, which generally occurs during winter. For example, the winter month precipitation in Figure 19.3.2-7 shows higher monthly water equivalent precipitation totals (approximately 1.2 to 2.2 inches [in.]) (3.0 to 5.6 centimeters [cm]) near the north and east boundary counties, caused by lake-effect snow from Lakes Michigan and Superior.The Madison, Wisconsin and Rockford, Illinois National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) weather observing stations (NCDC, 201 1a, NCDC, 2011c) are th e closest first-order weather stations, and are located approximately 40 mi. (64.4 km) north-northwest and 30 mi. (48.3 km) south-southwest of the SHINE site, respectively. "First-order" stations are defined as those on a 24-hour per day, year-round observing schedule with trained, certified observers.Climatic statistics for Madison presented in Table19.3.2-2 (NCDC, 2011a) show that monthly mean wind speeds range from 6.7 miles per hour (mph) (3.0 meters per second [m/s]) during the month of August to 10.1 mph (4.5 m/s) during the month of April. Annual mean wind speed is 8.5mph (3.8 m/s). Monthly prevailing wind directions are from the s outh-southwest during all months except the winter months of December through February, when the monthly prevailing winds are all from the northwest. Annual prevailing wind is from the south-southwest.Climatic statistics for Rockford presented in Table19.3.2-3 (NCDC, 2011c) show that monthly mean wind speeds are similar to those for Madison, and range from 7.0 mph (3.1 m/s) during the month of August, to 11.3 mph (5.1 m/s) during the month of April. Annual mean wind speed is 9.3mph (4.2 m/s). Monthly prevailing wind directions are similar to Madison, and blow from the south-southwest direction during all months except the period January through March, when the Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-12Rev. 0monthly prevailing winds are all from the northwest. Annual prevailing wind is from the south-southwest.Monthly mean relative humidities for Madison range from 66 percent during April and May, to 78percent during December (Table19.3.2-2). Rockford monthly mean relative humidities presented are similar to those from Madison, ranging from 66 percent during April and May, to 80percent during December (Table19.3.2-3).Mean monthly water equivalent precipitation and snowfall for Madison and Rockford (Table19.3.2-2 and Table19.3.2-3) are similar. Water equivalent precipitation ranges from minima of 1.25 in. (3.18 cm) during January in Madison and 1.34 in. (3.40 cm) during February in Rockford, to maxima during August of 4.33 in. (11.00 cm) at Madison, and during June of 4.80in. (12.19 cm) in Rockford. Mean monthly snowfall is limited to the months October through May, and ranges from a minimum of 0.1 in. (0.25 cm) at Madison and Rockford to a maximum of 12.9in. (32.77 cm) during January at Madison. Annual snowfall is 49.9 in. (126.75 cm) at Madison and 38.7 in. (98.30 cm) at Rockford.Table19.3.2-4 presents the mean numbers of days per month and per year of rain or drizzle, freezing rain or drizzle, snow, and hail or sleet at Madison and Rockford. Those parameters have very similar values for the two stations.Annual values of rain or drizzle days are 138 and 139 days for Madison and Rockford. For both Madison and Rockford, rain and drizzle days range from a minimum of 5 or 6 days during January, to a maximum of 16 days during May.Annual values of freezing rain or drizzle days are two for both Madison and Rockford. For both Madison and Rockford, freezing rain and drizzle days are zero during the months of May through September, and are a maximum of 1 day during the months of December and January.Snow typically occurs during 75 days per year at Madison, and 68 days per year at Rockford. Hail or sleet typically occurs during 2 days per year at both Madison and Rockford. Freezing rain or drizzle typically occurs during 2 days per year at both Madison and Rockford.19.3.2.1.3Identification of Region with Climate Representative of the SHINE SiteThe process of comparison of local (site) and regional climates requires a determination of which region is considered "representative" of climate at the SHINE site. That determination is described in this subsection.The SHINE site is located in central Rock County, Wisconsin which is at the south central edge of the state. It is located near the boundary of two Wisconsin physiographic provinces as presented in Figure 19.3.2-2, the Western Uplands and the Eastern Ridges and Lowlands. It is located in NOAA Cooperative Observer Network (COOP) Climate Division 8 South Central (Figure 19.3.2-11). The finished site grade elevation is approximately 827 feet (ft.) (252meters[m]) North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88). The land use in the site area is rural. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-13Rev. 0Summarizing, the site location is defined by the followi ng characteristics: a.Located in south-central Wisconsin, on rural prairie silt-loam soil.b.Located within till plains glacial deposits on the Central Lowland Province of the Interior Plains Division of the United States. It is on the border between the state of Wisconsin Eastern Ridge/Lowland and Western Upland Terrain, and most like the ridge/lowland to the east because the local topography is relatively gently rolling.c.Located outside the zone of influence of Lake Michigan lake breeze circulation systems.d.Located within the zone of influence of Lake Michigan effects on temperature and precipitation, including the following: added local warmth during winter and autumn, cooling during summer and spring, and additional local precipitation during winter, spring, and autumn.Based on the above summary characteristics, the perimeter of a surrounding geographic region, which is characterized as having the same climate as the site, is plotted on the regional map in Figure 19.3.2-12. That perimeter is bounded as follows:a.Bounded on the east by the 25-mi. (40.2 km) distance of maximum inland penetration of lake breeze circulations from Lake Michigan.b.Bounded on the south by the approximate southward limit of Lake Michigan's effects on the local climate of north-central Illinois, as presented in the mean precipitation and snowfall patterns in Figure 19.3.2-13 and Figure 19.3.2-14 and as described by local climatological data summaries for major Illinois monitoring stations. Annual isohyets and lines of equal snowfall are oriented northwest to southeast at the northeast corner of Illinois as shown in Figure 19.3.2-13 and Figure 19.3.2-14, illustrating the effects of Lake Michigan (Figure 19.3.2-15) on northern Illinois precipitation. Increased clouds and cooling effects due to Lake Michigan are des cribed in the climatological summary for Rockford, Illinois (NCDC, 2011c), but are not des cribed in the climat ological summaries for Springfield, Illinois farther to the south (NCDC, 2011d), or Mo line, Illinois farther to the southwest (NCDC, 2011b).c.Bounded on the west by the approximate westward limit of Lake Michigan's effects on the local climate of southern Wisconsin, as presented in the mean monthly temperature and precipitation, maps in Figure 19.3.2-3 through Figure 19.3.2-10.d.Bounded on the north by the approximate northward limit of Lake Michigan's effects on the local climate of central Wisconsin, as presented in the mean temperature and precipitation maps in Figure 19.3.2-3 through Figure 19.3.2-10. e.Bounded on the north by the approximate mean southern boundary of the Wisconsin Central Plain, as presented in Figure 19.3.2-2.This site climate region is then used to identify regional weather monitoring stations and Wisconsin and Illinois counties that can be used for comparisons in the analysis of local and regional climate. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-14Rev. 019.3.2.1.4Regional Data Sources The site climate region is identified in Subsection 19.3.2.1.3. Meteorological parameters from weather stations in the site climate region are available from a number of published data sources. Those data sources are described below.*Climatography of the United States No. 20 (Clim-20) statistical summaries from the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC).Clim-20 publications are typically available for COOP daily weather monitoring stations located within the site climate region. Those publications are of particular interest to agriculture, industry, and engineering applications. The publications include a variety of climate statistics useful for regional climate analysis. Those parameters include dry bulb temperature, daily precipitation, and snow fall. Descriptive statistics of those parameters include: mean, extremes, and mean number of days exceeding threshold values.COOP stations do not generally record humidity-related parameters, such as relative humidity, dew point or wet bulb temperatures. Therefore, wet bulb temperatures that are coincident with extreme dry bulb temperatures - which are of interest in regional climate analysis - are generally not available for COOP stations. Therefore, for COOP stations, it is often necessary to estimate coincident wet bulb temperatures using wet bulb temperatures recorded at other stations.*Climatological statistics available from Local Climatological Data (LCD) summaries published by NCDC. LCD annual summaries are typically available for meteorological stations located at major airports. Those summaries include climatic normals, averages and extremes. Thirty-year monthly histories are provided for the following parameters: mean temperature, total precipitation, total snowfall, and heating/cooling degree days. The summaries also include a narrative description of the local climate.*Statistical summaries available from the International Station Meteorological Climate Summary (ISMCS) (NCDC, 1996b).Those summaries are available for many domestic and international airports and military installations. The summaries include tabulations of statistics for several parameters of interest in regional climate analysis. The summaries also include a narrative description of local climate. Particularly useful and unique statistics available in the ISMCS are joint-frequency tables of dry bulb, and wet bulb temperature depression, and single-parameter frequency distributions of dry bulb and wet bulb temperatures.*Statistical summaries published by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc. (ASHRAE) (ASHRAE, 2009).ASHRAE climatic percentile information is available for worldwide locations including many U.S. airports with hourly surface weather observing stations. Parameters include dry bulb, wet bulb and dew point temperatures. Also included are: statistical design Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-15Rev. 0values of dry bulb with mean coincident wet bulb temperature, design wet bulb temperature with mean coincident dry bulb temperature, and design dew point with mean coincident dry bulb temperature.*Statistical summaries published by the U.S. Air Force Combat Climatology Center (AFCCC) (AFCCC, 1999). The AFCCC statisti cal summaries include values for dry and wet bulb temperatures.*American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) structural design standards for the site climate region (ASCE, 2006).The ASCE standards provide minimum load requirements for the design of buildings and other structures that are subject to building code requirements. Particularly useful and unique statistics of interest for climate analysis are values of basic wind speed on a map of the U.S. The basic speed is required by standards for determination of design wind loads. Also included are various adjustments and supplementary information dependent on site and structure characteristics. ASCE also provides maps of 50-year return interval snow pack and a methodology for converting 50-year values extracted from the maps to other return intervals (ASCE, 2006).*48-hour probable maximum precipitation (PMP).The 48-hour PMP is available from a study published by the U.S. Department of Commerce (USDOC) (USDOC, 1978). USDOC contains maps of estimated maximum probable precipitation amounts for a number of time periods (USDOC, 1978).*Tornado, waterspout, and other weather event statistics for counties in the site climate region from the NCDC online Storm Events Database (NCDC, 2011g) and "Storm Data" publications.The Storm Events Database contains a chronological listing, by state, of climate statistics of interest for climate analysis. Those statistics include: tornadoes, thunderstorms, hail, lightning, high winds, snow, temperature extremes, and other weather phenomena. Also included are statistics on personal injuries and property damage estimates.The "Storm Data" publications are monthly summaries of severe weather events published by NCDC. These publications provide supplemental information about specific severe weather events.*Maps of climatological parameters from the Climate Atlas of the United States (NCDC, 2002).This digital atlas provides color maps of climatic elements for the U.S., such as: temperature, precipitation, snow, wind, and pressure. The period of record for most maps is 1961-1990. The user extracts data from the atlas by selecting a parameter (e.g., dry bulb temperature), a statistical measure (e.g., mean), and a state.*Hourly meteorological data files in digital TD3505 (NCDC, 2006; NCDC, 2011j; NCDC, 2011k) and TD3280 (NCDC, 2005a; NCDC, 2011h; NCDC, 2011i) formats. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-16Rev. 0TD3280 is an older data file format that has recently been replaced by the TD3505 format. Hourly meteorological data files are available in TD3280 format through December, 2009. Data files for 2010 and 2011 are available in TD3505 format. Digital data files are available for worldwide locations from NCDC. These data sets contain hourly values of dry bulb temperature, humidity, wind speed/direction, and cloud cover. These data sets allow analysis of coincident meteorological conditions.19.3.2.1.5Identification and Selection for Analysis of Weather Monitoring Stations Located within the Site Climate RegionFigure 19.3.2-16 and Figure 19.3.2-17 present maps of the site climate region (identified in Figure 19.3.2-12), with additional annotations of locations within that region of NOAA Automated Surface Observing Stations (ASOS stations) (Figure 19.3.2-16), and NOAA COOP stations (Figure 19.3.2-17) for which NOAA "Clim-20" summaries have been published by NCDC. Table19.3.2-5 and Table19.3.2-6 present lists of the ASOS and COOP stations that are identified in Figure 19.3.2-16 and Figure 19.3.2-17. It should be noted that the ground elevations shown in Table19.3.2-5 and Table19.3.2-6 are given in ft. MSL (above Mean Sea Level) because that is the terminology used by NOAA in describing the ASOS and COOP stations (NCDC, 2001a; NCDC, 2001b; NCDC, 2001c; NCD C, 2001d; NCDC, 2001e; NCDC, 2001f; NCDC, 2001g; NCDC, 2001h; NCDC, 2001i; NCDC, 2001j; NCDC, 2001k; NCDC, 2001l; NCDC, 2001m; NCDC, 2001n; NCDC, 2001o; NCDC, 2001p; NCDC, 2001q; NCDC, 2001r; NCDC, 2001s; NCDC, 2001t; NCDC, 2001u; NCDC, 2001v; NCDC, 2001w; NCDC, 2001x; NCDC, 2012b). However, the MSL elevations are functionally equivalent to the NAVD 88 elevations used elsewhere in this subsection.A subset of the ASOS stations presented in Figure 19.3.2-16 is selected for analysis. The following criteria were used to select that subset of stations. The two first order stations Rockford and Madison are selected because of the extra statistical summaries in the form of NOAA annual summary LCD publications available for them. They also represent the geographical center of the site climate region. Four additional stations located approximately near the four corners of the site climate region are also selected to geographically bracket that region and avoid duplicate representation of similar areas. Those four additional stations are: Baraboo (at the northwest corner of the region), Fond du Lac (at the northeast corner of the region), Freeport (at the southwest corner of the region), and DuPage County (at the southeast corner of the region).All of the COOP stations presented in Figure 19.3.2-17 and Table19.3.2-6 are analyzed. Input information for that analysis includes statistics in the NOAA Clim-20 document for each station, that summarize climatic conditions during the 30 year period 1971 through 2000, and ten annual climatological data summaries for each of the states Wisconsin and Illinois, which summarize climatic conditions for each of the 10 years 2001 through 2010. Total years summarized for each of the COOP stations is, therefore, 40 years.19.3.2.2Regional Air QualityThe SHINE site is located in Rock County, Wisconsin which is part of the Rockford-Janesville- Beloit Interstate Air Quality Control Region (WDNR, 2011a). This air quality control region combines agricultural activities with the Beloit-Janesville, Wisconsin and Rockford, Illinois urban-industrial areas. The Wisconsin portion of the air quality control region, Rock County, is mostly flat to gently rolling farmland. Industry in the region includes manufacturing, foundry operations and electrical power plants (WDNR, 2011a). Rock County is currently in attainment for all criteria Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-17Rev. 0pollutants (ozone, particulate matter, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, and lead) (WDNR, 2011a, USEPA, 2011).Maintenance areas are those geographic areas that have a history of non-attainment but are currently in compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. In April 2004, the USEPA designated the following 10 counties in eastern Wisconsin as being in non-attainment with the 8-hour ozone air quality standard: Door, Kewaunee, Manitowoc, Sheyboygan, Washington, Ozaukee, Waukesha, Milwaukee, Racine, and Kenosha. However, in 2007, eight of the ten counties (Kewuanee, Manitowoc, Washington, Ozaukee, Waukesha, Milwaukee, Racine, and Kenosha) were re-designated as being in attainment with the 8-hour ozone standard
(WDNR, 2012a). The resulting eight-county maintenance area and the two counties currently out of attainment with the 8-hour ozone air quality standard (Door and Sheyboygan counties) are situated to the northeast of the Rockford-Janesville-Beloit Interstate Air Quality Control Region, along the western shore of Lake Michigan. These are the closest non-attainment areas to the SHINE site.USEPA guidance (USEPA, 1990) states that a Class I visibility impact analysis is necessary for a major source locating within 100 km (160.9 mi.) of a Class I area. Class I areas are national parks and wilderness areas that are potentially sensitive to visibility impairment. Table19.3.2-7 lists the nearest Federal Class I areas to the SHINE site (NPS, 2011). The table shows that the closest Federal Class I area is the Rainbow Lake Wilderness Area, which is located approximately 455 km (approximately 283 miles) northwest of the SHINE site in far northern
Wisconsin.Causes of regional air quality problems are generally due to a combination of factors. Typically, major factors include the following (Korshover, J., 1967): stagnating surface high pressure systems characterized by low surface wind speeds that linger over a region for several days, concentration of heavy industries and their air pollution emissions in relatively congested areas, and atmospheric mixing depths that limit the volume of air within which pollutants dilute (Holzworth, G.C., 1972). Additional factors can be involved for specific pollutants. For example, ozone air pollution is affected by not only the factors of stagnation, low wind speed, and limited mixing, but also requires the presence of additional factors that support the photochemical reactions in the atmosphere, including: intense sunlight, high temperature, and the presence of precursor chemical pollutants (Stern, A.C., 1973).19.3.2.3Severe Weather19.3.2.3.1Extreme Wind A statistic known as the "basic" wind speed is used for design and operating bases. Basic wind speeds are 50 year recurrence interval "nominal design 3-second gust wind speeds (mph) at 33ft. (10.1 m) above ground for Exposure C category", as defined in Figures 6-1 and 6-1C of ASCE, 2006.Several sources are considered to determine the wind speeds for the SHINE site. The basic wind speed for the SHINE site is 90 mph (40.2 m/s), based on the plot of basic wind speeds in Figure6-1C of ASCE, 2006. Basic wind speeds reported in AFCCC, 1999 for hourly weather stations in the site climate region are as follows: 90 mph (40.2 m/s) for Madison, Wisconsin, and 90 mph (40.2 m/s) for DuPage County Airport, West Chicago, Illinois. Consistency of the three values is the basis for selecting a value of 90 mph (40.2 m/s) for the SHINE site. That value Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-18Rev. 0applies to a recurrence interval of 50 years. Section C6.5.5 of ASCE, 2006 provides a method to calculate wind speeds for other recurrence intervals. Based on that method, a 100-year return-period value is calculated by multiplying the 50-year return-period value by a factor of 1.07. That approach produces a 100-year return-period three second gust wind speed for the SHINE site area of 96.3 mph (43.0 m/s).19.3.2.3.2Tornadoes and Waterspouts The NCDC Storm Events Database (NCDC, 2011g) provides information on historic storm events on a county basis. To use that database, 28 regional counties that are at least partially included within the site climate region are selected and presented on the map in Figure 19.3.2-18. Those counties approximate the representative climate region defined above in Subsection 19.3.2.1.3. The 28 counties are listed in Table19.3.2-8 (USCB, 2011). The NCDC Storm Events Database (NCDC, 2011g) was accessed to extract statistics on regional tornadoes and waterspouts. Information is extracted for the 28 regional counties. Those tornado and waterspout statistics, for the 62-year period May 1950 through July 2011, are presented in Table19.3.2-8. Strongest tornadoes in the database for Rock County (in which the SHINE site is located) are reviewed and are found to be of intensity F2. Table19.3.2-9 provides additional details on the most intense Rock County tornadoes. The strongest tornadoes found in the database for the seven counties adjacent to Rock County: Dane, Jefferson, Walworth, Boone, Winnebago, Stephenson, and Green counties, were reviewed and found to be F3 and F4 storms in Boone County, Illinois, and F3 storms in Dane County and Jefferson County, Wisconsin. Table19.3.2-10 presents additional details on the strongest tornadoes in counties adjacent to Rock County. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) guidance for siting research reactors (IAEA, 1987) was reviewed. This guidance requires design tornado information to be based on the maximum historical intensity within a radius of about 100 km (62 mi.) from the SHINE site. For the SHINE site, a 100 km (62 mi.) radius partially extends outside of the representative site climate region included within the 28 county region described above. An F5 intensity tornado was recorded on 8 June 1984 in Iowa County, Wisconsin, at the town of Barneveld, which is located approximately 49.7 mi. (80 km) in a west-northwest direction from the SHINE site.Regulatory Guide 1.76 specifies design-basis tornado characteristics for nuclear power reactors. Therefore, this guidance is not specifically applicable to an isotope production facility and Regulatory Guide 1.76 is used as a technical reference only. Wisconsin is located in Region I in Regulatory Guide 1.76 Figure 1. The design-basis tornado characteristics applicable to Region I are listed below: a.Maximum wind speed: 230 mph (103 m/s) b.Translational speed: 46 mph (21 m/s) c.Maximum rotational speed: 184 mph (82 m/s)d.Radius of maximum rotational speed: 150 ft (45.7 m/s)e.Pressure drop: 1.2 psi (83 millibars) f.Rate of pressure drop: 0.5 psi/s (37 millibars) Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-19Rev. 019.3.2.3.3Water Equivalent Precipitation Extremes This subsection examines and compares water equivalent precipitation extremes within the site climate region, and locally near the SHINE site. Daily total water equivalent precipitation is measured at the local NOAA COOP monitoring station at Beloit, Wisconsin, and several regional COOP stations within the site climate region.A PMP value for the SHINE site is presented in Subsection 19.3.2.3.6.Table19.3.2-11 presents maximum recorded 24-hour and monthly water equivalent precipitation values for the local COOP station at Beloit, and for the 18 regional COOP stations located within the site climate region defined in the map in Figure 19.3.2-17.Overall historic maximum recorded 24-hour water-equivalent precipitation from records for either the local Beloit station or for regional stations is 8.09 in. (20.55 cm) at DeKalb, Illinois. That event occurred on 18 July 1996. It was due to thunderstorms in a warm, moist tropical air mass streaming north from the Gulf of Mexico and into the warm sector southeast of a synoptic low pressure center located over northern Minnesota (NCDC, 1996a). Flash flooding was widespread over north-central and northeast Illinois due to record breaking rainfall during the 17-18 July period (NCDC, 1997).Overall historic maximum monthly water-equivalent precipitation from records for either the local Beloit station or for regional stations is 16.09 in. (40.87 cm) at Portage, Wisconsin. That month was August, 1980 (NCDC, 2001s).19.3.2.3.4Hail, Snowstorms and Ice Storms The mean hail or sleet frequencies during winter, spring, summer, autumn, and annual periods for Rockford and Madison are listed in Table19.3.2-12. Mean hail frequencies are less than one day per season at both stations. Statistics are very similar at Rockford and Madison, verifying some consistency across the site climate region.Hail events that are either severe (with hail size exceeding 0.75 in. (1.91 cm) in diameter) or large (with hail exceeding one inch in diameter) are reported to have occurred in Rock County, Wisconsin on 11 occasions during the period 1961-1990, or with a frequency of approximately 0.37 occurrences per year (NCDC, 2002). The largest hailstones t hat Rock County has experienced are as follows: of diameter 3.00 in. (7.62 cm) on one occasion during June 1930, of diameter 2.50 in. (6.35 cm) on one occasion during August 2006, and of diameter 2.00 in. (5.08cm) on one occasion during June 1975 and one occasion during June 1998 (NCDC,2011g).Daily total snowfall amounts are measured at the local NOAA COOP monitoring station at Beloit, Wisconsin, as well as at several regional COOP stations within the site climate region.Maximum recorded 24-hour snowfall from records for either the local Beloit station or for regional stations is 21.0 in. (53.34 cm) at Dalton, Wisconsin. That event occurred on 2 January 1999. It was due to a major winter synoptic cyclone (the "Blizzard of 1999") that developed in Colorado, curved northeast through the Great Lakes, then entered Canada (NCDC, 1999 and NCDC,2000). On 2 January 1999 the synoptic surf ace low was centered at the south tip of Illinois. A warm maritime tropical air mass with temperatures in the 80s°F was present to the Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-20Rev. 0south, and a continental arctic air mass with temperatures primarily in the teens °F was present to the north. An area of heavy snow covered the site climate region. This blizzard paralyzed south central and southeast Wisconsin. Ten to 21 in. (25.40 to 53.34 cm) of snow were deposited and wind gusts of 45 to 63 mph (20.1 to 28.2 m/s) occurred. Nearly all cities and villages declared snow emergencies, and airports were closed. Visibility in blowing snow was typically 0.5mi. (0.8 km). Structural damage to buildings and power lines was reported.Overall historic maximum monthly snowfall from records for either the local Beloit station, or for regional stations, is 50.4 in. (128.0 cm) at Watertown, Wisconsin. That month was January, 1979 (NCDC, 2001w). Overall, extreme snowfall conditions recorded at the local station at Beloit, Wisconsin are bracketed by conditions recorded at stations within the site climate region, supporting conclusions regarding climate region representativeness. A snow pack value for the SHINE site is presented in Subsection 19.3.2.3.6. The mean number of days with freezing rain or drizzle is 2 days per year at both Madison, Wisconsin and Rockford, Illinois (Table19.3.2-4). A summary of 14 ice storms that affected Rock County, Wisconsin during the period 1995-2011 is presented in Table19.3.2-13 (NCDC, 2011g). That summary indicates the following.a.Several ice storms, as many as two or three, can occur per year. b.Ice can accumulate periodically or during a consecutive period of anywhere from approximately two hours to 11 hours.c.Ice accumulations typically range from one-tenth to one-quarter inch, but can reach one-half inch.d.Hazardous driving conditions are a typical result of the storms.A 50-year return-interval atmospheric ice load due to freezing rain is estimated to be 0.75in. (1.91cm) for the SHINE site area (ASCE, 2006). Concurrent three second wind gust is estimated to be 40 mph (17.9 m/s). This ice load is intended for use in assessment of ice accumulation on free objects, such as wires.19.3.2.3.5Thunderstorms and Lightning Thunderstorm statistics for the regional NOAA first order weather stations at Rockford, Illinois and Madison, Wisconsin are p ublished and available for the site climate region (NCDC, 1996b; NCDC, 2011a and NCDC, 2011c). Thunderstorms occur during an average of 43.0 days per year at Rockford, and 39.6 days per year at Madison. Mean seasonal thunderstorm frequencies for Rockford and Madison are listed in Table 19.3.2-14. Thunderstorms are most frequent in summer and least frequent in winter at both stations. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-21Rev. 0The mean frequency of lightning strikes to earth is calculated via a method from the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), per the U. S. Department of Agriculture Rural Utilities Service (USDA, 1998). The method assumes a relationship between the average number of thunderstorm days per year (T), and the number of lightning strikes to earth per square mile per year (N). The mathematical relationship is as follows:N = [0.31][T](Equation 19.3.2-1)Based on the average number of thunderstorm days per year at Rockford during the 55 year period 1955-2010 (43.0, which is slightly higher than the value of 39.6 days for Madison and is therefore used here), the frequency of lightning strikes to earth per sq. mi. per year is 13.3 (5.1strikes per sq. km per year) for the SHINE site and surrounding area. For comparison, based on a five year period of record (NLSI, 2011), indicates 2 to 4 flashes per sq. km per year for the site region, which corresponds to 5.2 to 10.4 flashes per sq. mi. per year. The EPRI value therefore is shown to be a reasonable indicator.19.3.2.3.6Snowpack and Probable Maximum Precipitation (PMP) A 100-year return-period snowpack for the SHINE site vicinity was derived by multiplying the 50-year return interval snowpack from Figure 7.1 of ASCE, 2006 by a factor which converts the 50-year return interval snowpack to a 100-year return-interval snowpack. Table C7-3 of ASCE, 2006 suggests that an appropriate factor is 1.22 (i.e., the 50-year value divided by the factor of 0.82 listed in Table C7-3). The estimated 50-year interval snowpack for the SHINE site from Figure 7.1 of (ASCE, 2006) is 25 in. (63.5 cm). The resulting estimated 100-year return interval snow pack for the SHINE site is 30.5 in. (30.5 in. = 1.22 x 25 in.) (77.5 cm).The weight of the 48-hour PMP for the SHINE site vicinity was derived by multiplying the 48-hour PMP (in inches) from Figure 21 of USDOC, 1978 by the weight of one inch of water (one inch of water covering one square foot weighs 5.2 lb [2.4 kg]). The estimated 48-hour PMP for the SHINE site from Figure 21 of USDOC, 1978 is 34in.(86.4cm). The resulting estimated weight of the 48-hour PMP for the SHINE site is 176.8pounds per square feet (lb/ft
- 2) (863.2 kilograms per square meter [kg/m 2]) (176.8 lb/ft 2 =34 in.x5.2lb/ft 2).19.3.2.3.7Design Dry Bulb and Wet Bulb Temperatures Site design basis dry bulb temperatures (DBTs) and wet bulb temperatures (WBTs) are defined for the SHINE site and its climate area. Those include the following statistics. a.Maximum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 0.4 percentb.Mean coincident wet bulb temperature (MCWB) at the 0.4 percent DBTc.Maximum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 2.0 percent d.MCWB at the 2.0 percent DBT e.Minimum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 0.4 percentf.Minimum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 1.0 percentg.Maximum WBT with annual exceedance probability of 0.4 percent Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-22Rev. 0h.Maximum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 5 percenti.Minimum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 5 percentj.100-year return maximum annual DBT k.MCWB at the 100-year return maximum annual DBT l.100-year return maximum annual WBTm.100-year return minimum annual DBT Statistics for (a)-(g) are readily available from (ASHRAE, 2009). Since those statistics are available from a well-known reference, no additional data analysis is required. ASHRAE, 2009 includes values for the following stations in the SHINE site climate region: Fond du Lac, Wisconsin; Madison, Wisconsin; Rockford, Illinois; and DuPage County Airport, Illinois. These stations represent climatic conditions in the northern, central and southern portions of the site climate region, respectively (Figure 19.3.2-16). Worst-case (bounding) values for (a)-(g) are selected from those four stations. To maintain thermodynamic consistency between DBT and coincident WBTs, DBT/MCWB pairs are retained for a single station. The resulting statistics are listed in Table 19.3.2-15.Statistics for the maximum and minimum DBT with an annual exceedance probability of 5percent (items [h] and [i] above) are not available from ASHRAE, 2009. In lieu of values from ASHRAE, 2009, values are extracted from published DBT and wet-bulb depression joint
frequency tables in NCDC, 1996b. Joint-frequency tabl es are available only for Madison and Rockford. The extracted statistics for Madison and Rockford are listed in Table 19.3.2-15.The 100-year return interval maximum annual DBTs and WBTs (items [j], [l] and [m] above) are estimated using a technique described on page 14.6 of Chapter 14 of ASHRAE, 2009. The technique estimates the n-year return-interval extreme temperature from a series of annual maximum and minimum temperatures. The ASHRAE technique uses the following equation: (Equation 19.3.2-2) wheren-year return period value of the extreme temperature computed, in yearsmean annual extreme maximum or minimum temperature +1 if the maximum temperature is computed; -1 if the minimum temperature is computedstandard deviation of the annual extreme maximum or minimum temperaturesreturn period in years (=100 for a 100-year return interval). (Equation 19.3.2-3)sFIMTnnTMIsnn)1nnln(ln5772.0 6F Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-23Rev. 0whereF is a function that converts the standard deviation of annual extreme temperature parameter (such as the annual extreme temperature in °F) to a new variable that is linearly related to the n-year return-interval extreme temperature .Since the MCWB coincident with the 100-year return interval maximum DBT is required (item [k] above), this technique is only applied at meteorological stations in the climate region which had: (1) digital records of hourly DBT and coincident WBT and (2) published annual extreme DBTs (i.e., NOAA annual summary LCD publications, such as NCDC, 2011a). The published annual extreme DBTs are required to check annual extreme DBTs extracted from the digital records. There were only two stations in the climate region which meet these requirements: Rockford, Illinois and Madison, Wisconsin. The ASHRAE technique is applied to hourly TD3280 and TD3505 digital datasets (NCDC, 2011h-k) for each of these two stations. The extreme DBT and WBT are first identified for each year which has at least 90 percent of possible hourly coverage of DBT and WBT. This produces a time-series of annual maximum and minimum DBTs and WBTs for 53 years for Madison and 30 years for Rockford. Each time-series is then input into the ASHRAE technique. The resulting estimated 100-year return period annual DBTs and WBTs (items [j], [l] and [m] above) are listed in Table19.3.2-16.The estimated 100-year return maximum annual DBT at Rockford (104.8°F (40.4 ºC); Table19.3.2-16) is only 0.8°F (0.44 ºC) above the record maximum DBT at Rockford (104°F [40.0 ºC]) (NCDC, 2011c). Instead of attempting to derive a statistical relationship between the DBT and WBT useful over the short DBT interval of 104°F (40.0 ºC) to 104.8°F (40.4 ºC), the MCWB coincident with the estimated 100-year return maximum annual DBT at Rockford (104.8°F [40.4 ºC]) are taken to be the WBT coincident with the record maximum DBT at Rockford (104°F [40.0 ºC]). The WBT coincident with the record maximum DBT at Rockford is 80°F (26.7 ºC) (NCDC, 2011i and NCDC, 2011k). Therefore, the estimated MCWB coincident with the 100-year return maximum annual DBT at Rockford is 80°F (26.7 ºC).A similar approach is taken for the 100-year return maximum annual DBT for Madison. The 100-year return maximum annual DBT for Madison (104.3°F (40.2 ºC); Table19.3.2-16) is only 0.3°F (0.17 ºC) above the record maximum DBT for Madison (104°F [40.0 ºC]) (NCDC, 2011a). Therefore, the MCWB coincident with the estimated 100-year return maximum annual DBT is the WBT coincident with the record maximum DBT for Madison. The WBT coincident with the record maximum DBT at Madison is 75°F (23.9 ºC) (NCDC, 2011h and NCDC, 2011j). Therefore, the estimated MCWB coincident with the 100-year return maximum annual DBT for Madison is 75°F (23.9 ºC). The 100-year maximum annual DBT and MCWB pairs (items [j] and [k] above) for Rockford and Madison are listed in Table19.3.2-16.19.3.2.3.8Extreme Dry Bulb Temperatures An additional review of regional extreme DBTs is done using NOAA COOP climate monitoring stations in the SHINE site climate region. The locations of those stations are shown in Figure19.3.2-17. The COOP climate monitoring stations do not measure WBT and do not record hourly DBTs. Those stations only record maximum and minimum daily DBTs and daily snT Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-24Rev. 0precipitation totals. Therefore, it is not possible to identify WBTs coincident with the extreme DBTs recorded at those stations.Table19.3.2-17 presents extreme DBTs recorded at the COOP climate monitoring stations. For completeness, Table 19.3.2-17 also includes the extreme DBTs recorded at the two first order stations in the SHINE site climate region (Madison, Wisconsin and Rockford, Illinois). The overall extreme DBTs for the climate region are: a maximum of 109°F (42.8 ºC) recorded on 14 July 1936 at Marengo in Boone County, Illinois, and a minimum of -45°F (-42.8 ºC) recorded on 30 January 1951 at Baraboo in Sauk County, Wisconsin. Since Marengo is a COOP station, the WBT coincident with the extreme DBT at Marengo (109°F[42.8 ºC]) is not available. Furthermore, DBT and coincident WBT data in digital format that are available for stations in the climate region do not extend as far back as 1936 (Table19.3.2-5). Therefore, it is necessary to estimate a WBT coincident with the overall extreme DBT. A graphical extrapolation method is used to estimate the WBT coincident with the overall extreme DBT of 109°F (42.8 ºC). A simple graphical approach is appropriate for several reasons, as follows:a.A simple graphical approach is appropriate because at the extreme high end of the DBT range there are only a small number of observations. Use of an objective numerical technique to project larger DBT values using a small population as input is unjustified because it is effectively no less subjective than a graphical approach.b.The requirement is only for a mean coincident WBT value. A mean WBT value is simply identified for any DBT value on the graph, therefore a set of such means is easily plotted, and form the basis of an extrapolation line. c.Published DBT/WBT depression joint frequency distribution (JFD) tables are available for Madison and Rockford (NCDC, 1996 b). The tables are suitabl e for use in sketching the graphical relationship between regional DBT and WBT during conditions of the peak DBT. The closest first-order station to Marengo is Rockford, Illinois, which is located approximately 25mi. (40.2 km) west of Marengo (Figure 19.3.2-17). Therefore, the DBT/WBT depression JFD table from Rockford is used to estimate the WBT coincident with an overall extreme DBT of 109°F (42.8 ºC) recorded at Marengo. The upper DBT limit of the DBT/WBT depression JFD table from Rockford is 103°F (39.4 ºC). Therefore, it is necessary to extrapolate the upper end of the JFD table to the observed DBT of 109°F (42.8 ºC). Graphical extrapolation of the DBT/WBT depression relationship to a DBT of 109°F (42.8 ºC) results in an estimated WBT depression of 30°F (16.7 ºC), which corresponds to a MCWB of 79°F (26.1 ºC) (109°F - 30°F = 79°F). Therefore, the estimated MCWB coincident with the overall extreme DBT of 109°F (42.8ºC) at Marengo is 79°F (26.1 ºC).19.3.2.3.9Restrictive Dispersion Conditions Major air pollution episodes are typically a result of persistent surface high pressure weather systems that cause light and variable surface winds and stagnant meteorological conditions for four or more consecutive days. Estimates of the stagnation frequency are provided in (NOAA, Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-25Rev. 01999; Figures 1 and 2). Those estimates indicate that, on average, the SHINE site location experiences less than two stagnation cases per year and the average length of a case is less than five days.19.3.2.4Local MeteorologyThe purpose of this local climate analysis is to understand dispersion conditions in the vicinity of the SHINE site. That characterization is input to and provides a context for assessment of atmospheric impact of the facility on the environment. Local dispersion climatology includes consideration of airflow and atmospheric turbulence. The following subsections address local topography, the source of local meteorological data, wind roses, and atmospheric stability distribution.19.3.2.4.1TopographyThe SHINE site is located approximately at the center of Rock County, Wisconsin, about 13mi.(20.9 km) north of the Illinois/Wisconsin border, and 2.5 mi. (4.0 km) east of the Rock River. The SHINE site is located within till plains glacial deposits on the Central Lowland Province of the Interior Plains Division of the United States. Within a radial distance from the site of approximately 10 mi. (16.1 km), additional ground surface features include the following:a.There is terminal kettle-moraine topography in the central, north, and east sections, which represent effects of the last advance of the continental glacier, including uneven hills and ridges, varying drainage patterns, and gently rolling terrain (Rock County, 2012a).b.There is dissected upland with isolated bluffs in the west and southwest sections, part of the "driftless area" (Subsection 19.3.2.1.2) which was not overrun by ice during the last continental glaciation (Moran, J.M. and E.J. Hopkins, 2002; Rock County, 2012b).c.The Rock River watershed, the main waterway, bisects the county from north to south (Rock County, 2012a). The Rock River valley is typically less than 1 mi. (1.6 km) wide, with minor slopes at the edges of the river floodplain with heights of approximately 50 ft. (15.2 m).d.Most land is used for agriculture, including corn and soybean farming (Rand McNally, 1982 and 2005).e.The main urban centers of Janesville and Beloit are located along the Rock River.f.The finished site grade elevation is approximately 827 ft. (252 m) NAVD 88. The SHINE site and adjacent ground within a radius of approximately 1 mi. (1.6 km) is flat farmland. Within a 10 mi. (16.1 km) radius from the SHINE site, topographic elevations range from approximately 755 ft. (230 m) NAVD 88 along the Rock River, to approximately 1033 ft. (315 m) NAVD 88 at the highest bluffs (USGS, 1980). Therefore, the topography within a 10 mi. (16.1 km) radius ranges from approximately 72 ft. (21.9 m) below the SHINE site elevation, to 206 ft. (62.8 m) above the SHINE site elevation. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-26Rev. 019.3.2.4.2Local Data SourcesSurface meteorological data were available from the SWRA in Janesville, Wisconsin (NOAA station identifier KJVL). That airport is located approximately 0.25 mi. (0.40 km) west of the SHINE site. The station elevation is 808 ft. (246.3 m) NAVD 88 (Table 19.3.2-5). The SWRA meteorological monitoring station is an automated weather observation station (AWOS) with precipitation sensors installed (AWOS-IIIP). The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) describes the specifications of an AWOS system in an Advisory Circular (FAA, 2011). Specifications from this Advisory Circular are listed in Table19.3.2-18. The AWOS anemometer height at SWRA for the period of interest in this study (2005-2010) is 26 ft. (7.9 m) above ground level (NCDC,2012a).The FAA Advisory Circular (FAA, 2011) describes the FAA standard for procurement, construction, installation, activation, and maintenance of non-Federal AWOS systems. That standard is provided in an FAA Order (FAA, 1992), which requires inspections that meet specified technical standards and tolerances. On-site instrument calibration is required annually unless more frequent calibration is specified by the FAA region. Calibrations are required to be done by a qualified technician with FAA verification authority and witnessed by a qualified FAA non-Federal inspector. Facilities Maintenance Log and Technical Performance Record forms are maintained. In addition, NCDC subjects surface meteorological data collected at AWOS stations such as SWRA to documented quality assurance and analysis procedures (Del Greco et al., 2006). Raw meteorological data from SWRA are obta ined from NCDC (NCDC, 2011l). Hourly dry bulb temperature, humidity, wind speed, and wind direction data are extracted from the raw data. Table19.3.2-19 shows the annual data recovery rates for dry bulb temperature, humidity, wind speed, and wind direction. The table shows that the annual data recovery rate for each variable exceeded 90 percent for 2005, 2006, 2008-2010, and that the recovery rate was approximately 87 percent for each variable in 2007. Data from 2005 through 2010 are chosen for analysis in order to produce a data set with the most recent contiguous 5 years of data, and with 5 years of data having recovery rates better than 90 percent. The period of record requirements comply with the Final Interim Staff Guidance Augmenting NUREG-1537, Part 1, Section 19, to provide meteorological data collected as near as possible to the SHINE site for the most recent 5-year period. Table19.3.2-20 presents a summary of meteorological parameter statistics from the SWRA during the 2005-2010 period.Published, tabular values of average daily maximum and minimum dry bulb temperatures are not available from SWRA. However, these values are available for Madison, Wisconsin and Rockford, Illinois from Table 19.3.2-2 and Table 19.3.2-3, respectively. These values are expected to be sufficiently representative of the local climate. Published tabular values of annual fog frequencies are also not available for SWRA. However, these values are available for Madison, Wisconsin and Rockford, Illinois from Table 19.3.2-2 and Table 19.3.2-3, respectively. Heavy fog (defined as fog occurring with visibilities less than or equal to 0.25 miles (0.40 km) occur an average of 21.5 days per year at Madison, Wisconsin and 20.1 days per year at Rockford, Illinois. These values are expected to be sufficiently representative of the local climate. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-27Rev. 019.3.2.4.3Plans to Access Local Meteorological Data dur ing License Period Meteorological measurements will be available for use in responding to accidental radiological releases or other emergencies, and other routine purposes that require access to meteorological information during the licensing period. That meteorological information will be obtained for local government weather monitoring stations that observe wind and other surface meteorological parameters on an hourly basis.When needed during an emergency, real-time hourly surface meteorological measurements of wind direction, wind speed, air temperature, and weather type will be accessed by SHINE through government data sources. Access will be attempted during the emergency in the following sequence, until reliable data are obtained, as follows:a.Internet access to hourly surface weather observations recorded at the SWRA AWOS, at URL: http://www.weather.gov/data/obhistory/KJVL.htmlb.Telephone access to an automated synthesized voice recording of the most recent hourly surface observations recorded at the SWRA AWOS, at number: (608) 758-1723.c.If weather observations are not available from the SWRA AWOS, then weather information from another station with hourly meteorological data in the Site Climate Region will be used. The following stations will be used, in the order listed below. The stations are listed in order of increasing distance from Ja nesville, Wisconsin:1. Rockford, Illinois: http://www.weather.gov/data/obhistory/KRFD.html2. Monroe, Wisconsin: http://www.weather.gov/data/obhistory/KEFT.html3. Burlington, Wisconsin: http://www.weather.gov/data/obhistory/KBUU.html4. Madison, Wisconsin: http://www.weather.gov/data/obhistory/KMSN.htmlDuring normal operations, hourly data will be obtained by internet access to hourly surface weather observations recorded at the SWRA AWOS, at URL: http://www.weather.gov/data/obhistory/KJVL.html .19.3.2.4.4Comparison of Local and Regional Wind Roses Subsection 19.3.2.4.2 describes the meteorological monitoring system at the SWRA in Janesville, Wisconsin. As described in that subsection, wind speed and direction measurements are collected at the 26 ft. (7.9 m) level. Wind speed and direction from the 26 ft. (7.9 m) level are used to determine JFDs that are input to relative atmospheric concentration (/Q) and radiological dose assessments in this report (see Subsection 19.4.8.2).Figures 19.3.2-19 through 19.3.2-35 show the annual, monthly and seasonal wind roses from SWRA. The period of record on which those plots are based is the six years from January 1, 2005 through December 31, 2010 (NCDC, 2011). That period of record is also used for JFD input to /Q and radiological dose assessments in this report.An annual wind rose (Figure 19.3.2-19) shows dominant wind frequencies from the west (approximately 8 percent of the period) and from the south (approximately 7.5 percent of the period). The remaining directions include a group (N, E, SSW, SW, WNW, and NW) with frequencies of occurrence that range from approximately 5 to 7 percent of the period, and Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-28Rev. 0another group (NNE, NE, ENE, ESE, SE, SSE, WSW, and NNW) with frequencies of occurrence that range from approximately 3.5 to 5 percent of the period. The multi-modal nature of the annual wind rose reflects airflows associated with seasonal shifts of mean North American surface pressure belts and centers, seasonal changes in paths and frequencies of synoptic-scale surface cyclones and anticyclones that move across the area, and seasonal changes in frequency of development of synoptic surface fronts (Trewartha, G.T., 1954; Trewartha, G.T.,1961; Rand McNally, 2005; and EDS, 1968).The winter season wind rose (Figure 19.3.2-32) shows most frequent wind directions during that season from the west, northwest and north. This is a reflection of polar and arctic air masses that flow from Canada that are dominant during the winter. The large Icelandic low pressure center that intensifies during Northern Hemisphere winter causes a pressure gradient pattern that is oriented in a northwest-to-southeast direction over Canada and the U.S. that guides surface high pressure systems that contain the polar and arctic air masses in a southeast direction from Canada to the Midwest and eastern U.S. Upper-air meridional flow (relatively parallel to lines of longitude) is more prevalent than zonal flow (relatively parallel to lines of latitude), and surface cyclonic storms more frequently occupy the Alberta storm track that extends from southwest Canada into the central U.S. The spring season wind rose (Figure 19.3.2-33) shows dominant wind direction frequencies from the east, south, and west. During spring, the Icelandic low weakens, the southwest U.S. surface thermal low intensifies, and the north Atlantic Azores high pressure cell intensifies. Because of the northward shift of the subtropical high pressure belt (including the Azores high), storm systems and Canadian air masses are not always pushed towards the southeast, but rather stay farther north during their movement over the Midwest and eastern U.S. Intensification of the southwest U.S. thermal low increases winds from the south over the central U.S. Warm and stationary fronts form more frequently over the Midwest U.S. at the boundaries between northern and southern air masses. Surface pressure troughs at those fronts draw moist modified maritime tropical air from the south that results in surface convergence, lifting, and formation of precipitation at the fronts. The combined results of these changes are increased frequencies of west, south, and east winds as air masses converge on the area from more locations in the southwest, south, and southeast U.S. than during winter. During the summer season, the subtropical high pressure belt reaches its maximum intensity. It reinforces development of individual surface anticyclones, which follow in a general easterly direction behind weak cold fronts as they move eastward. Surface lows and precipitation are largely suppressed. The summer season wind rose (Figure 19.3.2-34) shows dominant wind direction frequencies from the south and southwest, reflecting flow out of the relatively slow moving surface high pressure centers.The autumn wind rose (Figure 19.3.2-35) reverts back to some cool season circulation patterns, which are also characteristic of the spring season. It shows dominant wind direction frequencies from the south and west, but east winds occur less frequently than during the spring season. East winds are less frequent because the subtropical surface pressure ridge extends westward from the north Atlantic to the central U.S. during autumn, whereas it is strongest off the Atlantic coastline during spring. Airflow, therefore, moves north out of surface anticyclones that are reinforced by the mean autumn subtropical ridge position across the east central U.S., and airflow relatively infrequently moves towards the west off of the North Atlantic. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-29Rev. 0Wind roses were generated for regional climate stations from TD-3505 hourly surface dataset files (NCDC, 2011m). The climate stations (Baraboo, Wisconsin; Madison, Wisconsin; Fond du Lac, Wisconsin; Freeport, Illinois; Rockford, Illinois; and Du Page County Airport, Illinois) were identified in Subsection 19.3.2.1.5. Rockford and Madison represent the geographical center of the site climate region. Baraboo, Fond du Lac, Freeport and Du Page County Airport represent the northwest, northeast, southwest and southeast corners of the climate region, respectively.Figure 19.3.2-36 shows a comparison of annual wind roses for the SWRA in Janesville and the six regional stations. The wind roses are arranged in the figure to match the approximate physical locations of the stations relative to Janesville, Wisconsin. The annual wind rose from Fond du Lac shows a bimodal southwest and northeast wind direction distribution. The northeast winds appear to be local effects of nearby Lake Winnebago, which is located approximately three miles northeast of the Fond du Lac airport. However, the annual wind roses at the other five regional stations (Baraboo, Madison, Freeport, Rockford, and Du Page County Airport) show overall multi-modal patterns similar to the annual wind rose from Janesville. This consistency verifies the representativeness of wind measurements from the SWRA in Janesville for purposes of dispersion modeling.19.3.2.4.5Atmospheric Stability Pasquill stability class is derived from hourly wind speed, ceiling height, and sky cover measurements from the AWOS at the SWRA in Janesville, Wisconsin. The Pasquill stability class is derived using computer code from USEPA, 1999 which implements the method described by (Turner, D.B,1964). Table19.3.2-21 shows the joint data recovery of wind speed, wind direction, and the computed Pasquill stability class. Joint data recovery exceeds 90 percent for 2005, 2006, and 2008-2010, and is 86 percent for 2007.Table19.3.2-22 presents the annual Pasquill class frequency distributions for the combined local data period 2005-2010, and each individual year in the combined period. This table shows that the Pasquill class "D" stability class is the most frequently occurring stability class for each year and for the combined period. The Pasquill "A" class is the least frequently occurring class. Both of these results are consistent with generally observed stability class climatologies. A similar distribution is also presented, for example, in Stern et al., 1984.The results in Table19.3.2-22 are presented in the form of JFDs of wind direction and wind speed stratified by Pasquill stability, in Table19.3.2-23 through Table19.3.2-29. These JFDs are used for /Q and radiological dose calculations presented in Subsection 19.4.8.2.19.3.2.5Programs or Policies to Reduce Greenhouse Gas EmissionsSHINE is committed to minimizing its carbon footprint and promoting initiatives to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG). SHINE will develop a comprehensive program to avoid and control GHG emissions associated with the facility. It is expected that this program will include elements of the following, as SHINE determines to be appropriate for the facility:*Participating in USEPA initiatives such as the Climate Leaders Program, ENERGY STAR Commercial Buildings Program, Green Power Partnership, and SmartWay Transport
Partnership.*Developing a GHG emission inventory, including appropriate procedures for estimating or monitoring GHG emissions. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-30Rev. 0*Investigating and implementing methods for avoiding or controlling the GHG emissions identified in the inventory.*Implementing energy efficiency and conservation programs at the SHINE facility.*Working with suppliers, transporters, and customers to improve their energy efficiency.*Installing solar panels and/or purchasing electricity generated from renewable energy sources.*Encouraging car pooling or other measures to minimize GHG emissions due to vehicle traffic during construction and operation of the SHINE facility.*Conducting periodic audits of GHG control procedures and implementing corrective actions when necessary.19.3.2.6Noise19.3.2.6.1Baseline Noise Conditions A commonly used measure of noise is A-weighted decibels (dBA). The SHINE site is currently an agricultural field. Consequently, the SHINE site itself has no noise-generating facilities. However, intermittent seasonal noise emissions at the site caused by use of farming equipment may result in noise emissions ranging from 85 to 100 dBA (Bean, T., 2008). At night, or at certain times during the day when traffic on US 51 is particularly light, noise levels at the SHINE site are more typical of a quiet urban setting where the noise level can be expected to range from 40 to 50 dBA (Table 19.3.2-30). The SHINE site was analyzed for current noise conditions resulting from off-site sources. Continuous daytime baseline level noise at the SHINE site is predominately the result of vehicle noise generation associated with traffic along US 51. The existing daytime traffic volume on US 51 is modeled to result in a 67 dBA noise level approximately 81 ft. (25 m) east of the edge of the northbound driving lane, which attenuates to 57 dBA at 260 ft. (79 m) east of the edge of the northbound driving lane. The nearest noise receptors to the SHINE site are Airport Park (0.30 mi. [0.48 km] to the northwest); a residence immediately west of Airport Park (0.33 mi. [0.53 km] to the northwest); and a church, Iglesia Hispania Pentecostes (0.35 mi. [0.56 km] to the south). There are no other known traffic-related noise receptors within an audible range of the SHINE site.On an intermittent basis, the loudest noise-generating facility within an audible range of the SHINE site is SWRA. The baseline noise condition at the SHINE site is characterized by additional intermittent noise generated by take-offs and landings of aircraft at the airport. There is one known past noise study, conducted by SWRA that analyzed noise generated within an audible range of the SHINE site. At the SHINE site, take-off and landing activity associated with Runway 4/22 is indicated to have a day night average sound level (Ldn) value of 60 at the northwest edge of the site with attenuation to an Ldn value of 55 near the middle of the site (Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, 2004).The Union Pacific Railroad is approximately 1.6 mi. (2.6 km) northeast of the SHINE site. Given the distance from the site, intermittent noise levels generated by trains are expected to attenuate to baseline levels at the site. There are no other industries or businesses within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the site that are characterized by notable noise emissions. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-31Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-1 Selected Characteristics of Wisconsin Physiographic Provinces (a)a) Characteristics are based on Moran, J.M. and E.J. Hopkins, 2002 and Rand McNally, 2005.Lake Superior LowlandNorthern HighlandCentral PlainEastern Ridges and LowlandsWestern UplandsVegetationBroadleaf deciduous and needleleaf evergreen treesAgriculture is limited by lakes, swamps, and short growing season.Marginally suited for agriculture. Irrigation required.
Tamarack bogs occur above impervious lake
clays.Broadleaf deciduous and needleleaf evergreen treesBroadleaf deciduous treesTopographyGently sloping plains, with steep escarpments at the southern shore of Lake Superior.The southernmost portion of the
Canadian Shield of crystalline bedrock. Weathering and erosion have reduced terrain to nearly a plain. Scattered hills of resistant bedrock remain. Lake and swamp
terrain.Relatively flat or
gently rolling topography with occasional sandstone mesas, buttes, pinnacles.Numerous
glacial landforms, lowest elevations of Wisconsin. Lake Winnebago is remnant of a larger glacial lake. Niagara cuesta is a rock ridge in the northeast in Door and Waukesha
Counties.Escaped recent glaciation, allowing streams and rivers to form steep valleys. Portions of the uplands are referred to as the "driftless area" due to the lack of glacial debris, or
"drift" ElevationsSeveral hundred feet above elevation of the
Great Lakes1,400 to 1,650 ft.
NAVD 88750 to 850 ft.
NAVD 88Topographic relief of 100 to 200 feet above the elevation of
Lake Michigan (mean lake elevation is approximately 600 ft. NAVD 88).Approximately 1,000 to 1,200 ft. NAVD 88,
including some topographic
relief approaching 500 feet. Rock bluffs, mounds (highest approximately 1,716 ft. NAVD 88). Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-32Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-2 Madison, Wisconsin Climatic Means and Extremes(Sheet 1 of 2)Table extracted from NCDC, 2011a. "POR" refers to the period of record (years). Refer to that reference for explanatory notes . Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-33Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-2 Madison, Wisconsin Climatic Means and Extremes(Sheet 2 of 2) Table extracted from NCDC, 2011a. "POR" refers to the period of record (years). Refer to that reference for explanatory notes . Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-34Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-3 Rockford, Illinois Climatic Means and Extremes (Sheet 1 of 2) Table extracted from NCDC, 2011c. "POR" refers to the period of record (years). Refer to that reference for explanatory notes . Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-35Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-3 Rockford, Illinois Climatic Means and Extremes(Sheet 2 of 2)Table extracted from NCDC, 2011c. "POR" refers to the period of record (years). Refer to that reference for explanatory notes . Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-36Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-4 Madison, Wisconsin and Rockford, Illinois Additional Climatic Means and Extremes(Sheet 1 of 2) (a)a)Based on NCDC, 1996b. Period of record for Rockford is 1951-1995 and 1948-1995 for Madison.ParameterPeriodMadison, Wisconsin Rockford, IllinoisMean number of days with rain or drizzle(NCDC, 1996b)January56February55 March1011
April1515May1616June1514July1514August1413 September1313 October1313 November1011 December78 Annual138139Mean number of days with freezing rain or drizzle(NCDC, 1996b)January11February< 0.5< 0.5 March< 0.5< 0.5 April< 0.5< 0.5
May00June00July00August00 September00 October< 0.50 November< 0.5< 0.5 December11 Annual22 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-37Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-4 Madison, Wisconsin and Rockford, Illinois Additional Climatic Means and Extremes(Sheet 2 of 2)ParameterPeriodMadison, Wisconsin Rockford, IllinoisMean number of days with snow(NCDC, 1996b)January1817February1413 March1311 April43 May< 0.5< 0.5 June00 July00 August00 September< 0.50 October11 November98 December1615 Annual7568Mean number of days with hail or sleet(NCDC, 1996b)January0< 0.5February0< 0.5 March< 0.5< 0.5 April< 0.5< 0.5 May< 0.5< 0.5 June< 0.5< 0.5 July< 0.5< 0.5 August< 0.5< 0.5 September< 0.5< 0.5 October< 0.5< 0.5 November< 0.5< 0.5 December< 0.50 Annual22 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-38Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-5 List of NOAA ASOS Stations Located within the Site Climate Region(a,b,c)a) The site climate region and station locations are defined via the map in Figure 19.3.2-16.b) Extracted from NCDC, 2012b.c) MSL elevations are functionally equivalent to the NAVD 88 elevations in this table.NameUSAFIDNo.WBANIDNo.St.County NorthLatitude(deg min sec)West Longitude (deg min sec)GroundElev.(ft. MSL)ApproximateAvailable DS 3505 Digital Database Period of Record (years)Baraboo72650354833WISauk43 31 1989 46 159781997-2011 (15)Burlington7220594866WIRacine42 41 2388 18 147791948-2011 (64)De Kalb TaylorMunicipal Airport72207504871WIDe Kalb41 55 5588 42 289151973-2011 (39)Juneau Dodge County72650904898WIDodge43 25 3388 42 109361997-2011 (15)Du Page County72530594892ILDu Page41 54 5088 14 567581973-2011 (39)Fond du Lac CountyAirport72650604840WIFond du Lac43 46 1288 29 98071997-2011 (14)Freeport Albertus Airport72208204876ILStephen-son42 14 4589 34 558592004-2011 (8) Janesville SouthernWisconsinRegional72641594854WIRock42 37 189 1 588081973-2011 (39)Madison Dane County TruaxField72641014837WIDane43 8 2789 20 418661948-2011 (64) Middleton
Municipal Morey Field720656n/aWIDane43 7 189 31 589282009-2011 (3)Monroe Municipal72641404873WIGreen42 36 5489 35 2710852001-2011 (10)Rochelle Municipal
AirportKoritzField72218204890IL Ogle41 53 3489 4 407812004-2011 (8)Chicago Rockford IntlAirport72543094822 ILWinne-bago42 11 3489 5 347431973-2011 (39)WatertownM unicipalAirport72646454834WIJefferson43 10 188 43 18331995-2011 (17) Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-39Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-6 List of NOAA COOP Stations in the Site Climate Region for which Clim-20 Summaries are Available(a,b)a)The site climate region and station locations are defined via the map in Figure 19.3.2-17.b)MSL elevations are functionally equivalent to the NAVD 88 elevations in this table.NameSt.County NorthLatitude (deg min)West Longitude (deg min)GroundElev.(ft. MSL) Approx. Period of Record(years)(temp precip)Arboretum Univ of WIWIDane43 289 2686541 41Arlington Univ FarmWIColumbia43 1889 20108049 49BarabooWISauk43 2889 4482358 73Beaver DamWIDodge43 2788 5184062 74
BeloitWIRock42 3089 2780121 162BrodheadWIGreen42 3789 23790115 115 Charmany FarmWIDane43 489 2991049 49DaltonWIGreen Lake43 3989 12860n/aDe KalbILDe Kalb41 5688 47873119 130 Fond du LacWIFond du Lac43 4888 27760126 126Ft AtkinsonWIJefferson42 5488 5280070 70 Hartford 2 WWIWashington43 2088 2598067 73 HoriconWIDodge43 2688 38880109 109 Lake GenevaWIWalworth42 3688 26880n/a Lake MillsWIJefferson43 588 54817119 121
Madison Dane Co APWIDane43 889 2186679 79MarengoILMcHenry42 1888 39815156 156OconomowocWIWaukesha43 688 3085673 73 PortageWIColumbia43 3289 26775119 123 Prairie du SacWISauk43 1989 44780n/a Rockford APILWinnebago42 1289 673061 61StoughtonWIDane42 3789 45840n/a WatertownWIJefferson43 1088 44825121 121 Wisconsin DellsWIColumbia43 3789 4683589 89 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-40Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-7 Nearest Federal Class I Areas to the SHINE Site (a)a) Extracted from NPS, 2011.Class I AreaDistance from SHINE Site (km)Distance from SHINE Site (mi.)Direction from SHINE SiteRainbow Lake Wilderness Area, WI455283NorthwestSeney Wilderness Area, MI475295North-northeastIsle Royale National Park , MI610379North Mammoth Cave National Park, KY630391South-southeastBoundary Waters Canoe Area, MN640398North-northwestMingo Wilderness Area, MO645401SouthVoyageurs National Park MN730454North Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-41Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-8 Regional Tornadoes and Waterspouts(a,b,c)a)Period of record is May, 1950 through July, 2011.b)Based on NCDC, 2011g.c)Additionally, an F5 tornado occurred on 8 June 1984 in Iowa County, Wisconsin, at the town of Barneveld, which is located approximately 50 mi. (80 km) west-northwest of the SHINE site.StateCountyArea (mi. 2)Number of Tornadoes Number of Waterspout sILBoone28280ILCarroll 466140ILCook1635510ILDe Kalb 635110ILDu Page 337240ILKane524190ILLake1368161ILLee729220ILMcHenry611 150ILOgle763190ILStephenson565 130ILWhiteside697 190WIAdams689170WIColumbia796 340WIDane1238560WIDodge907580WIFond du Lac766 430WIGreen585180WIGreen Lake380 300WIJefferson583 330WIJuneau804230WIKenosha 75491WIMarquette456 70WIRacine792201WISauk848230WIWalworth577 230WIWashington436 170WIWaukesha580 280 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-42Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-9 Details of Strongest Tornadoes in Rock County, Wisconsin(a,b,c)a) The SHINE site is located in Rock County, Wisconsin.b) Period of record is May, 1950 through July, 2011.c) Based on NCDC, 1960; NCDC, 1961; NCDC, 1970; NCDC, 1971; NCDC, 1988; NCDC, 1991; NCDC,1998, and NCDC, 2011g.Tornado IntensityDate Path Length (mi.) Path Width (yd.)Property Damage($)Additional DescriptionF215 Nov 19603.00672,500Occurred 1.5 mi. (2.4 km) south of Union, Wisconsin. Damage occurred to farm buildings, an abandoned restaurant, and a school roof.F222 Sep 19613.6022025,000Occurred 1 mi. (1.6 km) south of Whitewater, Wisconsin. Damage occurred to at least 15 farms. There was 1 injury.F29 Oct 197011.1050250,000The tornado moved NNW from the banks of the Rock River just north of Riverside Park (NW of Janesville) and 5 mi. (8.0 km) west of Edgerton toward Stoughton. An outbuilding was damaged. There was 1 injury.F21 Nov 19713.00100250,000A small tornado moved northeast in a mostly residential area along a line from 1.5 mi. (2.4 km) NNW to about 4 mi NNE of downtown Beloit. Several homes and
garages were severely damaged. There was 1 injury.F28 May 198827.00173250,000Tornado affected Rock, Dane, and Jefferson counties. Many farm buildings and two homes were damaged.F227 Mar 19917.004402.5 millionTornado affected Green, Rock, Dane, and Jefferson counties. There were 5 injuries and 1 fatality.F225 Jun 19982.50100845,000Tornado moved from 2.3 mi. (3.7 km) WNW of Leyden to 1 mi. (1.6 km) NNE of Leyden. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-43Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-10 Details of Strongest Tornadoes in Surrounding CountiesAdjacent to Rock County, Wisconsin(Sheet 1 of 2)(a,b,c,d,e,f)Tornado IntensityDateCounty Path Length (mi.)Path Width (yd.)Property Damage($)Additional DescriptionF421 Apr 1967Boone11.501200250,000Tornado moved near 50 mph (22.4 m/s) towards ENE to E, from 2 mi. (3.2 km) SE of Cherry Valley to two mi. north of Woodstock. Numerous reports of multiple funnel sightings were substantiated by damage. Almost complete destruction directly in path with major wind damage on either side. Many farm homes completely destroyed. Woods were stripped with large trees uprooted or snapped off. About 5 percent of the path was through an urban area, which was the SE corner of Belvidere, where a high school was hit. There were 450 injuries and 24 fatalities.F37 Jan 2008Boone7.001002.0 millionTornado traveled from about 1.2 mi. (1.9 km) N of Poplar Grove in Boone County, to about 3.2 mi (5.1 km) NE of Harvard in McHenry County. A large barn and farmhouse were destroyed, and other buildings severely damaged. Damage also occurred to power lines. Large trees were snapped, uprooted, and stripped of branches. There were 4 injuries.F32 Aug 1967Danen/an/a25,000Tornado moved SE on the N shore of Lake Mendota in the town of Westport, about 100 yards (0.1 km) inland. Three cottages were destroyed and several homes slightly damaged. There were 5 injuries and 2 fatalities. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-44Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-10 Details of Strongest Tornadoes in Surrounding CountiesAdjacent to Rock County, Wisconsin(Sheet 2 of 2)a) The SHINE site is located in Rock County, WI.b) Counties adjacent to Rock County include: Green (WI), Dane (WI), Jefferson (WI), Walworth (WI), Boone (IL), Winnebago (IL), and Stephenson (IL).c) Period of record is May, 1950 through July, 2011. d) "n/a" means information not available. e) Based on data in references NCDC, 1967a; NCDC, 1967b; NCDC, 1975; NCDC, 1980; NCDC, 1992; NCDC, 2005b; NCDC, 2008; and NCDC, 2011g.f) Additionally, an F5 tornado occurred on 8 June 1984 in Iowa County, Wisconsin, at the town of Barneveld, which is located approximately 50 mi. (80 km) west-northwest of the SHINE site.Tornado IntensityDateCounty Path Length (mi.)Path Width (yd.)Property Damage($)Additional DescriptionF34 Jun 1975Dane2.303325,000Tornado touched down three miles north of Sun Prairie and moved towards the east. Two farms had extensive damage and one home was destroyed.F317 Jun 1992Dane16.0040025.0 millionTornado occurred 2 mi. (3.2 km) north of Belleville. There were 30 injuries.F318 Aug 2005Dane17.0060034.3 millionStrong and destructive tornado started about 2.8 mi. (4.5 km) SE of Fitchburg and moved slowly ESE to the southern edge of Lake Kegonsa through residential neighborhoods including Dunn, Pleasant Springs, and Stoughton. There was extensive damage to homes, businesses, farm buildings, vehicles, power lines, and trees. There were 23 injuries and 1
fatality.F35 Jun 1980Jefferson4.00n/a25,000Tornado formed near Rock River at 0.25 mi. (0.4 km) E of Watertown, lifted and moved SE where it touched down a second time 1 mi. (1.6 km) SE of
Pipersville. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-45Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-11 Precipitation Extremes at Local and Regional NOAA COOP Meteorological Monitoring Stations within the Site Climate Region (a,b,c)a) The site climate region and station locations are defined in Figure 19.3.2-17.b) Based on 1971-2000 da ta in NCDC, 2001a-x.c) Madison and Rockford statistics were updated through the year 2010 from NCDC, 2011a and NCDC,2011c.Station NameStateCountyMaximum Recorded24-HourRainfall(in.)Maximum RecordedMonthlyRainfall(in.)Maximum Recorded24-HourSnowfall(in.)Maximum Recorded MonthlySnowfall(in.)Arboretum Univ of
WIWIDane6.0012.0712.025.5Arlington Univ FarmWIColumbia5.1012.9214.028.0BarabooWISauk7.7814.7912.035.2Beaver DamWIDodge4.4115.0513.030.0 BeloitWIRock5.7714.3911.022.0BrodheadWIGreen6.6213.1110.031.1Charmany FarmWIDane5.8511.4713.020.5DaltonWIGreen Lake4.6913.7721.025.5DeKalbILDe Kalb8.0914.2315.634.5Fond du LacWIFond du Lac6.8312.7014.025.1
Ft AtkinsonWIJefferson4.479.0514.039.0Hartford 2 WWIWashington5.2011.2312.033.0 HoriconWIDodge5.9414.7216.040.0Lake GenevaWIWalworth3.8811.3013.238.5 Lake MillsWIJefferson4.9311.3111.031.0Madison Dane Co APWIDane5.2815.1817.340.4MarengoILMcHenry5.1511.7012.021.0OconomowocWIWaukesha5.3811.3911.528.7PortageWIColumbia6.2916.0912.534.0Prairie du SacWISauk5.7311.4111.623.5Rockford APILWinnebago6.4213.9811.430.2StoughtonWIDane5.058.8612.035.5WatertownWIJefferson6.6510.4713.050.4Wisconsin DellsWIColumbia7.6714.1314.028.4 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-46Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-12 Mean Seasonal and Annual Hail or Sleet Frequencies at Rockford, Illinois and Madison, Wisconsin (a)a) Statistics from NCDC, 2011a and NCDC, 2011c.StationWinterSpringSummerAutumnAnnualRockford<0.3<0.5<0.5<0.5<0.5Madison<0.2<0.5<0.5<0.5<0.7 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-47Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-13 Ice Storms that have Affected Rock County, Wisconsin (a)a) Based on 1995 - 2011 data in NCDC, 2011g.Date of StormDescription of Ice Storm26 Feb 1995Freezing rain and freezing drizzle. Coating of ice up to one-quarter inch.26 Nov 1995Two to six hour period of sleet and/or freezing rain glazed road surfaces.13 Dec 1995Ice accumulations of one-quarter to one-half inch on top of one to five inches of snow. A glazing of less than one-quarter inch of freezing rain or freezing drizzle.4 Feb 1997Several hours of freezing rain, accumulated to one quarter inch. Sheets of ice on roads and sidewalks, especially rural.3 Feb 2003Periodic light freezing drizzle of light freezing rain glazed roads and sidewalks.7 Apr 2003Freezing drizzle left crusty layers. 16 Jan 2004Freezing rain caused road surfaces to become very slippery due to initial ice glazing of 1/16 to 1/8 inch.7 Mar 2004Freezing drizzle/rain generated a thin layer of ice on road surfaces. 18 Dec 2004Light freezing drizzle coated roads and bridges during morning hours.1 Jan 2005Pockets of freezing rain or drizzle resulted in a light glaze of ice on many road surfaces and sidewalks.17 Feb 2008Ice storm affected a 25 to 30 mile wide area stretching from Janesville to Ft. Atkinson to Delafield to Wes Bend to Port Washington, with about 11 hours of freezing rain. Ice accumulations ranged from one quarter to one half inch. Roads were icy. 8 Dec 2008Freezing rain produced ice accumulations of 1/10 to 2/10 inch near the Illinois border.28 Mar 2009Mixture of sleet, rain, freezing rain and snow caused very hazardous driving conditions. Ice accumulations were 0.10 inch.23 Dec 2009Freezing rain during afternoon hours resulted in a low-end ice storm with ice accumulations of one quarter to one half inch. Trees and power lines were coated, causing them to break. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-48Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-14 Mean Seasonal Thunderstorm Frequencies at Rockford, Illinois and Madison, Wisconsin (a)a) Statistics from NCDC, 2011a and NCDC, 2011c. StationWinter(days)Spring(days)Summer(days)Autumn(days)Rockford0.34.07.42.7Madison0.23.67.12.3 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-49Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-15 Design Wet and Dry Bulb Temperatures (a)a) 0.4%, 1% and 2% temperatures from ASHRAE, 2009. 5% temperatures from NCDC, 1996bStatisticBounding Value (°F)Maximum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 0.4 percent91.5 (Rockford)Mean coincident WBT (MCWB) at the 0.4 percent DBT75.0 (Rockford) Maximum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 2.0 percent85.8 (Rockford)Mean coincident WBT (MCWB) at the 2.0 percent DBT72.0 (Rockford)Minimum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 0.4 percent-9.1 (Madison)Minimum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 1.0 percent-2.9 (Madison)Maximum WBT with annual exceedance probability of 0.4 percent78.3 (Du Page County Airport)Maximum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 5 percent81 (Rockford)Minimum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 5 percent9 (Madison) Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-50Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-16 Estimated 100-Year Return Maximum and Minimum DBT, MCWB coincident with the 100-Year Return Maximum DBT, Historic Maximum WBT and Estimated 100-Year Annual Maximum Return WBT StationEstimated 100-yr maximum DBT (°F)MCWB coincident with 100-yr maximum DBT (°F)HistoricmaximumWBT (°F)Estimated 100-yrmaximumWBT (°F)Estimated 100-yr minimumDBT (°F)Rockford104.88083.685.9-35.1Madison104.37585.086.0-33.4Bounding value104.88085.086.0-35.1 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-51Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-17 Dry Bulb Temperature Extremes at Local and Regional NOAA COOP Meteorological Monitoring Stations within the Site Climate Region(a,b,c,d)a) The site climate region and station locations are defined in Figure 19.3.2-17.b) Based on 1971-2000 data in NCDC, 2001a-x. c) Rockford and Madison statistics were updated through the year 2010 from NCDC. 2011a and NCDC, 2011c.d) The highest and lowest dry bulb temperatures in the region are in bold font. StationNameStateCounty Maximum RecordedDry BulbTemperature (°F)MinimumRecordedDry Bulb Temperature (°F)Arboretum Univ. of WIWIDane108-38Arlington Univ. FarmWIColumbia102-36 BarabooWISauk102-45Beaver DamWIDodge100-36BeloitWIRock102-26BrodheadWIGreen102-36Charmany FarmWIDane102-34DaltonWIGreen Lake103-39 De KalbILDe Kalb103-27Fond du LacWIFond du Lac103-41Ft AtkinsonWIJefferson102-39Hartford 2 WWIWashington105-35 HoriconWIDodge101-36Lake GenevaWIWalworth106-27 Lake MillsWIJefferson104-33Madison Dane Co APWIDane104-37MarengoILMcHenry109-29 OconomowocWIWaukesha101-33 PortageWIColumbia103-35 Prairie du SacWISauk103-42Rockford APILWinnebago104-27StoughtonWIDane103-35WatertownWIJefferson103-33Wisconsin DellsWIColumbia102-43 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-52Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-18 FAA Specifications for Automated Weather Observing Stations(a)a) From FAA, 2011ParameterRangeAccuracyResolutionOtherDry bulb temperature-30° - +130°F (-35° - +55°C) 1°F RMSE over entire range with maximum error of 2°F 1° Ftime constant 2 minRelative humidity5 - 100 percent 5 percent 1 percenttime constant < 2 minWind speed2 - 85 knotsa) +/- 2 knots up to 40 knotsb) RMSE +/- 5 percent above 40 knots1 knota) distance constant < 10 mb) 2 knot threshold Wind direction1°- 360° azimuth+/- 5 percent RMSE1°a) time constant < 2 secondsb) 2 knot thresholdPressure17.58 - 31.53 in. Hga) +/- 0.02 in. Hg RMSE; b) maximum error 0.02 in. Hg 0.001 in. Hg drift 0.02 in. Hg for period not less than 6 monthsVisibility< 1/4 - 10 mi.a) 1/4 1/4 mi.: +/- 1/4 mi. b) 1-1/2 3/4 mi.: + 1/4 , -1/2 mi. c) 2 1/2 mi.: +/- 1/2 mi. d) 3 1/2 mi.: +1/2, -1 mi.
e) 4 mi.: +/- 1 mi.< 1/4, 1/4, 1/2, 3/4, 1, 1-1/4, 1-1/2, 2, 2-1/2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 10 and > 10
mi.time constant 3 minPrecipitation0.01 - 5 in/hr0.002 in/hr RMSE or 4 percent, which ever is greater0.01 in.Cloud height 0 to 12,500 ft 100 ft. or 5 percent, which ever is greatera) 0 - 5,500 ft.: 50 ft. b) 5,501 -10,000 ft.: 250 ft. c) > 10,000 ft.: 500 ft.a) sampling rate at least once every 30 seconds b) at least three cloud layers when visibility 1/4 mi.Time0000 - 2359 UTCwithin 15 seconds each month1 second Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-53Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-19 Annual Data Recovery Rates (in Percent) of Dry Bulb Temperatures, Relative Humidity, Wind Speed, and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport for 2005-2010 (a)a) From NCDC, 2011lYearDry Bulb Temperature Relative HumidityWind SpeedWind Direction200595.995.894.094.0200693.092.991.191.1200787.787.687.387.3 200892.692.691.291.2200993.993.692.792.6201093.893.792.492.4 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-54Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-20 Historical Dry Bulb Temperatures, Relative Humidity, and Wind Speed from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport for 2005-2010 (a)a) From NCDC, 2011lDry Bulb Temperature (°F) Relative Humidity(percent)Wind Speed (mph)MonthMaximum Minimum AverageAverageMaximum AverageJanuary61-2022.679.2359.2February59-1724.276.0498.7 March77736.872.7338.9April841949.763.24010.4May933059.265.5318.8 June934369.071.3487.0July974671.974.7316.1August934571.973.3385.8 September953464.072.8306.5October902351.572.4388.0November771240.173.1339.2 December55-824.082.4448.6Average811848.773.1388.1 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-55Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-21 Annual Joint Data Recovery Rates of Wind Speed, Wind Direction, and Computed Pasquill Stability Class from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (a)a) From NCDC, 2011l YearJoint Data Recovery(percent)200593.6200690.5200786.0 200890.6200991.7201091.7 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-56Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-22 Pasquill Stability Class Frequency Distributions from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (Percent) 2005-2010(a)a) From NCDC, 2011lFrequency of Occurrence (Percent)Pasquill Class2005200620072008200920102005-2010 A0.780.670.860.681.181.160.89 B5.003.433.613.645.245.394.40C11.8811.3110.1511.1810.6711.9811.21D52.9056.4556.6755.4454.0050.1954.24 E8.838.248.157.417.317.087.83F10.1010.2810.359.699.5910.4810.08G10.519.6210.2111.9612.0113.7211.35Total100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-57Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-23 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class A) (a)a)From NCDC, 2011l Speed (m/s)N NNENEENEEESESESSESSSWSWWSWWWNWNWNNW TotalCalm3230.00 < WS < 1.00 00000010000000001 1.00 < WS < 2.00 00112102000020009 2.00 < WS < 3.00 623957969553955492 3.00 < WS < 4.00 00000000000000000 4.00 < WS < 5.00 00000000000000000 5.00 < WS < 6.00 00000000000000000 6.00 < WS < 8.00 000000000000000008.00 < WS < 10.00 00000000000000000> 10.00 00000000000000000Totals6241078108955311554425 Speed (m/s)Calm0.680.00 < WS < 1.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 1.00 < WS < 2.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.02 2.00 < WS < 3.00 0.010.000.010.020.010.010.020.010.020.010.010.010.020.010.010.010.19 3.00 < WS < 4.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 4.00 < WS < 5.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 5.00 < WS < 6.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 6.00 < WS < 8.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.008.00 < WS < 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00> 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00Totals0.010.000.010.020.010.020.020.020.020.010.010.010.020.010.010.010.89 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-58Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-24 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class B) (a)a) From NCDC, 2011l Speed (m/s)N NNENEENEEESESESSESSSWSWWSWWWNWNWNNW TotalCalm6970.00 < WS < 1.00 00000000000000000 1.00 < WS < 2.00 51012811115481387125134136 2.00 < WS < 3.00 31252723292321222128402735332319427 3.00 < WS < 4.00 47393429383137474556614362613137698 4.00 < WS < 5.00 359106253132185191289138 5.00 < WS < 6.00 00000000000000000 6.00 < WS < 8.00 000000000000000008.00 < WS < 10.00 00000000000000000> 10.00 00000000000000000Totals8679827084676876871181178212811175692096 Speed (m/s)Calm1.460.00 < WS < 1.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 1.00 < WS < 2.00 0.010.020.030.020.020.020.010.010.020.030.020.010.030.010.030.010.29 2.00 < WS < 3.00 0.070.050.060.050.060.050.040.050.040.060.080.060.070.070.050.040.90 3.00 < WS < 4.00 0.100.080.070.060.080.070.080.100.090.120.130.090.130.130.070.081.46 4.00 < WS < 5.00 0.010.010.020.020.010.000.010.010.030.040.020.010.040.030.020.020.29 5.00 < WS < 6.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 6.00 < WS < 8.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.008.00 < WS < 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00> 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00Totals0.180.170.170.150.180.140.140.160.180.250.250.170.270.230.160.144.40 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-59Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-25 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class C) (a)a) From NCDC, 2011l Speed (m/s)N NNENEENEEESESESSESSSWSWWSWWWNWNWNNW TotalCalm11180.00 < WS < 1.00 00000000000000000 1.00 < WS < 2.00 152571567315151661814149167 2.00 < WS < 3.00 34242734251925283738573559535830583 3.00 < WS < 4.00 523939392439245665837272105946059922 4.00 < WS < 5.00 71724957544545811111361481141591501201011513 5.00 < WS < 6.00 422931273626174581105876561915356852 6.00 < WS < 8.00 05564565121221182381021428.00 < WS < 10.00 0001300043631110032> 10.00 000011022030501015Totals2141711561711621411242203273924103134414113162575344 Speed (m/s)Calm2.350.00 < WS < 1.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 1.00 < WS < 2.00 0.030.000.010.010.030.010.010.010.030.030.030.010.040.030.030.020.35 2.00 < WS < 3.00 0.070.050.060.070.050.040.050.060.080.080.120.070.120.110.120.061.22 3.00 < WS < 4.00 0.110.080.080.080.050.080.050.120.140.170.150.150.220.200.130.121.93 4.00 < WS < 5.00 0.150.150.100.120.110.090.090.170.230.290.310.240.330.310.250.213.17 5.00 < WS < 6.00 0.090.060.070.060.080.050.040.090.170.220.180.140.130.190.110.121.79 6.00 < WS < 8.00 0.000.010.010.010.010.010.010.010.030.030.040.040.050.020.020.000.308.00 < WS < 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.010.000.000.000.010.010.010.010.020.000.000.000.07> 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.010.000.010.000.000.000.03Totals0.450.360.330.360.340.300.260.460.690.820.860.660.930.860.660.5411.21 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-60Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-26 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class D) (a)a) From NCDC, 2011l Speed (m/s)N NNENEENEEESESESSESSSWSWWSWWWNWNWNNW TotalCalm13530.00 < WS < 1.00 000000000000000001.00 < WS < 2.00 393140364532251831272430473528405282.00 < WS < 3.00 24116816515820416415413718318518014025420121215028963.00 < WS < 4.00 32320520522427122020321334228223724033123926023640314.00 < WS < 5.00 32618918620027419016120238225018220331923526724138075.00 < WS < 6.00 37422924826329720519425646847632125348634438132651216.00 < WS < 8.00 25915120129134621817422761748838133460544847137955908.00 < WS < 10.00 632861901485931531391701121122391441661151730> 10.00 2768276825142172678196120745539800Totals16521007111412891653111395611272234194515181408240117201840152625856 Speed (m/s)Calm2.840.00 < WS < 1.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.001.00 < WS < 2.00 0.080.070.080.080.090.070.050.040.070.060.050.060.100.070.060.081.112.00 < WS < 3.00 0.510.350.350.330.430.340.320.290.380.390.380.290.530.420.440.316.073.00 < WS < 4.00 0.680.430.430.470.570.460.430.450.720.590.500.500.690.500.550.508.464.00 < WS < 5.00 0.680.400.390.420.570.400.340.420.800.520.380.430.670.490.560.517.995.00 < WS < 6.00 0.780.480.520.550.620.430.410.540.981.000.670.531.020.720.800.6810.746.00 < WS < 8.00 0.540.320.420.610.730.460.370.481.291.020.800.701.270.940.990.8011.738.00 < WS < 10.00 0.130.060.130.190.310.120.070.110.290.360.230.230.500.300.350.243.63> 10.00 0.060.010.020.060.140.050.030.040.150.140.170.200.250.160.120.081.68Totals3.472.112.342.703.472.332.012.364.694.083.182.955.043.613.863.2054.24 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-61Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-27 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class E) (a)From NCDC, 2011l Speed (m/s)N NNENEENEEESESESSESSSWSWWSWWWNWNWNNW TotalCalm00.00 < WS < 1.00 00000000000000000 1.00 < WS < 2.00 00000000000000000 2.00 < WS < 3.00 593548497782767091857544755053381007 3.00 < WS < 4.00 513554529084829416711568611368173361279 4.00 < WS < 5.00 422137326431185815012773541267676541039 5.00 < WS < 6.00 239111617166306544162662232719410 6.00 < WS < 8.00 000000000000000008.00 < WS < 10.00 00000000000000000> 10.00 00000000000000000Totals1751001501492482131822524733712321853992302291473735 Speed (m/s)Calm0.000.00 < WS < 1.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 1.00 < WS < 2.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 2.00 < WS < 3.00 0.120.070.100.100.160.170.160.150.190.180.160.090.160.100.110.082.11 3.00 < WS < 4.00 0.110.070.110.110.190.180.170.200.350.240.140.130.290.170.150.082.68 4.00 < WS < 5.00 0.090.040.080.070.130.070.040.120.310.270.150.110.260.160.160.112.18 5.00 < WS < 6.00 0.050.020.020.030.040.030.010.060.140.090.030.050.130.050.060.040.86 6.00 < WS < 8.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.008.00 < WS < 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00> 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00Totals0.370.210.310.310.520.450.380.530.990.780.490.390.840.480.480.317.83 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-62Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-28 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class F) (a)a) From NCDC, 2011l Speed (m/s)N NNENEENEEESESESSESSSWSWWSWWWNWNWNNW TotalCalm9750.00 < WS < 1.00 00000000000000000 1.00 < WS < 2.00 26142118413121192832182636152319388 2.00 < WS < 3.00 11774901111581531481641961761641312651922041012444 3.00 < WS < 4.00 3726533251495082100858460109717138998 4.00 < WS < 5.00 00000000000000000 5.00 < WS < 6.00 00000000000000000 6.00 < WS < 8.00 000000000000000008.00 < WS < 10.00 00000000000000000> 10.00 00000000000000000Totals1801141641612502332192653242932662174102782981584805 Speed (m/s)Calm2.050.00 < WS < 1.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 1.00 < WS < 2.00 0.050.030.040.040.090.070.040.040.060.070.040.050.080.030.050.040.81 2.00 < WS < 3.00 0.250.160.190.230.330.320.310.340.410.370.340.270.560.400.430.215.13 3.00 < WS < 4.00 0.080.050.110.070.110.100.100.170.210.180.180.130.230.150.150.082.09 4.00 < WS < 5.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 5.00 < WS < 6.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 6.00 < WS < 8.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.008.00 < WS < 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00> 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00Totals0.380.240.340.340.520.490.460.560.680.610.560.460.860.580.630.3310.08 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-63Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-29 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class G) (a)a) From NCDC, 2011lSpeed (m/s)N NNENEENEEESESESSESSSWSWWSWWWNWNWNNW TotalCalm40530.00 < WS < 1.00 00000000000000000 1.00 < WS < 2.00 77353862113106956110174557218312692671357 2.00 < WS < 3.00 00000000000000000 3.00 < WS < 4.00 00000000000000000 4.00 < WS < 5.00 00000000000000000 5.00 < WS < 6.00 00000000000000000 6.00 < WS < 8.00 000000000000000008.00 < WS < 10.00 00000000000000000> 10.00 00000000000000000Totals77353862113106956110174557218312692675410 Speed (m/s)Calm8.500.00 < WS < 1.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 1.00 < WS < 2.00 0.160.070.080.130.240.220.200.130.210.160.120.150.380.260.190.142.85 2.00 < WS < 3.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 3.00 < WS < 4.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 4.00 < WS < 5.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 5.00 < WS < 6.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 6.00 < WS < 8.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.008.00 < WS < 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00> 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00Totals0.160.070.080.130.240.220.200.130.210.160.120.150.380.260.190.1411.35 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-64Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-30 Representative Environmental Noise Levels (a)a)
Reference:
California Department of Transportation, 1998Common Outdoor ActivitiesNoise Level (dBA)Common Indoor Activities--110--Rock BandJet Fly-over at 1000 feet--100--Gas Lawnmower at 3 feet --90--Food Blender at 3 feetDiesel Truck going 50 mph at 50feet--80--Garbage Disposal at 3 feetNoisy Urban Area during DaytimeGas Lawnmower at 100 feet--70--Vacuum Cleaner at 10 feetCommercial AreaNormal Speech at 3 feetHeavy Traffic at 300 feet--60--Large Business OfficeQuiet Urban Area during Daytime--50--Dishwater in Next RoomQuiet Urban Area during Nighttime--40--Theater, Large Conference Room (background)Quiet Suburban Area duringNighttime--30--LibraryQuiet Rural Area during NighttimeBedroom at Night, Concert Hall (background) --20--Broadcast/ Recording Studio --10--Lowest Threshold of HumanHearing--0--Lowest Threshold of Human Hearing Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewGeologic EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-65Rev. 019.3.3GEOLOGIC ENVIRONMENTThis subsection provides a description of the geology, soils, and seismology of the site and region.19.3.3.1Summary of On-Site Geotechnical InvestigationsSHINE conducted a geotechnical investigation at the Janesville site during the fourth quarter of 2011. The investigation included the installation of 15 soil borings, with four of the borings converted to groundwater monitoring wells and one boring used solely for seismic profile testing (Figure 19.3.3-1). The geotechnical investigation methods and results are detailed in three reports:*Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report, Janesville, Wisconsin: August 3, 2012.*Preliminary Hydrological Analyses, Janesville, Wisconsin: August 3, 2012.*Seismic Hazard Assessment Report, Janesville, Wisconsin: August 3, 2012.The geotechnical report includes descriptions of soils encountered to a maximum boring depth of 221 ft. (67m) below ground surface, the results of vertical seismic profiling, depth to groundwater, engineering properties of the soils encountered at the site, an assessment of geologic hazards at the site or nearby, and the suitability of materials at the site for the construction of the proposed facility.The hydrological analyses report utilizes data gathered during the geotechnical investigation to assess the hydrologic regime at the site, including the flood risks from nearby surface waters, stormwater and runoff management risks, and groundwater flow and transport. The seismic hazard report summarizes the geologic history of the region and makes an assessment of hazards associated with seismic events based on the vertical seismic profiling and a review of published and on-line data. Results from each of these reports are used in the following subsections to further characterize the geological environment at the SHINE site. 19.3.3.2Bedrock Formations The SHINE site lies within the Central Lowlands physiographic province of the United States (Fenneman, Nevin Melancthon, 1946) in an area where thick sections of sedimentary rock overlie crystalline rock of Precambrian age (Olcott, Perry G., 1968). The sedimentary rock consists of Cambrian and Ordovician sandstone, dolomite, and shale (Figure 19.3.3-2). The sedimentary rock formations include the Mount Simon and Eau Claire s andstones and the Prairie du Chien group of Cambrian age, and the St. Peter sandstone, and Platteville, Decorah, and Galena formations of Ordovician age (Figure 19.3.3-3). According to Zaporozec (Zaporozec, Alexander, 1982), the "most significant feature of the bedrock surface (in Rock County) is the ancestral Rock River valley more than 300ft. (91m) deep, subsequently filled with outwash and other fluvial deposits."The Central Lowlands province is located within the middle of the relatively stable North American craton. The North American craton is the portion of the North American continental Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewGeologic EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-66Rev. 0plate that has been least affected by collisions with other plates or tectonic activity. The regional geologic structures within the basement rock that have been mapped include the Sandwich and Plum River fault zones (inactive); the La Salle anticlinorium, and the Wisconsin and Kankakee Arches (Figure19.3.3-4).Between 1.0 and 1.2 billion years ago, a rift zone identified as the Mid-Continent Rift was active from Wisconsin through Mississippi. After the Mid-Continent Rift had ceased being an active rift zone, subsequent cooling of the crust and regional subsidence associated with the Appalachian Orogeny to the east are the probable causes of the regional geologic structures.Overlying the sedimentary bedrock units are unconsolidated quaternary deposits of glacial till and outwash, consisting of well-sorted sand and gravel. The till and outwash deposits were deposited as the continental ice sheets advanced and retreated during the latter portion of the Pleistocene Epoch, between approximately 10,000 and 30,000 years ago. These outwash deposits are good sources of water, with single well yields of over 5000 gallons per minute (gpm) (1.89x104 liters per minute [lpm]) (Olcott, Perry G., 1968). The stratigraphy of the bedrock units that underlie the site (see Figure 19.3.3-3) from youngest to oldest is:*Galena Formation
- Decorah Formation
- Platteville Formation*St. Peter sandstone*Prairie du Chien Group
- Trempealeau Group*Tunnel City Group*Wonewoc Formation
- Eau Claire Formation*Mount Simon Formation*Precambrian basement rockThe bedrock units within Rock County are described in greater detail based on Zaporozec, Alexander, 1982.The Cambrian-Ordovician sedimentary rocks were deposited in shallow seas on an uneven and arched surface of igneous and metamorphic (basement) rocks of Precambrian age. Both the Precambrian surface and the sedimentary rocks dip gently to the south and southeast. The sedimentary units thicken in the direction of dip from about 1000ft. (305 m) in the northwestern corner of Rock County to over 1500ft. (457m) in the southeastern corner of the county.
The oldest formations of Cambrian age in Rock County are, in ascending order, the Mt.Simon sandstone, Eau Claire sandstone, Wonewoc (also known as the Galesville Formation) sandstone, Tunnel City Group (formerly Franconia sandstone), and Trempealeau Formation, consisting of the Jordan sandstone and St. Lawrence dolomite. In the Rock River valley, these rocks of Cambrian age are overlain primarily by unconsolidated Quaternary deposits, with much of the younger Ordovician sequence having been removed by erosion. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewGeologic EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-67Rev. 0Rock formations of Ordovician age include, in ascending order, the Prairie du Chien Group (dolomite), the St. Peter Formation (sandstone), and the Platteville-Galena Formation - also called the Sinnipee Group - consisting of carbonate rocks (limestone and dolomite). The Prairie du Chien Group was greatly thinned by erosion or completely eroded before deposition of the St.Peter sandstone when the land was elevated above sea level. In many areas of Rock County, the Prairie du Chien group is absent, and the St. Peter Formation rests directly on sandstones of Cambrian age. Because it was laid down on an uneven erosional surface, the St.Peter Formation varies considerably in thickness. The bedrock surface in the western part of the county is formed primarily by the St. Peter sandstone. Bedrock east of the Rock River valley and the ridge tops west of the valley are formed by the Platteville-Galena unit.After the deposition of the sedimentary rocks, erosion over a long period of time produced a bedrock surface having a maximum relief of 1000ft. (305m) in Rock County. The most significant feature of the bedrock surface is the ancestral Rock River valley, which reaches depths of greater than 300 ft (91m) (see Figure 19.3.3-2) and was subsequently filled with outwash and other fluvial deposits. East of the buried valley the bedrock has a flat, relatively undissected surface. West of the valley the bedrock surface is rugged and dissected.19.3.3.3Bedrock OverburdenThe site has been influenced strongly by Pleistocene glacial erosion and deposition, and subsequent post-glacial erosional and depositional processes. The site is covered by a mantle of well-drained loamy soils underlain by stratified sand and gravel. These sands and gravels represent late Wisconsin to possibly Holocene age glaciofluvial outwash deposits, transported from the Wisconsin-age glacial moraines related to the Green Bay Ice lobe of the Laurentide Ice Sheet to the north. Depth to bedrock at the SHINE site may be as deep as 300 ft. (91m), supported by geotechnical boreholes for this investigation completed to 221-ft. (67m) depths without encountering bedrock (Figure 19.3.3-5).Lab testing showed the soils to be primarily clean sandy soils with occasional gravel layers, with the density of the sand increasing with depth. A hard clayey silt layer was observed at approximately 180 ft. (55m) below ground surface, and groundwater was observed at a depth of 50 to 65 ft. (15.3 to 19.8m) below ground surface.19.3.3.4Soils On-Site Soil TypesThe soils were formed primarily from glacial processes which occurred in the region. Glacial till and outwash are the primary parent materials for the soil, in addition to reworked loess, decomposed vegetation, and deposits from the dolomite and sandstone bedrock in the area. Most of the glacial outwash in the area consists of stratified sand and gravel, deposited by water flowing from the glacier as it melted and receded. A layer of finer-grained material, which overlies the outwash, eventually weathered to form the silt loam and loam present at the site (USDA-SCS, 1974).The soils at the site are classified by the USDA Soil Conservation Service Soil Survey of Rock County, Wisconsin as two types, the Warsaw silt loam and the Lorenzo loam (USDA-SCS, 1974) (see Figure 19.3.1-5). The Warsaw silt loam, the primary soil at the site, is characteristic of outwash plains and terraces, with the surface layer either a silt loam or loam. The Warsaw silt Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewGeologic EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-68Rev. 0loam typically has slow runoff and is well-suited for farm and crop production. Soils in the Warsaw series consist of level to sloping loamy soils which are underlain by stratified sand and gravel. Permeability is typically moderate in the subsoil, with underlying sand and gravel typically found at depths ranging from 24 to 40 in. (61 to 102cm) (USDA-SCS, 1974).A secondary soil found at the site is the Lorenzo loam. The Lorenzo loam is also typically found on outwash plains and terraces. The surface layer of the Lorenzo loam is a black loam. The Lorenzo loam is well-drained and is moderately susceptible to erosion. The soils of the Lorenzo series are moderately suited to agriculture, with slow runoff. Permeability is typically moderate in the subsoil, with the underlying stratified sand and gravel found at a depth ranging from 12 to 20in. (30 to 51cm) (USDA-SCS, 1974).Prime FarmlandThe Warsaw silt loam with less than 2percent slope is classified as a prime farmland soil by the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, indicating that the soil has the best combination of physical and chemical characteristics for producing crops suitable for the area. Additional factors in the prime farmland designation include favorable climate, adequate and dependable water supply, acceptable soil pH, acceptable salt/sodium content, and the soil is not excessively eroded or saturated with water. Criteria for defining and delineating these lands are determined by the appropriate state or local agencies in cooperation with USDA. The significant difference between farmland of statewide importance and USDA designated prime farmland is that although the criteria used to designate both types of soils are not appropriate outside the state or local area, these lands which are designated as farmland of statewide importance approach the productivity of lands in their area that meet criteria for prime farmland and unique farmland.The Lorenzo silt loam present on the site is classified as farmland of statewide importance. Farmland of statewide importance approaches the productivity of prime farmland, but the soil does not meet the criteria for designation as prime farmland. The prime farmland on the site is shown on Figure 19.3.1-5. Approximately 41,950 ac. (16,977ha) of the area within the region are lands having soils classified as prime farmland or farmland of statewide importance.
Soil ErodibilityThe Warsaw and Lorenzo soils, when found on slopes greater than 2percent, are described by the USDA SCS (USDA-SCS, 1974) as slightly-to-moderately-erodible soil units. The soils found on slopes less than 2percent are not considered erodible. The erodibility of the soil units is a factor of the soil type, the amount of rainfall and runoff, wind speed, and the length and steepness of the ground slope. No soils present on the site or within the area of the site are listed as highly erodible land by the USDA NRCS (USDA NRCS, 2012a). Current erosion control practices observed at the site include the use of conservation or minimum tillage measures, the use of vegetated swales, and contoured cultivation. Conservation tillage is minimally disturbing the stubble from the preceding crop prior to planting of the next crop so that the root system serves to anchor the topsoil. Vegetated swales slow the rate of runoff, reducing the amount of sediment carried in the water, and sediment is trapped in place. Contoured cultivation parallels the contours of the land surface, allowing stormwater to be detained within the furrows, leading to increased infiltration. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewGeologic EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-69Rev. 0Soil Shrink/Swell PotentialThe shrink/swell potential of soil is the tendency of soil to expand or contract due to changes in the water content of the soil. Highly plastic clays are a significant component of soils with a high shrink-swell potential. The content of the soil on the site is primarily sand, with no evidence of highly plastic clays. The shrink/swell potential of the soils at the site is considered to be minimal.19.3.3.5SeismologyWisconsin, located in the central portion of the North American craton, is not within or near active seismic zones or fault zones; however, minor earthquakes can occur in the region. Three earthquakes within approximately 200 mi. (322km) of the site have been recorded during the first six months of 2012. These three earthquakes were centered near the towns of McHenry, Illinois; Clintonville, Wisconsin; and Topeka, Indiana. The McHenry earthquake was reported as a 2.3magnitude earthquake, the Topeka earthquake was reported as a 3.0magnitude earthquake, and the Clintonville earthquake was reported as a 1.5magnitude earthquake (CERI, 2012). The intensity and frequency of the earthquakes within the region are reflected in the Wisconsin Seismic Hazard Map (Figure 19.3.3-6), which depicts the Janesville region as within the seismic hazard zone with a less than 2percent chance of exceeding 0.4 to 0.6 gravities (g) within the next 50years, where g is the acceleration of an object due to the force of gravity.The geologic history of the basement rocks indicates that the site is located in a region of relative tectonic stability. Several post-500 million year old geologic structures have been mapped near the site, including the Sandwich and Plum River fault zones, the La Salle anticlinorium, and the Wisconsin and Kankakee Arches (see Figure 19.3.3-4). These geologic structures appear to have formed and been seismogenic under a tectonic regime different from the present-day. No seismogenic "capable" faults are recognized on or near the site. Capable faults are defined as either having exhibited movement at the surface in the past 35,000 years or recurring movement within the past 500,000 years. The closest known "capable" faults are part of the Wabash Valley liquefaction features located approximately 170 mi. (274 km) south of the site, and the New Madrid seismic zone located approximately 400 mi. (644 km) south of the site (Figure 19.3.3-7). Within 124 mi. (200 km) of the SHINE site, available earthquake catalogs contain only 35 epicenters for small to moderate earthquakes up to expected moment magnitude (E[ M]) 5.15 that have occurred since 1804. Interpretation of readily-available felt intensity records indicates that only moderate earthquake shaking (i.e., Modified Mercalli Intensity scale V) has probably been felt at the site four times in approximately the last 200years.Estimates of seismic hazard for the region from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 2008 national seismic hazard maps indicate that the site is located within one of the lowest earthquake hazard areas in the conterminous United States. As noted in Subection 2.5.7.3, liquefaction of soils typically occurs in loose soils under saturated or near-saturated conditions. The soils underlying the site at depths where saturated or near-saturated conditions are encountered were classified as dense during the geotechnical investigation. In Subsections 2.5.4 and 2.5.5, a detailed discussion of the seismic setting at the site and the derivation of probabilistic estimates of earthquake ground shaking from maximum potential Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewGeologic EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-70Rev. 0earthquakes can be found. The estimates were derived using the national seismic hazard model for five return periods between 475 and 19,900 years, using a maximum potential ( M) of 5.8. The peak horizontal ground acceleration (PGA) estimates derived from the national seismic hazard model, presented in Table 2.5-5, indicate a low to very low level of earthquake shaking hazard at the site.19.3.3.6Other Hazards 19.3.3.6.1TsunamisThe nearest source for tsunami-related impact is Lake Michigan, located approximately 63 mi (101km) to the east of the site. The elevation of the lake nearest to the site is in the Kenosha, WI area, at an elevation of approximately 580ft. (177m), which is approximately 230 to 250 ft. (70to 76m) below the elevation of the site. While the possibility of a large wave being generated in Lake Michigan exists, there is a negligible probability of it being greater than 230ft. (70m) and maintaining sufficient height for more than 60 mi. (96km) to impact the site. Consequently, the risk of tsunami is correspondingly very low.19.3.3.6.2VolcanismAs noted in Subsection 19.3.3.5, the site is located in a tectonically-stable region of the middle of the continent identified as the Central Lowlands (see Subsection 19.3.3.2). Volcanoes tend to cluster along narrow mountainous belts where folding and fracturing of the rocks provide channelways to the surface for the escape of magma (USGS, 2012a). The lack of magma forming processes in the Central Lowlands province prevents the formation of volcanoes in the region.19.3.3.6.3LandslidesBased on the landslide overview map of the conterminous United States, the SHINE site is located in a zone of low landslide incidence, which is defined as less than 1.5 percent of area involved in landsliding. The Rock County Hazard Mitigation Plan indicates that "-no significant landslides-have been reported in Rock County in recent years.".19.3.3.7Karst and Subsidence Karst terrain results from the dissolution of carbonate bedrock which is often followed by the formation of sinkholes with the subsidence of soils overlying the sinkholes. Karst areas can also include subsurface caverns and streams, which may also collapse, leading to subsidence of overlying soils and the formation of sinkholes. Rock County, especially the eastern third, contains carbonate bedrock which can be susceptible to dissolution or karst formation. The SHINE site is located in the central portion of the county, and no evidence for karst or subsidence has been observed at the site. In addition, subsidence has not been an issue in Rock County, and the subsidence hazard is low. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-71Rev. 019.3.4WATER RESOURCES19.3.4.1Hydrology19.3.4.1.1Surface WaterThe SHINE site is located within a small sub-watershed of the Upper Rock River (Hydrologic Unit Code 07090001 [USEPA, 2012b]). The project area watershed discharges to the Rock River at approximately river mile 179.4, as indicated on Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood profiles (FEMA, 2008). This project area discharge location is approximately 10 mi. (16km) by river downstream of downtown Janesville and approximately 8.3 mi. (13.4km) by river upstream from the Wisconsin - Illinois state line. The Rock River watershed area at the USGS stream gaging station at Afton, at Rock River mile 181.3, is 3340 sq. mi. (8651sq. km).19.3.4.1.1.1Watershed DescriptionThe drainage area of the project area watershed is approximately 1377 ac. (557 ha) (Figure 19.3.4-1). At the upstream end of the watershed, the USGS Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 12-digit drainage boundary for the watershed extends north of SH 11. No drainage culverts under SH 11 in that area are apparent and little or no surface drainage occurs southerly across SH 11. Another small, unnamed tributary to the Rock River borders the project area watershed to the southeast. The project area watershed has generally low relief, however, slopes as high as approximately 6 percent are present in the watershed.US 51 runs north-south through the project area watershed, with approximately half of the project area watershed located on each side of the highway.There are culverts under US 51 that convey water from the east side ditch to the west side, including two culvert locations (three culvert pipes) adjacent to the site (Figure 19.3.4-2). The watershed runoff that flows through those culverts passes through the SWRA, then through culverts under West Airport Road, through the Glen Erin Golf Course, and then through a box culvert under West Happy Hollow Road before discharging to the Rock River. Downstream of West Happy Hollow Road, the stream passes through the wooded Rock River floodplain and Happy Hollow Park, which has a boat ramp located at the confluence of the stream with the Rock River.Soils within the project area watershed have a relatively high infiltration capacity and the water table is generally not near the surface. Consequently, the project area watershed generates low surface runoff. As a result, aerial images of the area do not show readily identifiable stream channels, as defined by stream banks or vegetation upstream of the wooded Rock River floodplain.The project area watershed has a land use that consists primarily of cultivated fields. Other land uses in the project area watershed include the airport, the Glen Erin Golf Club, and the Happy Hollow Park.As is illustrated in Figure 19.3.4-1, a small upstream area drains through a portion of the approximately 91.27-ac. site. The site topography slopes toward the southwest. Most of the drainage generated by the site or upstream of the site is intercepted by the US 51 drainage ditch Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-72Rev. 0that is located along the western side of the site. A small portion of the site drains to the south onto private land abutting the south boundary of the site.19.3.4.1.1.2Climate Climate of the SHINE site is characterized as having four distinct seasons. Based on the Rockford, Illinois NOAA station located approximately 30 miles south of the site, monthly normal temperatures range from a normal daily maximum in July of 83.1 degrees Fahrenheit (°F) (28.4degrees Celsius [°C]) to a normal daily minimum of 9.3 °F (-12.6°C) for the month of January (NCDC, 2011c). Annually, the mean number of days when the maximum daily temperature does not exceed 32°F (0°C) is 55.3. The normal annual precipitation in the Janesville vicinity based on the NOAA station at Rockford is approximately 36.6 in. (93.0cm). The period from April through September receives a normal rainfall of 24.23 in. (61.5cm), with June the calendar month with the largest normal rainfall amount. The normal annual snowfall is 38.7 in. (98.3 cm). A summary of monthly and annual precipitation data is provided in Table 19.3.4-1. Rainfall depth-duration-frequency statistics for the area for durations up to 10 days are summarized in Table 19.3.4-2. The 24-hour (hr.) duration, 2-year recurrence interval rainfall is 2.78 in. (7.06cm) and the 24-hr., 100-year rainfall depth is 7.06 in. (17.9cm) (Huff, Floyd A. and James R. Angel, 1992).19.3.4.1.1.3Soils and Land CoverThe site is covered by a mantle of well-drained loamy soils underlain by stratified sand and gravel with a depth to bedrock as much as 300 feet. The silty loam soils in the vicinity of the SHINE site have slopes ranging from nearly flat up to approximately 6percent. The surficial soils at the site are identified by the NRCS soil survey information (USDA NRCS, 2012a and 2012b) as Warsaw silt loam and the Lorenzo loam. The Warsaw silt loam and Lorenzo loam are classified as having a moderately low runoff potential as Hydrologic Soil Group (HSG) B. HSG B soils are those that have a moderate infiltration rate and water transmission rate within the soil profile in the range of 0.15 to 0.30 inches per hour (in/hr) (0.4 to 0.76 centimeters per hour [cm/hr]). Warsaw silt loam is characterized as having a sand content of 67 percent and the Lorenzo loam has a sand content of 62 percent. The Warsaw silt loam has a saturated vertical hydraulic conductivity of approximately 62 micrometers per second (equivalent to 6.2 x 10 -3 cm/s or 8.8 in/hr [22.4cm/hr]), and the Lorenzo loam has a saturated vertical hydraulic conductivity of approximately 50micrometers per second (equivalent to 5.0 x 10 -3 cm/s or 7.1 in/hr [18cm/hr]), which are relatively high hydraulic conductivities, and lead to the classification as "well drained" soils. The saturated vertical hydraulic conductivity identified for the soils are significantly greater than the water transmission rate range associated with HSG B soils as described above.The NRCS soil survey classification information also indicates depth to water table is greater than 179 cm (70 in.) throughout the project area and adjoining land (the water table level is more than 50 feet below ground surface, as described in Subsection 19.3.3.3). The relatively low runoff potential is reflected in the relative absence of well defined intermittent stream channels near the
site. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-73Rev. 0The site is currently utilized for row crop agriculture. The eastern portion of the site is equipped with a center-pivot irrigation system, which is also indicative of both a well drained soil as described above and a readily available groundwater supply.19.3.4.1.1.4StreamflowThere are no streamflow monitoring data from the project area watershed and there are no permanent streams on the site or in proximity to the site. The Rock River is located approximately 2 mi. (3.2km) south-southwest of the site. To characterize runoff and streamflow in the area, however, there are several USGS streamflow monitoring stations in Rock County (Table 19.3.4-3). The nearest Rock River streamflow station (USGS Station 05430500 Rock River at Afton, Wisconsin) (USGS, 2012b) is located upstream from the point where the site watershed drains into the river west of the site. The Turtle Creek at Carvers Rock Road near Clinton, Wisconsin (Station05431486) is located east of the site. The Yahara River near Fulton, Wisconsin (Station 05430175) is located to the northwest, and Badfish Creek near Cooksville, Wisconsin (Station 05430150) is located to the northwest. There are other stations, but none with long term streamflow records. Flows at these four stations indicate that the runoff in the Rock River, Turtle Creek and Yahara River is very similar when expressed in inches of runoff per year per unit drainage area. Runoff rates presented as 12-month depths based on the running average over the previous 60 months (5years) for these streams along with precipitation similarly expressed as 12-month depths from the 60-month (5-year) running average are presented in Figure 19.3.4-3. The figure illustrates that even over an arbitrary 5-year period variations in average streamflow are notable and trend closely with precipitation. Badfish Creek appears to have a higher sustained flow from groundwater contribution(s). The figure illustrates that for these four representative streams, the 5-year average runoff rate has ranged from approximately 4 to 17 inches per year (in/yr) (10 to 43centimeters per year [cm/yr]). The long-term average discharges for these streams range from approximately 8.2 to 11.4 in/yr (20 to 28cm/yr), whereas the long-term flow at the Badfish Creek station has been approximately 18.3 in/yr (46cm/yr) The City of Janesville has stated an assumed average groundwater recharge rate for Rock County of 6.3 in/yr (16cm/yr) (City of Janesville, 2010) and that the estimated groundwater production is approximately 15 percent of the recharge rate (0.95 in/yr, [2.41cm/yr]). A portion of the groundwater production is not ultimately consumed (e.g., treated wastewater discharges) and returns to the streams as surface flow.Olcott describes the upper part of Turtle Creek and the Rock River as receiving groundwater discharge (Olcott, Perry G., 1968). The lower portion of Turtle Creek, nearest the site, is described as being a losing stream, with infiltration to the groundwater, which then may discharge into the Rock River.The baseflow contribution to the total flow in these streams can be quantified using standard procedures (Sloto, Ronald A. and Michele Y. Crouse, 1996; Hughes et al., 2003). Analyses using these methods indicate that the baseflow contributions are approximately 84 to 91 percent of the flow at the Rock River at Afton station, 77 percent at the Turtle Creek station, 87 to 89 percent at the Badfish Creek station, and 86 percent at the Yahara River near Fulton station. Based on these estimates of the baseflow component of streamflow and the total runoff, the typical long-term average surface flow component of streamflow ranges from approximately 0.8 to 2.0 in/yr (2 to 5cm/yr). Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-74Rev. 019.3.4.1.1.4.1High FlowsThe annual maximum floods on streams in Rock County typically occur either in late winter/early spring (March to April) or due to early summer thunderstorms, most often in June. Floods on the Rock River at Afton generally occur in March or April, with few floods occurring in November to January. For smaller watersheds, the peak runoff events typically occur either in February to March or in June to July time periods.The USGS has evaluated watershed peak runoff rates and developed regression equations relating various watershed parameters to observed high flows (Walker, J.F. and W.R. Krug, 2003). For the physiographic region in which the site is located, the watershed parameters of drainage area, main channel slope, and surface storage in lakes, ponds, wetlands, etc., as indicated on USGS and NRCS information, are the three watershed parameters found to provide the best statistical predictor. The USGS has estimated discharge frequency data for the Rock River at long-term streamflow stations, including Station 05430500 at Afton. The discharge frequency data are summarized in Table 19.3.4-4. Rock River flood discharge frequency data used by FEMA for the Rock County Flood Insurance Study (FEMA, 2008) are also included in Table 19.3.4-4. Rock River flood levels near the site are well below the lowest ground elevations at the site. River flood levels are also sufficiently below the site that the river flood levels have no backwater influence on the tributary flood water levels.Analyses were completed to estimate the maximum water levels at the SHINE site resulting from a local Probable Maximum Precipitation (PMP) event. Several conservative assumptions were made for the analyses, including the assumption of nearly complete runoff (limited infiltration and losses) and the failure of the site drainage system (designed for a 100-year return period event), resulting in exclusively overland flow. The SHINE site also has a perimeter berm with an external conveyance area that splits runoff from areas upstream of the site, resulting in a portion of stormwater that flows west along the northern edge of the site and a portion that flows south and then west along the site. The analyses determined that the maximum water levels around the site safety structures from on-site runoff are below the floor levels of the structures. Additionally the maximum water runoff from an approximate 234-ac. drainage area is diverted around the site by the perimeter berm and conveyance system, resulting in water levels below the top of berm at all locations. The analyses also determined that flow velocities associated with those diverted flows are not high and, therefore, not significantly erosive.19.3.4.1.1.4.2Low FlowsLow flows at the Rock County streamflow gaging stations (Table 19.3.4-3) can be characterized based on average flows over selected periods of 7, 15, and 30 days. The minimum average low flows during the period of record in these streams exhibit more variation than high flows. The Rock River flows at Afton are affected by upstream flow controls. The 7-, 15- and 30-day average low flows in the 98-year long period of record are 0.0343, 0.045, and 0.052 cubic feet per second per square mile (cfs/sq. mi. [0.0025, 0.0034, and 0.0039 cubic meters per second per square kilometer (cms/sq. km)]), respectively. The shorter duration (e.g., 7-day) average low flows are more affected by gated controls than longer duration flows, such as the 30-day average low flow, which is comparable to rates on other local streams that are not affected by flow Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-75Rev. 0controls. The corresponding (7-, 15-, and 30-day) record low flows in the 72-year Turtle Creek record are 0.085, 0.091, and 0.096 cfs/sq. mi. (0.0062, 0.0067, and 0.0070 cms/sq. km). The record low flows (runoff per unit drainage area) in the Yahara River and Badfish Creek, both of which have 35-year periods of record, are approximately twice and six times those in Turtle
Creek.The annual minimum 7-day average low flows on the Rock River at Afton show a significant autocorrelation and long-term variation, similar to the variation in the 5-year running average flows as shown in Figure 19.3.4-3. The annual minimum 7-day average low flows during the 35-year period from 1935 to 1970 are significantly lower than the flows during the period from 1914 to 1935 and the period from 1970 to 2011. As observed for the 5-year running average comparison with rainfall, distinct rainfall and flow variations over relatively long time periods have occurred. The 20 lowest values of the annual (January-December) minimum 7-day and 30-day average low flows from the period of record are summarized in Table 19.3.4-5.19.3.4.1.1.5Dams and Reservoirs There are numerous dams on the Rock River. These low dams were originally constructed for hydropower and are characterized as having a small increase in water level, or head, for increased power but generally do not create a large reservoir volume. With reference to the junction of the tributary stream through which the site drains to the Rock River, the Indianford Dam is located on the Rock River approximately 21 mi. (34km) upstream; the Centerway Dam is located upstream near downtown Janesville just downstream of the West Centerway Street / US 51 bridge crossing, and Monterey Dam is located approximately 6.5 mi. (10.5km) upstream. Downstream from the SHINE site, the first dam on the Rock River is the Blackhawk Dam, also known as the Beloit Dam, located approximately 8.4river mi. (13.5 river km) downstream of the site.None of these dams maintain a large upstream reservoir or have a high head, especially during high flow events. The Indianford Dam was constructed downstream of the natural Lake Koshkonong. There are no dams or reservoirs upstream of the site or on an adjacent stream within a distance of the site that would potentially affect the site in the event of a failure of the structure. While Wisconsin has many natural lakes, Rock County has few lakes and no large lakes other than Lake Koshkonong. The southern end of Lake Koshkonong is located in Rock County but the majority of the lake is located in Jefferson County. The nearest named lake is Lions Pond located in Lions Park in southern Janesville, approximately 3.3 mi. (5.3km) north of the site and just east of the Rock River. Delavan Lake is located 19.6 mi. (31.5km) east of the site in Walworth County. The only other relatively close lake included in the Wisconsin DNR lake maps inventory (WDNR, 2012b) is Spaulding Pond, located approximately 8.5 mi. (13.7km) northeast of the site.19.3.4.1.1.6Estuaries and OceansNo estuaries or oceans are located near the SHINE site. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-76Rev. 019.3.4.1.1.7Applicable Regulations and PermitsSite development stormwater regulatory criteria applicable to the site area are established by Wisconsin administrative code, Chapters Natural Resources (NR) 151 and NR 216 and City of Janesville Ordinances Chapter 15, Sections 15.05 (construction erosion and sediment control) and 15.06 (post-construction stormwater management) (City of Janesville, 2011a). Stormwater discharge regulatory requirements established pursuant to the federal National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program are based on industrial classification code applicable to the activity. The facility is believed to be appropriately classified with SIC 2834 (325412 North American Industry Classification System [NAICS]) (USCB, 2012). This industrial classification code requires a Wisconsin Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (WPDES) stormwater discharge permit (NR 216.21 (2)(b)), except that an exclusion exists for certain facilities that are constructed and operated such that no activities defined as "industrial activities" are exposed to stormwater (NR 216.21 (3)). This industry type requires a WPDES stormwater discharge permit for industrial activity only if industrial activities are exposed to stormwater; it is anticipated that the site design and operation would be such that no industrial activities are exposed to stormwater and that a Conditional No Exposure Certification submitted regularly as required would be applicable. The "no exposure" exclusion exists and if the site has no industrial activities exposed to stormwater, then a WPDES permit for stormwater discharge would not be required.For construction sites disturbing 1ac. (0.4ha) or more, controls must be implemented that reduce sediment discharge from the site by 80percent on an average annual basis (NR 151.12). Additionally, the site must be constructed such that peak discharge rate and a minimum infiltration volume are provided (NR 151.12(5)). The local stormwater regulations require that for sites that disturb more than 1 ac. (0.4ha), the 2-, 10-, and 100-year design storms must be managed on the site to result in no increase in peak runoff rates for those events (City of Janesville, 2011b). Also, for new development sites that are not in-fill development of less than 5ac. (2ha), the post-development infiltration is to be at least 60 percent of the pre-development infiltration volume on an average annual basis. Additionally, total suspended solids must be reduced by 80 percent from the loading if no controls were implemented (same requirement as state criteria at NR 151.12).Other regulatory designations and standards related to water quality are discussed in Subsection19.3.4.3.1. While existing and potential for surface water use at the vicinity of the site is limited, water use exceeding certain threshold rates including the capacity to withdraw water at a rate of 100,000 gallons per day or more (WDNR, 2011b), requires registration in the state's water use program. There are no designated floodplains within the SHINE site, so floodplain regulations established by the local community in accordance with minimum federal requirements for participation in the National Flood Insurance Program are not applicable (i.e.,criteria for development within a designated flood hazard area). The site is not located within a FEMA 100-year floodplain. However, Rock County ordinance Chapter 32 (Rock County, 2005) provides for regulation of floodplain deve lopment within regional floodplains, defined as floodplains that are mapped by local, non-FEMA studies. No regional floodplain mapping at the site is known. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-77Rev. 019.3.4.1.2GroundwaterThere are two major aquifer systems within the region, the surficial aquifer and the Cambrian-Ordovician aquifer system, neither of which are identified by the USEPA as sole-source aquifers (USEPA, 2012c) The surficial aquifer system consists of sand and gravel, ice-contact deposits, and alluvium. The Cambrian-Ordovician aquifer system consists of a sandstone and dolomite aquifer and two sandstone aquifers, typically separated by less-permeable confining layers (Olcott, Perry G., 1992). At the SHINE site, the surficial aquifer is present as glacial outwash, and the Cambrian-Ordovician aquifer is either an upper Cambrian sandstone or a lower Ordovician sandstone and dolomite unit. The stratigraphy of the site is described in detail in Subsections 19.3.3.2 and 19.3.3.3 and a cross-section of the site, including the location of the water table, is shown on Figure 19.3.3-5.19.3.4.1.2.1Surficial Aquifer SystemThe regional surficial aquifer is composed of material deposited during multiple advances and subsequent retreat of continental glaciers during the Quaternary period. The SHINE site is located within a pre-glacial river valley, where the bedrock surface was eroded up to 300 ft. (91m) below surrounding bedrock (Olcott, Perry G.,1968). The pre-glacial valley is filled with glacial outwash, consisting of well-graded sand and sand and gravel. The sand extends to a depth of at least 221 ft. (67m) below ground surface. A 10 ft. (3 m) to 18 ft. (5 m) thick layer of hard clayey silt layer occurs at approximately 180 ft. (55m) below ground surface. The hard clayey silt layer is underlain by sand or silty sand to the borehole termination depth of 221 ft. (67m) below ground surface. The hard clayey silt layer occurred within all three borings at depths greater than 180 ft. (55 m) below ground surface. Monitoring of wells installed on the SHINE site (Figure 19.3.4-4) demonstrates that groundwater is present at a depth of 50 to 65 ft. (15.3 to 19.8m) below ground surface, corresponding to groundwater elev ations ranging from 765.72 ft. (233.39 m) to 761.96 ft. (232.25 m) (Table 19.3.4-6).Based on monthly water level measurements, the direction of groundwater flow at the site is to the southwest, toward the Rock River (Figures19.3.4-5, 19.3.4-6, 19.3.4-7, and 19.3.4-8), with minimal seasonal change in flow direction. The coarse nature of the glacial outwash material is reflected in permeability estimates derived from slug tests performed in the monitoring wells installed at the SHINE site. The slug-in tests indicate an average permeability estimate of 0.0051 feet per second [fps] (0.155 centimeters per second [cm/s]) and the slug-out tests indicate an average permeability of 0.0039 fps (0.119cm/s), with the average permeability of 0.0045 fps (0.137 cm/s). The surficial aquifer in the area has shown yields of 5000 gpm (1.89 x 10 4 lpm) with a resulting drawdown of less than 7ft. (2.1m) over a 24-hr. test (Olcott, Perry G., 1968). The average north to south hydraulic gradient at the site ranges from 0.0007 to 0.0008 feet per foot (0.021 to 0.024 cm per cm) between monitoring wells SM-GW1A and SM-GW2A, and the average east to west hydraulic gradient ranges from 0.0002 to 0.0005 feet per foot(0.006 to 0.015 cm per cm) between monitoring wells SM-GW3A and SM-GW4A. Prior to the start of SHINE's investigation, no wells were present on the site. Consequently, no historic groundwater information is available for the site. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-78Rev. 019.3.4.1.2.2Bedrock GroundwaterIn Rock County, the deeper bedrock groundwater is found within the sedimentary formations (Platteville-Galena dolomite, St. Peter sandstone, Prairie du Chen dolomite, and Cambrian sandstone) which overlie the Precambrian basement rock. The formations may act as a single aquifer or as independent aquifers, based on the separation of the units by less permeable members. This deep groundwater is not typically utilized for water supplies (Zaporozec, Alexander, 1982). The drilling was terminated at approximately 220 ft. (67m) below ground surface and did not penetrate the bedrock formation.The Cambrian sandstone's estimated thickness at the SHINE site is 1000 ft. (300 m), and is the primary source of water where the surficial aquifer is not available. Pump tests on wells within the Cambrian sandstone have resulted in estimated yields ranging from 32,000 to 37,000 gallons per day per foot (gpd/ft) (121,133 to 140,060 liters per minute per meter) (LeRoux E.F., 1963).19.3.4.2Water Use 19.3.4.2.1Regional Surface Water UseThe USGS has periodically reported water use information within Wisconsin, including statistics by county. The USGS (Buchwald, Cheryl A., 2011) found that in 2005 the total water use in Rock County was 96.31 million gallons per day (Mgd) (364.6 million liters per day [Mld]) with 50.56 Mgd (191.4 Mld), or 52.5percent, coming from surface water sources and 45.75 Mgd (173.2 Mld) (47.5 percent) coming from groundwater sources. However, 50.12 Mgd (189.7 Mld), including only 0.12 Mgd (0.5 Mld) from groundwater, was used for thermo-electric power generation and all, or nearly all, of that use was for cooling water. When excluding thermo-electric power generation from water use, the USGS reported that the 2005 surface water use was equivalent to 4.7 gallons (17.8 liters) per capita per day, compared to a similar per capita groundwater use of 385.4 gallons per day (gpd) (1458.9 liters per day [lpd]). A similar USGS report of water use in the year 2000 listed a Rock County total water use of 162.61 Mgd (615.5 Mld) and a thermoelectric power generation water use of 133.54 Mgd (505.5 Mld) (Ellefson, et al., 2002).The Wisconsin Department of Health Services reported that no community water supplies in Rock County rely on surface water while a population of 122,585 is served by groundwater (Wisconsin Department of Health Services, 2012). Olcott reported that surface water use prior to 1968 was limited, with the only significant industrial use being cooling water (Olcott, Perry G., 1968).The Janesville City Water Utility developed a water conservation plan in 2010 in accordance with a Public Service Commission requirement (City of Janesville, 2010). In 2010 the Water Utility projected a total 2010 water pumpage volume of 5,060 million gallons (13.86 Mgd [52.5 Mld]) and a projected 2020 volume of 5910 million gallons (16.2 Mgd [61.3 Mld]). Peak water pumpage through 2009 occurred in 1999; water usage dropped in the following years primarily due to reduction in industrial use (City of Janesville, 2010) The Water Utility plans to develop an industrial facility water audit program that the industrial water users, which included 29 users in 2010, may voluntarily use to improve water efficiency. Water conservation programs will also be developed for other water use sectors. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-79Rev. 0The City is currently planning to install a new water distribution line along the northern boundary of the project property. This distribution line would serve the properties in the vicinity of the SHINE site as well as the facility. Water uses in the vicinity of the project include agricultural irrigation and potable water supply. Near the site, the SWRA uses the public water supply system. These uses are both supplied by groundwater resources. There are no apparent, or known, surface water uses near the SHINE site.19.3.4.2.2Groundwater All public water supplies in Rock County are from groundwater. Table 19.3.7-14 lists the nine major municipal water suppliers that each serve communities in Rock County. Six of the nine municipal water systems in Rock County have a wellhead protection plan including Clinton, Evansville, Footville, Janesville, Milton, and Orfordville. Wellhead protection ordinances are in place for only Evansville and Janesville (USGS, 2012c). Janesville and Evansville have both a wellhead protection plan and a wellhead protection ordinance.The water systems serving the largest populations are those in Beloit and Janesville. In addition to the public water systems, numerous private wells provide drinking water to residents not connected to municipal water supplies. The Janesville Water Utility provides water supply for both public drinking water and for fire protection utilizing eight wells. The water supply system for the city of Janesville includes three booster stations, two water storage reservoirs, and a water tower. According to the city of Janesville, the total pumping capacity of its eight groundwater wells is 29 Mgd (109.8 Mld). Average water usage is about 11 Mgd (41.6 Mld). Accordingly, the excess capacity of the Janesville water supply system is approximately 18 Mgd (68.1 Mld).Public water supplies within Wisconsin are monitored to ensure public health protection, whereas individual well owners are responsible for monitoring and testing private wells. The public water use index for Rock County is 80 (Table 19.3.7-15), which estimates how many people are served by public water supplies. A number greater than 50 means more people are served by public water versus private wells.The Janesville water supply is disinfected with chlorine treatment and fluoride added at each pumping station and pumped directly into the distribution system. There are two earth-covered reservoirs for storage as well as a 500,000-gallon (1,892,706-liter) water tower completed in 2007. The wells include four deep wells, approximately 1150 ft. (350m) deep, and four sand and gravel wells that are 100 to 200 ft. (30.5 to 61m) deep. The shallow wells have nitrate concentrations that are controlled by blending with water from the deep wells.In addition to the municipal water utility, groundwater is also withdrawn for agricultural irrigation. The USGS estimates that agricultural crop irrigation is the largest user of groundwater in Rock County, with an estimated usage of 16.2 Mgd (61.3Mld) (Buchwald, Cheryl A., 2011). 19.3.4.2.3Facility Water Use Water use by the SHINE facility is described in Subsection 19.2.3 and is entirely supplied by groundwater from the City of Janesville water supply wells. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-80Rev. 019.3.4.3Water Quality19.3.4.3.1Surface WaterStream water quality generally reflects groundwater characteristics as a result of the groundwater discharge conditions that exist in much of Rock County (Olcott, Perry G., 1968). Surface water management activities conducted in accordance with Section 305(b) of the Clean Water Act and the Total Daily Maximum Load (TMDL) program provide water quality characterization and are described below. 19.3.4.3.1.1Water Quality19.3.4.3.1.1.1Impaired Waters and Total Maximum Daily LoadThe SHINE site is located in the watershed of an unnamed stream located within the Lower Rock River Basin. The unnamed tributary flows into the most downstream segment of the Rock River identified by WDNR for purposes of water quality monitoring and reporting. The Rock River segment extends from the Illinois state boundary upstream approximately 12.4 river mi. (20riverkm) to the Janesville wastewater treatment plant. This segment of the Rock River is considered to be impaired due to total suspended solids and total phosphorous (The CADMUS Group, 2011). This segment of the Rock River (Illinois state line to the Janesville wastewater treatment plant) has previously been impaired as a result of mercury and polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) pollutants; however, those have since been removed. The specific impairments listed for this reach of the Rock River are low dissolved oxygen and degraded habitat. The SHINE site drains into the Rock River through the project area watershed at a point approximately 8.3mi. (13.4km) upstream from the Illinois state line.On a regional and state-wide basis, Wisconsin has identified phosphorus and suspended solids as parameters of concern due to the ability of particulates to adsorb and transport phosphorus. State regulations include specific numerical criteria directed at the control of discharge of phosphorus and suspended solids from development sites. The State's 303d list of impaired streams developed and updated as required by the Clean Water Act has identified only the Rock River in the vicinity of the SHINE site as an impaired water body. The TMDL states that industrial facilities operating under a general WPDES permit will be screened to determine if additional requirements might be needed to ensure that the permitted activity is consistent with TMDL goals. Individual permits, if issued, will include limits consistent with approved TMDL wasteload allocations (The CADMUS Group, 2011).19.3.4.3.1.1.2Other Water Body Designations The Lower Rock River is a state-designated Area of Special Natural Resource Interest as a result of it being Natural Heritage Inventory (NHI) water. The NHI program was created by the Wisconsin legislature in 1985.Bass Creek and Turtle Creek, two tributaries to the Rock River in the vicinity of the site, are designated as Exceptional Resource Waters (Rock County Planning, Economic & Community Development Agency, 2009). An Exceptional Resource Water is defined as a stream or lake that has excellent water quality, high recreational and aesthetic value, high quality fishing, but that Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-81Rev. 0does not rise to the designation of outstanding resource water because it may be impacted by point source pollution or that it may have the potential for future discharge from a small community sewer system. (NR102.11 (1)(d)28).19.3.4.3.1.2Project Surface Water MonitoringSurface water quality monitoring was completed monthly from October 2011 through September 2012. The later part of this period occurred during a widely-recognized severe drought condition in south-central Wisconsin. As a result of these conditions, surface water samples were only collectable at location SW-02 on the unnamed tributary south of the SHINE site. The other two locations were established as opportunistic sampling locations and were observed to be dry on all twelve sampling events during the monitoring period. Laboratory results for samples collected at monitoring location SW-02 (Figure 19.3.4-4) are presented in Table 19.3.4-7 and field-measured parameters are provided in Table 19.3.4-8. Water was consistently present in the unnamed stream at location SW-02, although it was shallow and slow-flowing. It is believed that the flow was dominated in each sample by base flow contributed from groundwater seepage.Total phosphorus is a constituent of primary regional concern in surface waters. The phosphorus concentration at SW-02 was generally less than the detection limit (<0.2 mg/L). Field-measured parameters are summarized in Table 19.3.4-8. No remarkable measurements were documented. As noted above, physical conditions for sampling were less than ideal due to shallow water depth.19.3.4.3.2Groundwater19.3.4.3.2.1Groundwater Quality Groundwater quality monitoring was completed in four groundwater wells on a monthly basis from October 2011 through September 2012. The later part of this period occurred during a widely recognized severe drought condition in south-central Wisconsin. Laboratory results for samples collected at m onitoring location SM-GW1A, SM-GW2A, SM-GW3A, and SM-GW4A (Figure 19.3.4-4) are presented in Table 19.3.4-9 and field measured parameters are provided in Table 19.3.4-10. The groundwater elevations were also measured during the sampling events and are summarized in Table 19.3.4-6. Figures 19.3.4-5 through 19.3.4-8 provide groundwater isopleths for the first month of each quarterly monitoring period.Nitrate impact is a concern in agricultural areas due to the use of fertilizers and the presence of livestock. The nitrate concentrations were consistently above the drinking water standard of 10mg/l, with all samples found to contain nitrates. The minimum nitrate concentration detected was 13.5 mg/l and the maximum detection of 19.3 mg/l. Fecal coliform and Escherichia coli (E-coli) are common bacterial contaminants, often found in groundwater under the influence of surface water which has come into contact with human or animal waste. The groundwater samples were not found to contain E. coli above the detection limit. Fecal coliform was present in 3 of the 53 samples analyzed, with a maximum detection of 7 colony-forming units per 100 mL (CFU/100mL). Salinity and specific conductance are field parameters used to determine the stability of the groundwater prior to collection of the samples. During the May field effort, these Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-82Rev. 0parameters were elevated over previous months, but returned to earlier levels during the June field event.19.3.4.3.3Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Actions Subsection 19.4.13 provides an analysis of the cumulative effects of the SHINE project in consideration of other past, present and reasonably foreseeable future actions. On-going agricultural uses will place continuing demand on the groundwater supply in the vicinity of the SHINE site. With respect to other potential uses of water resources, SHINE identified one key off-site activity representing a potential additional demand on water supplies, wastewater treatment, and pollutant loading. Specifically, the lands immediately to the northeast of the SHINE site are zoned for future light industrial development. While designs and devel opment plans have not been prepared for this development area, it is expected that such uses will place additional demands on the City's water supply and water treatment system. Additionally, construction of these areas will represent a potential additional source of pollutant loading associated with runoff from construction sites.There are no other identified domestic, municipal, industrial, mining, recreation, navigation, or hydroelectric power uses of any bodies of water or aquifers at distances close enough to affect or be adversely affected by the facilities. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewWater ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-83Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-1 Rockford, Illinois Climatic Means and Extremes(Sheet 1 of 2) Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewWater ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-84Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-1 Rockford, Illinois Climatic Means and Extremes(Sheet 2 of 2)Table extracted from NCDC, 2011c. "POR" refers to the period of record (years). Refer to that source for explanatory notes. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-85Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-2 Rainfall Depth-Duration-Frequency Data for Janesville Vicinity DurationRainfall (inches) for Given Recurrence Interval (years)0.51251025501005-min0.220.270.330.420.500.620.730.8510-min0.380.470.580.740.881.091.271.48 15-min0.490.610.750.951.131.401.641.9130-min0.670.831.031.311.551.922.242.611-hour0.861.061.311.661.972.432.853.32 2-hour1.051.301.612.052.443.003.514.093-hour1.171.441.782.262.693.323.884.526-hour1.171.692.092.653.153.884.555.30 12-hour1.371.962.423.073.654.515.276.1424-hour1.822.252.783.534.25.186.067.0648-hour1.972.463.073.964.685.796.757.8272-hour2.162.703.384.345.166.347.348.4710-day2.973.714.725.936.868.219.3310.6
Reference:
Huff, Floyd A. and James R. Angel, 1992 Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-86Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-3 USGS Streamflow Monitoring Stations in Rock County, WisconsinStation Name Station NumberDrainage Area(sq. mi.)Period of RecordRock River at Newville, WI54275302560October 2009-presentRock River at Indianford, WI54275702630May 1975-2011Yahara River near Edgerton, WI5430000430October 1916-Nov 1917Badfish Creek near Cooksville, WI543015082.6July 1977-present Yahara River near Fulton, WI5430175518 (481.4)
(a)July 1977-presentFischer Creek Tributary at Janesville, WI54304031.42August 1980-November 1984Markham Creek at O Leary Road near Janesville, WI54304469.32June 2004-November 2005Rock River at Afton, WI54305003340January 1914-presentStevens Creek near Footville, WI543054013.9May 2004-November 2005Turtle Creek at Carvers Rock Road near Clinton, WI5431486199 (196.67) (a)September 1939-presentTurtle Creek near Clinton, WI5431500202September 1939-December 1979a) Contributing drainage area.
Reference:
USGS, 2012b Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-87Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-4 Flood Discharge Frequency Data - Rock River at Afton, WisconsinRecordPeriodDischarge (cfs) for Indicated Recurrence Interval2-yrs.5-yrs.10-yrs.25-yrs.50-yrs.100-yrs.500-yrs.1914 - 20006,3508,73010,20011,90013,00014,100NA1914 - 20116,4606,01010,61012,53013,90015,22018,150
Reference:
Flynn et al., 2006 Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-88Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-5 Annual Minimum Low Flows - Rock River at Afton
Reference:
USGS, 2012b30-Day Average Low Flow7-Day Average Low FlowYearFlowRankYearFlowRank (cfs)(cfs)1934174119341151193619321964149219641953193215231939202419361704195820351958171519322186195917961949252719391887193725781949204819592579194822591948275101946237 101963282111937238 111931288121953242 121946297131931243 131941308141963258 141953320151940260 151971328161941278 161957333171962278 171940342181957285 181955356191955288 191988361201971288 20 Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-89Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-6 Groundwater Monitoring Well Water Table Elevations(Sheet 1 of 2)Well IDDateTOC Elevation (ft) (a)Depth to Watera (ft - BTOC)Water Table Elevation(a)SM-1A10/26/2011828.0462.32765.72SM-2A10/26/2011821.4056.98764.42 SM-3A10/26/2011829.9664.52765.44SM-4A10/26/2011814.1549.51764.64SM-1A11/16/2011828.0462.44765.60 SM-2A11/16/2011821.4057.09764.31SM-3A11/16/2011829.9664.65765.31SM-4A11/16/2011814.1549.61764.54 SM-1A12/13/2011828.0462.58765.46SM-2A12/13/2011821.4057.18764.22SM-3A12/13/2011829.9664.77765.19 SM-4A12/13/2011814.1549.75764.40SM-1A1/9/2012828.0462.66765.38SM-2A1/9/2012821.4057.27764.13 SM-3A1/9/2012829.9664.86765.10SM-4A1/9/2012814.1549.85764.30SM-1A2/13/2012828.0462.86765.18 SM-2A2/13/2012821.4057.44763.96SM-3A2/13/2012829.9664.04765.92SM-4A2/13/2012814.1550.03764.12 SM-1A3/12/2012828.0462.97765.07SM-2A3/12/2012821.4057.55763.85SM-3A3/12/2012829.9665.15764.81 SM-4A3/12/2012814.1550.13764.02 SM-1A4/16/2012828.0463.11764.93SM-2A4/16/2012821.4057.67763.73SM-3A4/16/2012829.9665.32764.64 SM-4A4/16/2012814.1550.27763.88SM-1A5/22/2012828.0463.39764.65SM-2A5/22/2012821.4057.90763.50 SM-3A5/22/2012829.9665.62764.34SM-4A5/22/2012814.1550.42763.73SM-1A6/13/2012828.0463.62764.42 SM-2A6/13/2012821.4058.16763.24 Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-90Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-6 Groundwater Monitoring Well Water Table Elevations(Sheet 2 of 2)Well IDDateTOC Elevation (ft) (a)Depth to Water (ft - BTOC)Water Table Elevation(a)SM-3A6/13/2012829.9665.90764.06SM-4A6/13/2012814.1550.68763.47 SM-1A7/16/2012828.0464.30763.74SM-2A7/16/2012821.4058.93762.47SM-3A7/16/2012829.9666.77763.19 SM-4A7/16/2012814.1551.29762.86SM-1A8/15/2012828.0464.52763.52SM-2A8/15/2012821.4059.18762.22 SM-3A8/15/2012829.9666.84763.12SM-4A8/15/2012814.1551.62762.53SM-1A9/18/2012828.0464.81763.23 SM-2A9/18/2012821.4059.44761.96SM-3A9/18/2012829.9667.12762.84SM-4A9/18/2012814.1551.89762.26a) TOC: top of casing; BTOC: below top of casing; all vertical elevations are NAVD 88 Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-91Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-7 Surface Water Analytical Results ParameterUnitsMethod Detection LimitsNumberSamplesCollectedNumberDetectsMin.MaxAlkalinity, Bicarbonate (CaCO3)mg/L2.31717272301Alkalinity, Total As CaCO3mg/L101717278327Biochemical Oxygen Demand, 5 daymg/L2.0175ND10.4Carbon Dioxide mg/L5.015159.821Carbon Dioxide (Not Preserved - NP)mg/L5.0442022 Chemical Oxygen Demandmg/L11.3179ND43.8Chlorophyll A mg/m30.0841714ND27Coliform, FecalCFU/100mL11714ND1300 Coliform, TotalMPN/100mL1171765027200Escherichia ColiMPN/100mL117171649Kjeldahl Nitrogen, Totalmg/L0.351710ND2.6 Nitrate As Nitrogenmg/L1.017176.410.4Nitrite As Nitrogenmg/L0.1174ND0.26Nitrogen As Ammoniamg/L0.25170NDNDOrthophosphorusmg/L0.00317170.0160.062Pheophytin A mg/m30.0591710ND16Phosphorusmg/L0.088174ND0.42 Silicamg/L0.134171711.922.9 Total Dissolved Solids (TDS)mg/L8.71717378500Total Hardnessmg/L0.151717351414 Total Organic Nitrogenmg/L0.351710ND2.6 Total Suspended Solids (TSS)mg/L0.03117170.8238Calciummg/L6.6171779.294.6Chloridemg/L2.0171724.548.2 Cyanide, Totalmg/L0.0043173ND0.0071Ironmg/L0.004817170.03966.52Leadmg/L0.0013179ND0.0236 Magnesiummg/L0.0231171737.343.2Mercurymg/L0.0001170NDNDPotassiummg/L0.047317172.123.96 Sodiummg/L0.028517175.5716Sulfatemg/L2.0171725.434.6Zincmg/L0.0016177ND0.0322 mg/L - milligrams per literND - not detected above the detection limit mg/m3 - milligrams per cubic meterMPN/100ml - most probable number per 100 milliliters Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewWater ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-92Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-8 SHINE Medical Surface Water Field Data - JanesvilleSample IDDateTemp. (°C) pH(SU)Specific Conductivity(µS/cm)Dissolved Oxygen(mg/L)Turbidity(NTU)Salinity(%)ColorOdorWaterLevel(inches)CommentsSM-SW0110/27/2011 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSStream Dry SM-SW0210/27/2011 8.197.1860015.141.60.00ClearNo Odor6.0SM-SW0310/27/2011 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW0111/16/2011 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSStream Dry SM-SW0211/16/2011 10.896.5960010.780.00.00ClearNo Odor7.0SM-SW0311/16/2011 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW0112/13/2011 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSStream Dry SM-SW0212/13/2011 6.847.467547.723.40.37ClearNo Odor8.0SM-SW0312/13/2011 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW011/9/2012NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSStream Dry SM-SW021/9/20125.847.447707.80-1.60.38ClearNo Odor7.0SM-SW031/9/2012NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW012/13/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSStream Dry SM-SW022/13/2012 5.927.476007.932.60.29ClearNo Odor3 - 11SM-SW032/13/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW013/13/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSStream Dry SM-SW023/13/2012 8.877.417647.985.00.38ClearNo Odor4.0SM-SW033/13/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW014/16/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSStream Dry SM-SW024/16/2012 10.427.546457.141.30.32ClearNo Odor8.0SM-SW034/16/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW015/22/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSStream Dry SM-SW025/22/2012 11.557.4314968.0534.70.76*ClearNo Odor6.0SM-SW035/22/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW016/12/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSStream Dry SM-SW026/12/2012 15.677.537288.0221.90.36ClearNo Odor5.0SM-SW036/12/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW017/16/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSStream Dry SM-SW027/16/2012 21.696.797576.186.00.37ClearNo Odor6.0SM-SW037/16/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW018/15/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSStream Dry SM-SW028/15/2012 17.337.447484.7316.00.37ClearNo Odor7.0SM-SW038/15/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW019/18/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW029/18/2012 13.836.997977.312.00.39ClearNo Odor6.0SM-SW039/18/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewWater ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-93Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-9 Groundwater Analytical Results for Monitoring Wells Parameter UnitsMethod Detection LimitsNumberSamplesCollectedNumberDetectsMinimumMaximumAlkalinity, Bicarbonate (CaCO3)mg/L2.35353231302Alkalinity, Total As CaCO3mg/L105353248612Biochemical Oxygen Demand, 5 daymg/L2530NDNDCarbon Dioxide mg/L548481831Carbon Dioxide (Not Preserved - NP)mg/L510102030Chemical Oxygen Demandmg/L11.35315ND89.1Chlorophyll Amg/m30.084537ND1.6Coliform, FecalCFU/100mL 1533ND7Coliform, TotalMPN/100mL 15337ND2419Escherichia ColiMPN/100mL 1530NDNDKjeldahl Nitrogen, Totalmg/L0.35538ND0.46Nitrate As Nitrogenmg/L1535313.522.2Nitrite As Nitrogenmg/L0.1530NDNDNitrogen As Ammoniamg/L0.25531ND0.52Orthophosphorusmg/L0.0035338ND0.086Pheophytin Amg/m30.059537ND2.2Phosphorusmg/L0.088531ND0.26Silicamg/L134535313.918.8Total Dissolved Solids (TDS)mg/L8.75353340462Total Hardnessmg/L1505353330565Total Organic Nitrogenmg/L0.35536ND0.46Total Suspended Solids (TSS)mg/L0.03153531389Calciummg/L6.6535374.6126Chloridemg/L2535316.629.2Cyanide, Totalmg/L0.0061538ND0.018Ironmg/L4.853530.0443.04Leadmg/L1.35336ND0.0042Magnesiummg/L23.1535333.660.8Mercurymg/L0.0001530NDNDPotassiummg/L47.353530.4492.96Sodiummg/L28.553532.269.15Sulfatemg/L2535310.120.3Zincmg/L0.00165328ND0.0302 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewWater ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-94Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-10 SHINE Medical Groundwater Field Data - Janesville(Sheet 1 of 2)Sample IDDateWaterLevel(ft BTOC)Temp.(°C)pH(standard units)SpecificConductivity(µS/cm)DissolvedOxygen(mg/L)ORP(mV)Turbidity(NTU)Salinity(%)Color/Odor SM-GW1A10/26/201162.3810.707.3070510.70125.227.00.35Clear/No Odor SM-GW2A10/26/201157.0210.647.3067310.94134.75.70.33Clear/No Odor SM-GW3A10/27/201164.5911.607.2370310.14104.96.00.35Clear/No Odor SM-GW4A10/27/201149.5510.397.2172411.19107.98.90.36Clear/No Odor SM-GW1A11/16/201162.4510.117.2271110.44133.73.70.35Clear/No Odor SM-GW2A11/16/201157.0911.237.2067810.74116.48.90.33Clear/No Odor SM-GW3A11/17/201164.679.357.2470110.03122.5-0.80.34Clear/No Odor SM-GW4A11/17/201149.659.037.1574511.06135.6-0.80.37Clear/No Odor SM-GW1A12/13/201162.5910.437.2170010.44150.332.70.35Clear/No Odor SM-GW2A12/13/201157.2210.337.236989.78123.35.60.34Clear/No Odor SM-GW3A12/19/201164.8111.147.2273311.08120.65.00.36Clear/No Odor SM-GW4A12/19/201149.7810.177.1876311.73113.318.30.37Clear/No Odor SM-GW1A1/10/201262.698.197.2869311.60113.616.60.34Clear/No Odor SM-GW2A1/10/201257.298.507.3067411.72120.90.20.33Clear/No Odor SM-GW3A1/10/201264.929.667.2671911.25120.63.70.35Clear/No Odor SM-GW4A1/10/201249.857.697.1973711.45133.86.00.36Clear/No Odor SM-GW1A2/14/201262.888.417.2271111.70141.035.50.35Slightly Turbid/No Odor SM-GW2A2/14/201257.488.637.3067311.95112.80.70.33Clear/No Odor SM-GW3A2/14/201264.048.237.2472310.98144.44.60.35Clear/No Odor SM-GW4A2/14/201250.047.797.1772911.85180.26.50.36Clear/No Odor SM-GW1A3/12/201262.9611.547.1371410.02122.928.90.35Clear/No Odor SM-GW2A3/12/201257.5411.917.1968010.4399.71.50.33Clear/No Odor SM-GW3A3/12/201265.1612.257.117269.72107.50.30.36Clear/No Odor SM-GW4A3/12/201250.1311.807.0255610.16169.89.10.36Light Tan/No Odor SM-GW1A4/16/201263.1410.877.3558610.10121.532.60.29Light Brown/No Odor SM-GW2A4/16/201257.6810.547.4058010.62131.04.10.28Clear/No Odor SM-GW3A4/17/201263.3513.467.0672910.13155.4-2.30.36Clear/No Odor SM-GW4A4/17/201250.3114.487.017449.85198.5-4.10.37Clear/No Odor SM-GW1A5/23/201263.4415.976.62132010.03332.40.50.67(a)Clear/No Odor SM-GW2A5/23/201257.9018.006.66128210.09414.43.10.64(a)Clear/No Odor SM-GW3A5/22/201265.6614.776.20136910.07416.42.00.69(a)Clear/No Odor SM-GW4A5/22/201250.4413.916.73137010.47319.61.30.69(a)Clear/No Odor Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewWater ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-95Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-10 SHINE Medical Groundwater Field Data - Janesville(Sheet 2 of 2)Sample IDDateWaterLevel(ft BTOC)Temp.(°C)pH(standard units)SpecificConductivity(µS/cm)DissolvedOxygen(mg/L)ORP(mV)Turbidity(NTU)Salinity(%)Color/Odor SM-GW1A6/13/2012 63.6613.047.2164611.68202.66.60.32Clear/No Odor SM-GW2A6/12/2012 58.2214.147.2464711.68194.10.40.32Clear/No Odor SM-GW3A6/13/2012 65.9412.447.1768711.72200.00.00.34Clear/No Odor SM-GW4A6/12/2012 50.6713.007.1770011.55217.124.10.34Clear/No Odor SM-GW1A7/16/2012 64.3617.855.4265211.44618.5103.70.32Light Brown/No Odor SM-GW2A7/17/2012 58.9719.116.3177911.68549.5131.20.38Light Brown/No Odor SM-GW3A7/17/2012 66.7713.494.5274712.47574.410.70.37Light Brown/No Odor SM-GW4A7/16/2012 51.3020.336.0077113.39549.181.60.38Light Brown/No Odor SM-GW1A8/15/2012 64.5515.567.2963510.01122.33.90.31Clear/No Odor SM-GW2A8/16/2012 59.2014.797.3464510.48147.16.50.32Clear/No Odor SM-GW3A8/16/2012 66.8713.447.3370410.25147.13.70.35Clear/No Odor SM-GW4A8/15/2012 51.6514.007.2767210.35122.20.90.33Clear/No Odor SM-GW1A9/19/2012 64.8112.817.4071010.52201.07.70.35Clear/No Odor SM-GW2A9/18/2012 59.4614.115.7872111.01339.30.30.35Clear/No Odor SM-GW3A9/18/2012 67.1413.096.7180910.59212.30.30.40Clear/No Odor SM-GW4A9/19/2012 51.913.897.1678110.43260.17.40.38Clear/No Odora) meter malfunctioningµS/cm - micro Siemens per centimetermV - millivoltNTU - nephelometric turbidity unit Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-96Rev. 019.3.5ECOLOGICAL RESOURCESThis subsection provides a description and characterization of the terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems potentially affected by the construction and operation of the SHINE facility. Consultations with the WDNR (WDNR, 2012c) and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) (USFWS, 2012) were initiated for information regarding ecological resources near the SHINE site. This consultation process was used to obtain agency input regarding threatened and endangered species, sensitive habitats, commercial and recreational species, and other ecological characteristics for the site and near-site areas. Ecological resources described herein are based on recorded information provided by resource agencies and supplemental quarterly field surveys conducted in 2011 and 2012. 19.3.5.1Off-Site Areas Ecoregions are geographical areas within which the biotic and abiotic components of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems exhibit relatively homogenous patterns in comparison to that of other areas. Ecoregions serve as a spatial framework for the research, assessment, monitoring, and management of ecosystems and ecosystem components. Wisconsin contains 27 Level IV ecoregions nested within six larger Level III regions that also occupy portions of Illinois and other adjoining states (Omernik et al., 2008). Three Level III ecoregions have been identified and are further divided into several other Level IV ecoregions in southern Wisconsin and northern Illinois as depicted in Figure 19.3.5-1. The Rock River Drift Plain and the Southeastern Wisconsin Savannah and Till Plain are the only two ecoregions mapped within Rock County. The only ecoregion near the site (5-mi. [8-km] radius) is the Rock River Drift Plain as part of the larger Southeastern Wisconsin Till Plains ecoregion. Ecoregions are mapped by the USEPA (USEPA, 2012d) and are described in Wisconsin and Illinois by Omernik et al. (Omernik et al., 2008) and Woods et al. (Woods et al., 2006), respectively.The SHINE site is located within the Rock River Drift Plain as depicted in Figure 19.3.5-1. The Rock River Drift Plain is located in both southern Wisconsin and northern Illinois. This Level IV ecoregion is characterized by a landscape containing numerous small creeks, a greater stream density, and fewer lakes than in ecoregions to the north and east. Steeper topography and broad outwash plains with loamy and sandy soils characterize this ecoregion (Omernik et al., 2008). The soils of the Rock River Drift Plain have developed primarily from glacial till, outwash deposits, loess, or alluvium. Oak savanna, prairie, and to a lesser extent, forest (primarily on fire-protected dissected uplands and along water courses) were the predominant vegetative communities prior to European settlement. Today, more than half of the Rock River Drift Plain is cropland. Although forage crops and feed grains harvested to support dairy operations and livestock are most common, cash-grain farming is also important (Woods et al., 2006).19.3.5.2Site and Near Site Areas The SHINE site consists of a 91.27-ac. (36.94 ha) parcel located south of Janesville, Wisconsin, as depicted in Figure 19.3.1-1. Within the site boundary, 91.09 ac. (36.86 ha), or 99.8percent of the site, consists of agriculture/cultivated crops (see Table 19.3.1-1). The remaining 0.18ac. (0.07 ha) consists of developed open space as described in Subsection19.3.1. Because of continuous land disturbance associated with agricultural practices, the site is devoid of natural landscapes such as forest, we tlands, grasslands, prairie, old field, and other natural plant communities. In addition, there are no ephemeral, intermittent, or perennial streams and associated riparian zones located within the boundaries of the SHINE site. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-97Rev. 0The entire 5-mi. (8-km) radius of the site center point is contained within the Rock River Drift Plain Level IV ecoregion as depicted in Figure 19.3.5-1. The Rock River Drift Plain LevelIV ecoregion is described in Subsection 19.3.5.1. Land cover near the site (5-mi. [8-km] radius) is illustrated in Figure 19.3.1-2 and summarized in Table 19.3.1-1. The vast majority of the area near the site is used for agricultural production (see Table19.3.1-1). Cultivated crops make up 25,236 ac. (10,213ha), or more than 50percent of the area near the site. Corn, soybeans, and winter wheat are commonly grown. An additional 5896 ac. (2386 ha), or approximately 12percent near the site, is used for pasture or hay production. Altogether, agricultural activities make up 61.9percent of the area near the site. Developed lands account for 11,861 ac. (4800 ha), or nearly 24percent near the site (see Table19.3.1-1). This includes developed lands mapped as open space, low intensity, medium intensity, and high intensity. Developed lands are further described in Subsection 19.3.1. Forested resources account for 3367 ac. (1363 ha), or less than 7percent, near the site (see Table 19.3.1-1). Forested resources primarily consist of deciduous forest but also include minor amounts of evergreen and mixed forest. Because most of the natural communities near the site have been converted to agriculture, forested resources are concentrated in riparian corridors along the Rock River and its associated tributary streams. Mapped wetland land cover is sparse near the SHINE site as indicated in Table 19.3.1-1. Wetlands mapped near the site include 722 ac. (292 ha) of woody wetlands and 787 ac. (318ha) of emergent herbaceous wetlands. Together, wetland cover types account for 3percent of the land cover near the site. A total of 796 ac. (322 ha), or close to 2percent, near the site is mapped as open water. Grassland resources account for 1049 ac. (425 ha), or just over 2percent, near the site. Shrub/scrub and barren lands each account for 1percent or less near the site (see Table19.3.1-1). 19.3.5.3HistoryThe SHINE site is located within the Southeastern Wisconsin Till Plains where, at the time of European settlement, forests were common on moraines and along watercourses whereas prairie occurred on level to rolling uplands (Woods et al., 2006). According to Will-Wolf and Montague (Will-Wolf, S, and T.C. Montague, 1994), prairie covered approximately 50percent of southern Wisconsin prior to European settlement. However, given the intensity of agricultural land uses, a very small fraction of the original tallgrass prairie remains in Wisconsin (Higgins et al., 2001; Smith, Daryl D., 1990).Conversion of native plant communities to agriculture in the Midwest took place primarily in the 19th Century and was accelerated in 1837 by John Deere's invention of the self-scouring steel plow (Robertson, Ken, 2008). Conversion to agriculture not only changed the composition of plant communities, but also resulted in the draining of wetlands and the channelization of small streams to accommodate row crop production. Lands of the SHINE site have been in continuous agricultural production for several decades. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-98Rev. 019.3.5.4Places and Entities of Special InterestThis subsection provides information relative to the ecological resources of special interest near the SHINE site. The occurrence and characteristics of these features is developed as a result of quarterly field studies on and immediately surrounding the site, general field reconnaissance, and from agency correspondence.19.3.5.4.1Communities and Habitats of Special InterestEcological communities of special interest near the SHINE site include wetlands and terrestrial communities of special interest identified by WDNR. As described in Subsection 19.3.5.6, mapped wetland land cover is sparse near the SHINE site as indicated in Table 19.3.1-1. Wetlands mapped near the site include 722 ac. (292 ha) of woody wetlands and 787 ac. (318 ha) of emergent herbaceous wetlands. Together, wetland cover types account for 3percent of the land cover within the 5-mi. (8 km) radius. There are no wetlands on-site.As part of a WDNR endangered resources review letter, six communities of special interest were identified near the SHINE site (WDNR, 2012c): *Dry prairie, *Dry-mesic prairie, *Mesic prairie, *Southern dry-mesic forest,
- Southern mesic forest, and *Wet prairie.
Dry Prairie. This dry grassland community usually occurs on steep south or west facing slopes or at the summits of river bluffs with sandstone or dolomite bedrock near the surface. Short to medium-sized prairie grasses such as little bluestem (Schizachyrium scoparium), side-oats grama (Bouteloua curtipendula), hairy grama (Bouteloua hirsuta), and prairie dropseed (Sporobolus heterolepis) are the dominants in this community. Common shrubs and forbs include lead plant (Amorpha canescens), silky aster ( Aster sericeus), flowering spurge (Euphorbia corollata), purple prairie-clover (Dalea purpurea), cylindrical blazing-star (Liatris cylindracea ), and gray goldenrod (Solidago nemoralis). Stands on knolls in the Kettle Moraine region of southeastern Wisconsin, and on bluffs along the St. Croix River on the Minnesota- Wisconsin border, occur on gravelly substrates and may warrant recognition as distinctive subtypes of "Dry Prairie."Dry Mesic Prairie. This grassland community was common in parts of southern Wisconsin, occurring on slightly less droughty sites than dry prairie. Today, this community type is rare because of conversion to agricultural uses or the encroachment of woody vegetation due to the lack of wildfire. Dry-mesic prairie has many of the same grasses as dry prairie, but taller species such as big bluestem (Andropogon gerardii) and Indian-grass (Sorghastrum nutans ) dominate. Needle grass (Stipa spartea) and prairie drop-seed may also be present. The herb component is more diverse than in dry prairies, as it may include many species that occur in both dry and mesic prairies. Composites and legumes are particularly well-represented in relatively undisturbed stands.Mesic Prairie. Although common historically, this type is extremely rare today. This grassland community occurs on rich, moist, well-drained sites, usually on level or gently rolling glacial Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-99Rev. 0topography. The dominant plant is the tall grass, big bluestem. The grasses little bluestem, Indian grass, needle grass, prairie dropseed, and switch grass ( Panicum virgatum) are also frequent. The forb layer is diverse in the number, size, and physiognomy of the species. Common taxa include the prairie docks (Silphium spp.), lead plant, heath aster ( Aster ericoides), smooth aster (Aster laevis), prairie coreopsis (Coreopsis palmata), prairie sunflower (Helianthus pauciflorus ), rattlesnake-master (Eryngium yuccifolium), flowering spurge, bee-balm (Monarda fistulosa ), prairie coneflower (Echinacea pallida), and spiderwort (Tradescantia spp. ).Southern Dry-mesic Forest. Red oak is a common dominant tree of this upland forest community type. White oak (Quercus alba), basswood (Tilia americana), sugar maple ( Acer saccharum), red maple (Acer rubrum), white ash (Fraxinus americana), shagbark hickory (Carya ovata), and black cherry (Prunus serotina) are also important. The herbaceous understory flora is diverse and includes many species listed under southern dry forest plus jack-in-the-pulpit (Arisaema triphyllum), enchanter's-nightshade (Circaea spp.), large-flowered bellwort (Uvularia grandiflora), interrupted fern (Osmunda claytoniana), lady fern ( Athyrium filix-femina), tick-trefoils (Desmodium spp.), and hog peanut (Amphicarpaea bracteata ).Southern Mesic Forest. This upland forest community occurs on rich, well-drained loamy soils, mostly on glacial till plains or loess-capped sites south of the tension zone. The dominant tree species is sugar maple, but basswood, and near Lake Michigan, American beech may be co-dominant. Many other trees are found in these forests, including those of the walnut family, ironwood ( Carpinus caroliniana), red oak ( Quercus rubra), red maple, white ash, and slippery elm (Ulmus rubra). The understory is typically open, or sometimes brushy with species of gooseberry (Ribes spp.) on sites with a history of grazing, and supports fine spring ephemeral displays. Characteristic herbs are spring-beauty (Claytonia spp.), trout-lilies ( Erythronium spp.), trilliums (Trillium spp.), violets (Viola spp.), bloodroot (Sanguinaria canadensis), blue cohosh (Caulophyllum thalictroides), mayapple (Podophyllum peltatum), and Virginia waterleaf (Hydrophyllum virginianum ).Wet Prairie. This is a rather variable tall grassland community that shares characteristics of prairies, southern sedge meadow, calcareous fen and even emergent aquatic communities. The wet prairies' more wetland-like character can mean that sometimes very few obligate prairie species are present. In wet prairie the dominant graminoids may include Canada bluejoint grass (Calamagrostis canadensis), cordgrass ( Spartina spp.), and marsh wild- timothy (Muhlenbergia glomerata), plus several sedge species including lake sedge ( Carex spp.), water sedge ( Carex aquatilis), and woolly sedge (Carex spp.). Many of the herbs are shared with the wet-mesic prairies, but the following species are often prevalent: New England aster (Aster novae-angliae ), swamp thistle (Cirsium muticum), northern bedstraw (Galium boreale), yellow stargrass ( Hypoxis hirsuta), cowbane (Oxypolis rigidior), tall meadow-rue (Thalictrum dasycarpum), golden Alexander ( Zizia spp.), and mountain-mint (Pycnanthemum spp. ).A total of ten state designated natural areas are located in Rock County (Figure 19.3.5-2). However, only Rock River Prairie is located within 5-mi (8-km) of the SHINE site. Rock River Prairie is a 37-ac. (14 ha) dry prairie situated on the rolling terrace above the Rock River and contains large populations of prairie forbs and grasses including several rare and threatened plants. The prairie supports over 50 native prairie species including pasque flower ( Anemone patens), cream wild indigo (Baptisia bracteata ), rock sandwort (Arenaria spp.), and prairie gentian (Gentiana puberulenta). Dominant grasses include little blue-stem and side-oats grama with prairie drop-seed. More common forbs present include silky aster, shooting-star
(Dodecatheon spp.), prairie-smoke (Anemone patens), bird's-foot violet (Viola pedata), smooth Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-100Rev. 0yellow flax (Linum spp.), fringed puccoon (Lithospermum incisum), and spiderwort. The prairie also contains rare plants including one of Wisconsin's largest populations of the state-endangered wild petunia ( Ruellia humilis). Other rare plants include prairie bush-clover (Lespedeza leptostachya ), woolly milkweed (Acerates lanuginosa) and prairie thistle ( Cirsium spp.). The rare prairie false dandelion (Microseris cuspidata) was recently rediscovered at the site after the reintroduction of fire and other management activities. Rock River Prairie is owned by the WDNR and was desig nated a State Natural Ar ea in 1999 (WDNR, 2012d).Given the landscape position of the SHINE site, it is likely that the SHINE site may have been prairie habitat before its conversion to agriculture. However, because of the complete conversion of the lands of the SHINE site and its immediate environs to cultivated fields or other developed uses, none of the above habitat types are present either on-site or in adjacent off-site areas.19.3.5.4.2Other Sensitive or Susceptible AreasIn addition to the state-listed natural areas described above, Happy Hollow County Park, located southwest of the site is a park with natural features of special interest (see Figure 19.3.5-2). The park consists of 192 ac. (77 ha) that are located along the Rock River. The park supports a wide variety of habitats including wetlands, grasslands, and forested areas. It is of interest for bird watching and supports an abundance of bird species such as eagles, hawks, owls, kingfishers, herons, sea gulls and a variety of song birds. The park also has a trail system that is designated for both hiking and equestrian use (Rock County, 2012c).19.3.5.4.3Important Ecological SystemsRock County is located along a principal route of the Mississippi Flyway (Bird Nature, 2012). As such, natural habitats along the Rock River and other areas are particularly useful to migrating birds for resting, feeding and foraging. Unbroken forested lands and riparian habitats are particularly recognized for their value in providing support to neotropical migratory birds both during migration and as habitats for nesting and nursery areas. Such areas however, are largely confined to the lands west of US 51 along the Rock River. Habitats of the SHINE site and adjacent lands are dominated by agricultural and developed uses and are not considered to be high value or important ecological systems.19.3.5.5Aquatic Communities and Potentially Affected Water BodiesThere are no aquatic resources or water bodies present on the SHINE site. This subsection therefore, provides information that describes the aquatic communities and potentially affected water bodies within the 5-mi. (8-km) area around the SHINE site.Available mapping indicates that the majority of site runoff flows southwest toward the Rock River. However, because of the high infiltration rate of the soils near the SHINE site, no organized stream channel and associated aquatic habitats are present. Sampling was performed within an unnamed stream located south of the site in order to characterize aquatic biota near the SHINE site.Aquatic habitats near the SHINE site include those associated with the Rock River and an unnamed stream which is a tributary to the Rock River. The unnamed stream is located approximately 1.6 mi. (2.6km) south of the site, while the Rock River is 1.9 mi. (3.1 km) Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-101Rev. 0southwest of the site. The SHINE site and immediate off-site areas drain south and west towards the Rock River and its tributaries. Local streams have substrates consisting primarily of sand, gravel, cobble, and occasional boulders.Surveys of adult and juvenile fish in the Rock River have been compiled by the WDNR and are accessible in a fish mapping database (WDNR, 2012e). Table 19.3.5-1 su mmarizes Rock River fish species from the WDNR database collected within Rock County since the year 1980. In order to further characterize the aquatic biological communities of tributaries potentially draining the site, fish surveys and benthic macroinvertebrate surveys were conducted within the unnamed stream south of the site (Figure 19.3.5-3). Fish surveys were conducted utilizing a seine on a quarterly basis (October 2011, January 2012, April 2012, and July 2012). Macroinvertebrate surveys were conducted in October 2011 and April 2012 by use of a kicknet in representative in-stream habitats. Aquatic location 2 was the only location along the unnamed stream that contained water. Therefore, no samples were collected from aquatic location 1. Six sweeps or kicks collected at aquatic location 2 were composited, preserved using 5 percent buffered formaldehyde, and transported to AMEC's St. Louis laboratory for analysis. WDNR's fish mapping database indicate that a total of 21 distinct species have been collected in the Rock River by electrofishing since 1980 (see Table 19.3.5-1). Results reflect a fish community typical of flowing river habitats. Representative species of the Rock River near the SHINE site include smallmouth bass ( Micropterus dolomieu), northern pike ( Esox lucius ), rock bass (Ambloplites rupestris), freshwater drum (Aplodinotus grunniens), northern hogsucker (Hypentelium nigricans ), white bass (Morone chrysops), channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatus ), bigmouth buffalo (Ictiobus cyprinellus), shorthead redhorse (Moxostoma macrolepidotum ), white sucker (Catostomus commersonii), spotfin shiner (Cyprinella spiloptera), emerald shiner (Notropis atherinoides), spottail shiner (Notropis hudsonius), logperch (Percina caprodes ), sauger (Sander canadensis), and walleye (Sander vitreus). Other species that are more characteristic of slow-moving/backwater included bowfin (Amia calva), common carp ( Cyprinus carpio), pumpkinseed (Lepomis gibbosus), bluegill ( Lepomis macrochirus), and black crappie (Pomoxis nigromaculatus ). Only two species were collected from the unnamed tributary of the Rock River, located south of the site. Species present in this small stream included brook stickleback (Culaea inconstans) and green sunfish (Lepomis cyanellus). This stream is the closest freshwater body to the SHINE site and is characterized as having a channel that is 3 to 4 ft. (0.9 to 1.2m) wide at the ordinary high water mark, and having a depth of up to approximately 1 ft. (0.3m) deep. Given its small size, fish species diversity was expected to be low. Benthic macroinvertebrate collections from the unnamed stream south of the site contained a total of 252 specimens representing 12 distinct taxa in the fall 2011 samples, and a total of 284 specimens representing 9 distinct taxa in the spring 2012 samples (Table 19.3.5-2). Low species diversity is likely due to the very small and intermittent nature of this stream. Crustaceans, particularly the amphipod Gammarus, dominated both samples representing 79percent of the fall 2011 sample and 94percent of the spring 2012 sample. All other taxa collected in the benthic macroinvertebrate samples made up less that 5percent of the samples. Shannon diversity for fall 2011 and spring 2012 was 0.96 and 0.35 (respectively). Biotic index values for fall 2011 and spring 2012 were 6.29 and 6.69, respectively (see Table 19.3.5-2). These values indicate the presence of a moderately tolerant benthic invertebrate community. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-102Rev. 019.3.5.6WetlandsWetlands are transitional ecosystems between aquatic and terrestrial systems where the water table is usually at or near the surface or the land is covered by shallow water (Cowardin et al., 1979). Wetlands vary widely because of regional and local differences in soils, topography, climate, hydrology, water chemistry, vegetation, and other factors, including human disturbance. For regulatory purposes under the Clean Water Act, the term wetland means "...those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs and similar areas" (40 CFR 230.3(t)). Jurisdictional wetlands are regulated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and display characteristic hydrology, soils, and hydrophytic plants. A wetland delineation survey was performed at the SHINE site in October 2011 in accordance with Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Northcentral and Northeast Region (USACE, 2009). No jurisdictional wetlands were identified within the site boundary. 19.3.5.7Terrestrial CommunitiesThis subsection provides a description and characterization of terrestrial communities identified on the SHINE site and the surrounding area. Quarterly pedestrian and roadside surveys were conducted to identify and characterize plant and animal species that occur on site and those that are characteristic of the area.19.3.5.7.1Plant Communities Characterization of terrestrial plant communities on and in proximity to the SHINE site is based on records review (recorded distributional records), agency consultation with WDNR and USFWS, and field studies. Investigative methods included vegetative land cover type mapping and field confirmation, general site reconnaissance, and pedestrian surveys. Pedestrian surveys were performed during the growing season in the fall 2011 and spring and summer 2012 to identify and record terrestrial plant species for a qualitative inventory of the flora on and in proximity to the site. Supplemental field studies are used in part to characterize the assemblage of terrestrial plant species and to aid in the identification of any federally listed threatened or endangered species or Wisconsin listed threatened, endangered or special concern species potentially occurring within and in proximity to the SHINE property boundary.Most of the site is used for cultivated crops, with generally opportunistic weedy species encountered in-between planted fields and along the west border with US 51 (Figure19.3.5-3). Cultivated crops on the SHINE site include corn (Zea mays), soybean ( Glycine max ), and winter wheat (Triticum aestivum). Weedy species encountered on-site include fescue (Festuca sp. ), green foxtail ( Setaria viridis), Queen Anne's lace (Daucus carota), and common dandelion (Taraxacum officinale ).As depicted in Figure 19.3.1-2, the land cover types found in proximity to the site are mainly developed-open space, developed-low, medium, and high intensity, and cultivated crops/pasture/hay, with a small area south of the site combining deciduous forest, scrub shrub, grassland herbaceous, and woody wetlands. Table 19.3.5-3 lists the terrestrial plants observed within these land cover areas from pedestrian surveys during the growing season. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-103Rev. 0No federal or state-listed threatened, endangered or special concern plant species have been observed on or in the proximity of the SHINE site. The site and terrestrial habitats in proximity to the site are mainly cultivated crops/pasture/hay and developed areas. This is consistent with the dominant land uses within the region (see Figure 19.3.1-2).19.3.5.7.2WildlifeThe terrestrial ecology of the SHINE site and near the site was characterized in a series of quarterly field studies conducted over a 1-year period extending from October 2011 to September 2012. The field studies for wildlife included surveys for avifauna, mammals and herpetofauna. In general, study methods within the ecological investigation area included a review of available mapping, databases, and correspondence with the appropriate agencies. Amap of the site along with the aquatic and bird survey locations is provided in Figure 19.3.5-3. The subsections below summarize relevant information from each of these studies and provide other data and descriptions of the terrestrial ecology in the area.19.3.5.7.2.1MammalsMethodology for the identification of mammal species within the SHINE site and near the site consisted of records review (i.e., recorded range/distributional records [American Society of Mammalogists, 2012]) and agency consultation with WDNR and USFWS. These methods were supplemented with additional field studies including general field reconnaissance and faunal observations, road kills, tracks, scat, nests, or other indicated evidence. Supplemental field studies within the site and near the site were used in part to characterize the assemblage of mammal species and to aid in the identification of protected species near the SHINE site. Specific mammal survey locations were not developed. Mammal species were recorded based on general field reconnaissance and incidental observations at the aquatic survey locations and along the bird survey route. A quarterly walk through of the entire site was also conducted for evidence of wildlife use. Mammals were not commonly observed during site reconnaissance due to the agricultural nature of the site. Mammal species observed on-site included white-tailed deer ( Odocoileus virginianus ), raccoon (Procyon lotor hirtus), eastern cottontail (Sylvilagus floridanus), and groundhog (Marmota monax). Mammal occurrence on-site is likely driven by the presence and life stage of the agriculture crop that is present, as agricultural crops provide a source of food for some wildlife species. The list of mammals observed on-site and those potentially occurring near the site, based on distributional range, are recorded in Table19.3.5-4. No protected mammal species have been observed or are known to occur at the SHINE site. White-tailed deer and eastern cottontail are both recreationally valuable as game species. Their use of the site, however, is sporadic given the lack of cover, shelter, and water supply. Agency consultation did not identify any state or federally listed mammal species that were recorded within 5 mi. (8 km) of the SHINE site.19.3.5.7.2.2BirdsIdentification of bird species potentially occurring on the site or in near off-site areas consisted of records review (i.e., recorded range/distributional records [WBBA, 2012 and USGS, 2012d]), field investigation and agency consultation with USFWS and WDNR. For the SHINE site and Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-104Rev. 0near the site, field studies included general field reconnaissance and observation, site surveys, and roadside bird surveys. Figure 19.3.5-3 depicts the roadside survey route that was surveyed seasonally (fall, winter, spring, summer) for birds. Observers stopped at 0.5 mi. (0.8km) intervals to record all birds seen or heard during a 3-minute survey period. The route was driven on two separate dates during each season with observations initiated approximately at sunrise each day. Fifty-eight species were observed during the 2011-2012 surveys near the site, 61 species were identified as part of the Wisconsin Breeding Bird Atlas (WBBA) da tabase (WBBA, 2012), and 74species were recorded as part of the closest Breeding Bird Survey route (USGS, 2012d). Abundant and common bird species observed during field surveys near the site included red-winged blackbird (Agelaius phoeniceus), northern cardinal (Cardinalis cardinalis), American goldfinch (Carduelis tristis), house finch (Carpodacus mexicanus), American crow ( Corvus brachyrhynchos), horned lark ( Eremophila alpestris ), house sparrow (Passer domesticus ), common grackle (Quiscalus quiscula), European starling (Sturnus vulgaris), and American robin (Turdus migratorius). Birds observed on-site included red-winged blackbird, Canada goose
(Branta canadensis), red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), killdeer (Charadrius vociferus ), American crow, and horned lark. The complete list of birds observed on-site and those potentially occurring near the site are recorded in Table 19.3.5-5. Based on the methodology outlined above, there are no protected bird species at the SHINE site. Canada goose is the only species observed on-site that is recreationally valuable since it is a game species. The state of Wisconsin is part of the Mississippi Flyway. Based on field observations, Canada geese occasionally fly over the site or use the site during migration to feed. In addition to the Mississippi Flyway, the Rock River (approximately 2 mi. [3.2km] south of the site) is a potential habitat for other waterfowl and shoreline bird use; however, there are no documented rookeries near the site along the Rock River. Agency consultation did not identify any state or federally listed bird species that were recorded within 5 mi. (8 km) of the SHINE site.19.3.5.7.2.3HerpetofaunaAmphibians and reptiles (herpetofauna) within the site and near the site areas were identified using records review (i.e., recorded range/distributional records [WDNR, 2012f]) and agency consultation with USFWS and WDNR. On the SHINE site these methods were supplemented with additional field studies including general field reconnaissance and site surveys. Supplemental field studies within the site and near the site were used in part to characterize the assemblage of amphibian and reptile species and to aid in the identification of protected species near the SHINE site. Terrestrial ecology study locations on the site and near the site are shown on Figure 19.3.5-3. Specific herpetofauna survey locations were not developed. Herpetofauna were recorded based on general field reconnaissance and incidental observations at the aquatic survey locations and along the bird survey route. A quarterly walk-through of the entire site was also conducted for evidence of wildlife use. Species observed or heard during field surveys near the site included the American toad (Bufo americanus), bullfrog (Rana catesbiana), green frog (Rana clanitans), northern leopard frog (Rana pipiens), spring peeper (Pseudacris crucifer ), common snapping turtle ( Chelydra serpentina), and eastern garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis ). There were no amphibians or reptiles observed on the SHINE site. The complete list of herpetofauna potentially occurring based on range/distribution near the site is recorded in Table19.3.5-6. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-105Rev. 0WDNR identified the Blanding's turtle (Emydoidea blandingii) as state threatened and potentially occurring near the site. The Blanding's turtle is found in a variety of aquatic habitats including marshes, lake bays, slow-moving streams, oxbows, drainage ditches, meadows, and wetlands. This species is semi-terrestrial thus individuals may spend a good deal of time on land moving between a variety of wetland types from early March to mid-October. They typically overwinter in standing water that is at least 3 ft. (0.9 m) in depth with a deep organic substrate but will also use both warm and cold-water streams and rivers where they can avoid freezing. Nesting occurs from about mid-May through June depending on spring temperatures and they have a strong preference for nesting in sandy soils. Hatching occurs from early August through early September but hatchlings can successfully overwinter in the nest, emerging the following spring (WDNR, 2012g). Blanding's turtles were not observed during field rec onnaissance. Given the absence of wetlands and open water habitat on the site or its immediate near-site environs, Blanding's turtles are not expected to occur on-site.19.3.5.8Invasive SpeciesNon-native species are those species that arrived in and colonized an area with direct or indirect human assistance, even if they are native elsewhere in the state. Non-native species may also be called non-indigenous, alien, exotic, adventive or naturalized species. Invasive species, as defined by Executive Order 13112, include alien species whose introduction does or is likely to cause economic or environmental harm or harm to human health. According to Executive Order13112, each federal agency whose actions may affect the status of invasive species shall, to the extent practicable and permitted by law, prevent the introduction of invasive species; detect and control populations of such species; monitor invasive species populations; and provide for the restoration of native species in ecosystems that have been invaded.In 2001, the Wisconsin Legislature directed the WDNR to establish a statewide program to control invasive species, and to promulgate rules to identify, classify and control invasive species for purposes of the program. On September 1, 2009, the WDNR created Wisconsin's Invasive Species Identification, Classification and Control Rule (Chapter NR 40, Wisconsin Administrative Code). In accordance with the rule, invasive species have been identified and classified into two categories: Prohibited and Restricted. With certain exceptions, the transport, possession, transfer and introduction of Prohibited species is banned. Restricted species are also subject to a ban on transport, transfer and introduction, but possession is allowed, with the exception of fish and crayfish (WDNR, 2012h).Because there are no ponds, streams, or other water bodies on-site, aquatic invasive species associated with these habitats, such as fish and crayfish, are not present on the SHINE site. Similarly, the lack of wetlands on-site precludes the presence of obligate wetland invasive species on the SHINE site.The list of invasive species for the State of Wisconsin (WDNR, 2010b) was evaluated against the terrestrial plant species observed during the vegetation surveys conducted on the site and near the site in 2011 and 2012. Based on this evaluation, seven "restricted" and two "prohibited" plant species were identified off-site in nearby areas. Restricted species observed in nearby off-site areas include musk thistle (Carduus nutans ), autumn olive (Elaeagnus umbellata), bush honeysuckle (Lonicera maackii), garlic mustard (Alliaria petiolata), wild parsnip ( Pastinaca sativa), dames rocket (Hesperis matronalis), and reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea). These weedy invasive species were observed in various Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-106Rev. 0land cover types including developed lands, agricultural lands, and riparian corridors. "Prohibited" species observed in nearby off site areas include Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), and sericea lespedeza (Lespedeza cuneata). Japanese honeysuckle was observed on nearby developed lands, whereas sericea lespedeza was observed in the riparian corridor of the unnamed stream south of the site. It should be noted that no invasive species listed by WDNR (neither restricted nor prohibited) were observed on the SHINE site. Additionally, there are no existing plans to implement invasive species management/control activities at the facility.19.3.5.9Procedures and ProtocolsThe SHINE site has been in agricultural production for several decades. As such, the site has a history of frequent ground disturbance (disking, planting, plowing) and herbicide applications to maximize row crop production. There are no ecological procedures or management plans in place for the SHINE site.19.3.5.10Studies and Monitoring The terrestrial and aquatic ecology of the SHINE site and near the site was characterized in a series of field studies conducted over a 1-year period extending from October 2011 to September 2012. The objective of the field studies was to obtain site-specific species data to characterize existing ecological conditions. The field studies included surveys for terrestrial vegetation, avifauna, mammals, herpetofauna, identification of waters of the United States (including wetlands), adult/juvenile fish, and benthic macroinvertebrates. In general, study methods within the ecological investigation area included a review of available mapping, databases, and correspondence with the appropriate agencies along with supplemental field studies. Subsections 19.3.5.5 and 19.3.5.7 summarize relevant information from each of these studies and provide other data on existing terrestrial and aquatic ecology in accordance with the guidance in the Final ISG Augmenting NUREG-1537.19.3.5.11Protected SpeciesA list of threatened/endangered species or species of special concern identified within 6 mi. (9.7km) of the SHINE site is provided in Table 19.3.5-7. Terrestrial and aquatic listed species include five fish species, five mussel species, one turtle species, and 27 plant species. Agency consultation did not identify any state or federally listed mammal, bird, or insect species near the SHINE site.The fish, unionid mussels, and turtle with the potential to occur near the study area are listed as state endangered, threatened, or species of special concern. The fish include the American eel (Anguilla rostrata), gravel chub (Erimystax (Hybopsis)x-punctatus ), redfin shiner ( Lythrurus umbratilis), greater redhorse (Moxostoma valenciennesi), and Ozark minnow (Notropis nubilus ). Listed mussels include the elktoe (Alasmidonta marginata ), purple wartyback (Cyclonaias tuberculata), monkeyface (Quadrula metanevra), ellipse (Venustaconcha ellipsiformis ), and rainbow shell (Villosa iris ). The Blanding's turtle (Emydoidea blandingii) is the only reptile species listed with the potential to occur near the SHINE site. These species were indicated to be known or likely to occur near the site during consultation with the WDNR (WDNR, 2012c). The species listed above inhabit aquatic areas such as rivers and streams and the Blanding's turtle requires ponds and wetlands. Because these habitats are absent from the site, these species are not expected to occur on the SHINE site. The Rock River and adjacent riparian Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-107Rev. 0area, approximately 2 mi. (3.2 km) from the SHINE site, is the nearest location with suitable habitat for the listed fish, mussel, and turtle species. Agency consultation identified 27 plant species that may potentially occur near the site that are listed as state endangered, threatened, or species of special concern (WDNR, 2012c). The state or federal status of each of these species is provided in Table 19.3.5-7. The prairie bush-clover (Lespedeza leptostachya) is listed as a state endangered and federally threatened species and is the only plant species that is federally listed near the site (WDNR, 2012c; USFWS, 2012). The listed plant species are discussed below based on the three general habitat types in which they are found: forests/woodlands, riparian areas, and prairies.Eight state-listed plant species known or likely to occur near the site prefer forested or woodland habitats including: yellow giant hyssop (Agastache nepetoides ), purple milkweed ( Asclepias purpurascens), kitten tails ( Besseya bullii), wood spurge (Euphorbia commutata), hairy wild-petunia (Ruellia humilis), snowy campion ( Silene nivea), purple meadow-parsnip ( Thaspium trifoliatum var. flavum ), and sycamore (Platanus occidentalis). There is no forested habitat on the SHINE site nor were any of these species observed during any of the vegetation surveys within the site or near the site.Two state-listed plant species known or likely to occur near the site prefer wetland or true aquatic habitats including small forget-me-not (Myosotis laxa) and yellow water lily (Nuphar advena ). Small forget-me-not is typically found in cold, clear forested streams whereas yellow water lily prefers shallow to deep water of sluggish streams, ponds and lakes (WDNR, 2012c). Aquatic habitats, including streams, ponds, and lakes, are lacking from the site and neither of these species was observed during any of the vegetation surveys within the site or near the site. Seventeen state-listed plant species that prefer prairie habitat were identified as known or likely to occur near the SHINE site include: a.Artemisa dracunculus (dragon wormwood) b.Asclepias lanuginosa (wooly milkweed) c.Cacalia tuberosa (prairie Indian-plantain) d.Calylophus serrulatus (yellow evening primrose) e.Camassia scilloides (wild hyancinth) f.Cirsium hillii (Hill's thistle) g.Cypripedium candidum (small white lady's-slipper) h.Echinacea pallida (pale purple coneflower) i.Hypericum sphaerocarpum (round-fruited St.John's-wort) j.Lespedeza leptostachya (prairie bush clover) k.Melica nitens (three-flowered melic grass) l.Nothocalais cuspidata (prairie false-dandelion) m.Penstemon hirsutus (hairy beardtongue) n.Polygala incarnata (pink milkwort) o.Polytaenia nuttallii (prairie parsley) p.Prenanthes aspera (rough rattlesnake-root) q.Scutellaria parvu la (small skullcap) None of these species were observed during the vegetation surveys performed within or near the site. Furthermore, the entire SHINE site is composed of agricultural land and does not include the preferred prairie habitat of the listed species above. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-108Rev. 0Table 19.3.5-1 Fish Potentially Occurring near the SHINE SiteCommon NameScientific Name Rock River(a)Unnamed Stream (Tributary of Rock River(b))Rock bassAmbloplites rupestris XBowfinAmia calva XFreshwater drumAplodinotus grunniens XWhite suckerCatostomus commersoniiXBrook sticklebackCulaea inconstans XSpotfin shinerCyprinella spiloptera XCommon carpCyprinus carpio XNorthern pike Esox lucius XNorthern hogsuckerHypentelium nigricans XChannel catfishIctalurus punctatus XBigmouth buffaloIctiobus cyprinellus XGreen sunfishLepomis cyanellus XPumpkinseedLepomis gibbosus XBluegillLepomis macrochirus XSmallmouth bassMicropterus dolomieu XWhite bassMorone chrysops XShorthead redhorseMoxostoma macrolepidotumXEmerald shinerNotropis atherinoides XSpottail shinerNotropis hudsonius XLogperchPercina caprodes XBlack crappiePomoxis nigromaculatusXSaugerSander canadensis XWalleyeSander vitreus XSpecies Richness 212a)WDNR, 2012c (fish collect ed on the Rock River within Rock County beyond the year 1980).b)SHINE ER field sampling program. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-109Rev. 0Table 19.3.5-2 Benthic Macroinvertebrates Collected in an Unnamed Stream (Tributaryof the Rock River) near the SHINE SiteOrdersAbundanceFall 2011Spring 2012 Diptera2DixidaeDixa modesta 1Chironomidae1Chironominae1 Apedilum1Stictochironomus 9Stratiomyidae Odontomyia2 Hemiptera Belostomatidae Belostoma 3Corixidae Sigara21GerridaeAquarius1Coleoptera Hydrophilidae 1Tropisternus 1Tricladida Dugesiidae Girardia106Megaloptera SialidaeSialis1Non-insects Amphipoda 9Gammarus200266IsopodaCaecidotea10 Lirceus5GastropodaGyraulus1 Planorbidae1 Physidae Physa1Total #252284 Taxa Richness129EPT Richness00Shannon Diversity Index0.960.35 Biotic Index6.296.69 Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-110Rev. 0Table 19.3.5-3 Terrestrial Plants Observed on or near the SHINE Site(Sheet 1 of 4)Botanical NameCommon NameQualitative Abundance in Land Cover Area Surveyed(a)SiteDeveloped-Open SpaceDeveloped-Low, Medium, High IntensityCultivated Crops/Pasture/Deciduous Forest/ Shrub/ Herbaceous/WetlandsTrees/SaplingsAbies balsamea Balsam fir CUAcer negundoBox elder COAcer rubrumRed mapleOUUAcer saccharinumSilver mapleOCAcer saccharumSugar mapleCOCBetula nigra River birch OCeltis occidentalis Hackberry COCercis canadensisEastern redbud UCrataegus mollisDowny hawthorn ACrataegus monogynaOneseed hawthorn OFraxinus americanaWhite ash CFraxinus pennsylvanicaGreen ash OOGleditsia triacanthosHoney locustUUUJuglans nigra Black walnutCOUJuniperous virginianaEastern red cedar UMorus alba White mulberry UMorus rubra Red mulberry UPicea pungens Blue spruce OPinus resinosaRed pineOCPinus strobusEastern white pine OOPopulus albaWhite poplar RPopulus grandidentataBigtooth aspen OCPrunus sp. CherryURPrunus serotina Black cherry OQuercus albaWhite oak OCSalix sp.WillowRUSalix babylonicaWeeping willow USalix nigraBlack willow UCUlmus americanaAmerican elm CCUlmus rubraSlippery elmAOAShrubsCeanothus cuneatusBuckbrush COCephalanthus occidentalisCommon buttonbush UCrataegus monogynaOneseed hawthorn OElaeagnus umbellataAutumn olive U Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-111Rev. 0Table 19.3.5-3 Terrestrial Plants Observed on or near the SHINE Site(Sheet 2 of 4)Botanical NameCommon NameQualitative Abundance in Land Cover Area Surveyed(a)SiteDeveloped-Open SpaceDeveloped-Low, Medium, High IntensityCultivated Crops/Pasture/Deciduous Forest/ Shrub/ Herbaceous/WetlandsShrubs (continued)Juniperous virginianusEastern red cedar UOLonicera maackiiBush honeysuckleAAARibes cynosbatiEastern prickly gooseberry CORosa rugosaRugosa rose CSymphoricarpos occidentalisWestern snowberry OSyringa vulgarisCommon lilac UViburnum sp.ViburnumOVinesLonicera japonicaJapanese honeysuckle OParthenocissus quinquefoliaVirginia creeper CARubus sp.BlackberryCCCSolanum dulcamaraClimbing nightshade UToxicodendron radicansPoison ivy UVitis sp.Wild grape UHerbsAchillea millefoliumYarrowOUCAlliaria petiolata Garlic mustardUCOAmaranthus sp.PigweedUAndropogon gerardiiBig bluestem UAntennaria neglecta Field pussytoes UArctium lappaGreater burdock RArctium pubensCommon burdockOURArtemisia ludovicianaWhite sagebrush OArtemisia serrataSawtooth wormwood CAsclepias syriacaCommon milkweed UAster sp. AsterUBidens aristosaBearded beggarticks CBoltonia asteroidesWhite doll's daisy UBrassica nigra Black mustard UBromus catharticusRescuegrass OBromus japonicusField bromeACCBromus pubescensHairy woodland brome CO Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-112Rev. 0Table 19.3.5-3 Terrestrial Plants Observed on or near the SHINE Site(Sheet 3 of 4)Botanical NameCommon NameQualitative Abundance in Land Cover Area Surveyed(a)SiteDeveloped-Open SpaceDeveloped-Low, Medium, High IntensityCultivated Crops/Pasture/Deciduous Forest/Shrub/Herbaceous/WetlandsHerbs (continued)Bromus tectorumDrooping brome CCarduus nutansMusk thistleUCCACarex sp.SedgeCCichorium intybusChicoryUCirsium vulgareBull thistle ODactylis glomerataOrchardgrass CCDaucus carotaQueen Anne's lace UOCEquisetum arvenseField horsetail CErigeron philadelphicusPhiladelphia fleabane OOErysimum sp.Wallflower UUEupatorium perfoliatumLate boneset UEupatorium rugosumWhite snakerootUCUFestuca sp. FescueAAOCFestuca arundinacea Tall fescueAAGlycine maxSoybeanAAHesperis matronalisDame's rocket CCImpatiens capensisJewelweed CLemna sp. DuckweedALeonurus cardiacaCommon motherwort OLespedeza sp.Lespedeza OOLespedeza cuneataSericea lespedeza OLeucanthemum vulgareOxeye daisyUURMarrubium vulgareWhite horehound RUMedicago sativa AlfalfaAMelilotus officinalisSweetclover OMonarda fistulosaWild bergamot UOenothera biennisCommon evening primrose RPanicum sp.Panic grassOOOPanicum virgatumSwitchgrass CUPastinaca sativaWild parsnip CPhalaris arundinaceaReed canary grass APhysalis longifoliaLongleaf groundcherry UPlantago lanceolataNarrowleaf plantainUPoa annuaAnnual bluegrass ACPoa compressaCanada bluegrass A Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-113Rev. 0Table 19.3.5-3 Terrestrial Plants Observed on or near the SHINE Site(Sheet 4 of 4)Botanical NameCommon NameQualitative Abundance in Land Cover Area Surveyed(a)SiteDeveloped-Open SpaceDeveloped-Low, Medium, High IntensityCultivated Crops/Pasture/Deciduous Forest/ Shrub/ Herbaceous/WetlandsHerbs (continued)Polygonum sp.KnotweedUCSchizachyrium scopariumLittle bluestem OUScirpus atrovirensGreen bulrush OSenecio pauperculusBalsam groundsel CCSetaria spFoxtailOSetaria faberi FoxtailAOSetaria viridisGreen foxtail OOCSilene csereiiBalkan catchfly OOSilene cucubalusMaidenstears OSilphium perfoliatumCup plant OSolidago altissimaTall goldenrod CSolidago canadensisCanada goldenrodUCOASolidago giganteaGiant goldenrod CSorghum halepenseJohnson grass OCStachys byzantinaLamb's ear OOStellaria mediaCommon chickweed OSymphyotrichum lanceolatumWhite panicle aster OSymphyotrichum novae-angliaeNew England aster OTaraxacum officinaleCommon dandelionUOCU CThlaspi arvenseField pennycress UToxicodendron radicansPoison ivy UTragopogon dubiusWestern salsify UTrifolium pratenseRed cloverOUOTriticum aestivumWinter wheatAOOATypha latifolia Broadleaf cattailURUVerbena strictaHoary verbena CViola sp.VioletCXanthium strumariumCockleburCAUZea maysCornACAZizia aureaGolden zizia Ca) Abundance Categories: A=abundant; C=common; O=occasional; U=uncommon; R=rare Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-114Rev. 0Table 19.3.5-4 Mammals Potentially Occurring on or near the SHINE SiteGroup/Scientific NameCommon Name Observed during Field SurveyPouched Mammals Didelphis virginianaOpossumXHare-Shaped MammalsSylvilagus floridanusEastern Cottontail XInsect-Eating MammalsBlarina brevicaudaNorthern Shor t-Tailed ShrewSorex cinereusMasked Shrew Sorex hoyi Pygmy ShrewScalopus aquaticusEastern MoleFlying MammalsEptesicus fuscus Big Brown BatLasiurus borealis Red BatLasiurus cinereus Hoary Bat Myotis lucifugusLittle Brown BatPipistrellus subflavusEastern PipistrelleFlesh-Eating MammalsCanis latrans CoyoteXUrocyon cinereoargenteusGray FoxVulpes vulpes Red FoxLontra canadensisRiver OtterMustela frenataLong-tailed WeaselMustela nivalisLeast WeaselNeovison visonAmerican Mink Mephitis mephitisStriped Skunk XProcyon lotor RaccoonXEven-Toed Hoofed MammalsOdocoileus virginianusWhite-Tailed Deer XGnawing MammalsMarmota monaxGroundhog XSciurus carolinensisGray Squirrel XSpermophilus tridecemlineatusThirteen-Lined Ground Squirrel XCastor canadensisBeaverZapus hudsoniusMeadow Jumping MouseMicrotus ochrogasterPrairie VoleMicrotus pennsylvanicus Meadow VoleOndatra zibethicusMuskratPeromyscus leucopusWhite-Footed MouseMus musculusHouse MouseRattus norvegicusNorway Rat
Reference:
American Society of Mammologists, 2012 Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-115Rev. 0Table 19.3.5-5 Avifaunal Species Potentially Occurring on or near the SHINE Site(Sheet 1 of 3)Scientific NameCommon Name FieldSurveysAbundance(a)Wisconsin Breeding Bird Atlas(b)Breeding Bird Survey(c)Actitis macularia Spotted sandpiper XAgelaius phoeniceus Red-winged blackbird A(d)XXAmmodramus savannarum Grasshopper sparrow RXAnas platyrhynchos MallardRXXAccipiter cooperii Cooper's hawk RArchilochus colubris Ruby-throated hummingbird XArdea herodiasGreat blue heron XXBaeolophus bicolorTufted titmouse OBombycilla cedrorum Cedar waxwing UXXBranta canadensis Canada goose O(d)XXBubo virginianusGreat horned owl XButeo jamaicensis Red-tailed hawk U(d)XXButorides virescens Green heron XCardinalis cardinalis Northern cardinal CXXCarduelis tristis American goldfinch CXXCarpodacus mexicanus House finch CXXCeryle alcyonBelted kingfisher XXChaetura pelagica Chimney swift XCharadrius vociferus KilldeerO(d)XXChordeiles minorCommon nighthawk RXCistothorus platensis Sedge wren XCoccyzus americanusYellow-billed cuckoo XCoccyzus erythropthalmusBlack-billed cuckoo XColaptes auratusNorthern flicker RXXColinus virginianus Northern bobwhite XColumba livia Rock dove UXXContopus virens Eastern wood pewee UXXCorvus brachyrhynchos American crow C(d)XXCyanocitta cristataBlue jayOXXDendroica petechiaYellow warbler RXXDolichonyx oryzivorusBobolinkXDumetella carolinensis Gray catbird UXXEmpidonax alnorumAlder flycatcher XEmpidonax minimus Least flycatcher RXEmpidonax spp.Willow/alder flycatcher XEmpidonax traillii Willow flycatcher XEremophila alpestris Horned lark C(d)XEuphagus cyanocephalus Brewer's blackbird UXFalco sparverius American kestrel XX Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-116Rev. 0Table 19.3.5-5 Avifaunal Species Potentially Occurring on or near the SHINE Site(Sheet 2 of 3)Scientific NameCommon Name Field Surveys Abundance(a)Wisconsin Breeding Bird Atlas(b)Breeding Bird Survey(c)Geothlypis triachasCommon yellowthroat RXXGrus canadensis Sandhill crane XXHirundo rustica Barn swallow UXXHylocichla mustelina Wood thrush XXIcterus galbula Baltimore oriole RXXIcterus spurius Orchard oriole RXJunco hyemalisDark-eyed junco OLarus delawarensis Ring-billed gull RXMelanerpes carolinus Red-bellied woodpecker OXXMelanerpes erythrocephalusRed-headed woodpecker XMeleagris gallopavo Wild turkey OXMelospiza melodia Song sparrow OXXMimus polyglottos Northern mockingbird OMolothrus ater Brown-headed cowbird OXXMyiarchus crinitus Great crested flycatcher RXXPasser domesticus House sparrow CXXPasserculus sandwichensis Savannah sparrow XPasserina cyanea Indigo bunting RXXPetrochelidon pyrrhonotaCliff swallow XXPhasianus colchicus Ring-necked pheasant XPheucticus ludovicianus Rose-breasted grosbeak XPicoides pubescensDowny woodpecker OXXPicoides villosus Hairy woodpecker XPipilo erythrophthalmus Eastern towhee UPoecile atricapillusBlack-capped chickadee OXXPolioptila caeruleaBlue-gray gnatcatcher RXXPooecetes gramineus Vesper sparrow XXProgne subisPurple martin RXQuiscalus quiscula Common grackle CXXRiparia riparia Bank swallow XSayornis phoebe Eastern phoebe OXXSialia sialis Eastern bluebird OXXSitta carolinensisWhite-breasted nuthatch OXXSpiza americanaDickcissel XSpizella arboreaAmerican tree sparrow RSpizella passerina Chipping sparrow OXXSpizella pusilla Field sparrow U(d)XXStelgidopteryx serripennis Northern rough-winged swallowRXX Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-117Rev. 0Table 19.3.5-5 Avifaunal Species Potentially Occurring on or near the SHINE Site(Sheet 3 of 3) Scientific Name Common Name FieldSurveysAbundance (a)Wisconsin Breeding Bird Atlas (b)Breeding Bird Survey(c)Sturnella magna Eastern meadowlark OXXSturnella neglecta Western meadowlark XSturnus vulgaris European starling AXXTachycineta bicolorTree swallow RXXToxostoma rufumBrown thrasher UXXTroglodytes aedon House wren XXTurdus migratoriusAmerican robin AXXTyrannus tyrannusEastern kingbird UXXVireo gilvus Warbling vireo XXVireo olivaceus Red-eyed vireo XXWilsonia catrina Hooded warbler XZenaida macrouraMourning dove UXXZonotrichia albicollis White-throated sparrow USpecies Richness 586174a)A=abundant; C=common; O=occasional; U=uncommon; R=rareb)WBBA, 2012c)USGS, 2012d d)Indicates species observed on-site. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-118Rev. 0Table 19.3.5-6 Reptiles and Amphibians Potentially Occurring on or near the SHINE SiteScientific NameCommon NameObserved during Field SurveyTurtlesApolone spinifera Spiny softshell turtleChrysemes pictaPainted turtleChelydra serpentinaCommon snapping turtle XEmydoidea blandingii Blanding's turtleGraptemys geographicaCommon map turtleGraptemys ouachitensisOuachita map turtleGraptemys pseudogeographica False map turtleSternotherus odoratus Common musk turtleSalamandersNecturus maculosaMudpuppyFrogs and ToadsBufo americanusAmerican toad XHyla chrysoscelis Copes gray treefrogHyla versicolorEastern gray treefrogPseudacris cruciferSpring peeper XPseudacris triseritataWestern chorus frogRana catesbianaBullfrogXRana clanitansGreen frog XRana pipiensNorthern leopard frog XRana sylvaticaWood frogSnakesColuber constictorBlue racerElaphe vulpina Fox snakeHeterodon platyrhinosEastern hog-nosed snakeLampropeltis triangulum Milk snakeNerodia sipedonNorthern water snakeOpheodrys vernalisSmooth green snakeSistrurus catenatusEastern massasaugaStoreria dekayiNorthern brown snakeStoreria occipitomaculataRed-bellied snakeThamnophis sirtalisEastern garter snake XLizardsCnemidophorus sexlineatusSix-lined racerunnerEumeces fasciatusFive-lined skink
Reference:
WDNR, 2012f Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-119Rev. 0Table 19.3.5-7 Protected Species near the SHINE Site(a)Scientific NameCommon Name Status(a)FishAnguilla rostrataAmerican eelSpecies of special concern (S)Erimystax x-punctatusGravel chubEndangered (S)Lythrurus umbratilisRedfin ShinerThreatened (S)Moxostoma valenciennesiGreater redhorseThreatened (S)Notropis nubilusOzark MinnowThreatened (S)Mussels Alasmidonta marginataElktoeSpecies of special concern (S)Cyclonaias tuberculataPurple wartybackEndangered (S) Quadrula metanevra MonkeyfaceThreatened (S)Venustaconcha ellipsiformisEllipseThreatened (S)Villosa irisRainbow shellEndangered (S)Turtles Emydoidea blandingiiBlanding's turtleThreatened (S) PlantsAgastache nepetoides Yellow giant hyssopThreatened (S)Artemisa dracunculusDragon wormwoodSpecies of special concern (S)Asclepias lanuginosaWoolly milkweedThreatened (S)Asclepias purpurascensPurple milkweedEndangered (S)Besseya bulliiKitten tailsThreatened (S) Cacalia tuberosaPrairie Indian-plantainThreatened (S)Calylophus serrulatusYellow evening primroseSpecies of special concern (S)Camassia scilloidesWild hyancinthEndangered (S)Cirsium hilliiHill's thistleThreatened (S)Echinacea pallidaPale purple coneflowerThreatened (S)Euphorbia commutataWood spurgeSpecies of special concern (S)Lespedeza leptostachyaPrairie bush-cloverEndangered (S)Threatened (F)Melica nitensThree-flowered melic grassSpecies of special concern (S)Nothocalais cuspidataPrairie false-dandelionSpecies of special concern (S)Penstemon hirsutusHairy beardtongueSpecies of special concern (S)Polytaenia nuttalliiPrairie parsleyThreatened (S)Prenanthes asperaRough rattlesnake-rootEndangered (S)Ruellia humilisHairy wild-petuniaEndangered (S)Scutellaria parvulaSmall skullcapEndangered (S)Silene niveaSnowy campion Threatened (S)Thaspium trifoliatumPurple meadow-parsnipSpecies of special concern (S)Cypripedium candidumSmall white lady's-slipperThreatened (S)Hypericum sphaerocarpumRound-fruited St. John's-wortThreatened (S)Myosotis laxaSmall forget-me-notSpecies of special concern (S)Nuphar advenaYellow water lilySpecies of special concern (S)Plantanus occidentalisSycamoreSpecies of special concern (S)Polygala incarnata Pink milkwortEndangered (S)a) Protected species information was provided by USFWS and WDNR within a 6-mi (9.7 km) radius of the site b) State listed (S), Federally listed (F).
References:
USFWS, 2012 and WDNR, 2012c Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-120Rev. 019.3.6HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCESCultural resource studies were performed for the SHINE site that consisted of a geographical information system (GIS) analysis, a records level review of properties listed on the National Register of Historic Properties (NRHP), and fi eld surveys. GIS analyses and records reviews were performed on an area within a 10-mi. (16-km) radius of the SHINE site. While this radius is not specified in the Final ISG Augmenting NUREG-15 37, the use of 10 mi. (16 km) is consistent with guidance of NUREG-1555 (Subsection 2.5.3) regarding the radius appropriate for the collection of sufficient data to describe historic properties within the area surrounding a proposed project. Field surveys and reviews consisted of a Phase I archaeological survey of the entirety of the SHINE site. This survey was conducted to ensure compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and other Federal and state cultural resources management regulations.19.3.6.1Cultural SettingGeneral information regarding the cultural setting in the vicinity of the SHINE site is summarized by Knopf and Krause (Knopf, Chad and Kari Krause, 2012) and is presented in this section. The prehistory of southern Wisconsin is divided into four broad periods describing Native American habitation and development: the Paleoindian, Archaic, Woodland, and Mississippian periods. Approximately 10,000 years ago, Paleoindians pushed northward into Wisconsin as the glaciers retreated. These hunter-gatherers exploited the new resource-rich environments and hunted woolly mammoth, mastodon, and bison. Small, mobile groups utilized fluted and unfluted projectile points/knives designed for hunting and butchering animals. Clovis and Folsom points have been recovered in southeastern Wisconsin.Along with the change in the climate to warmer and drier conditions that occurred around 8000years ago, came the shift from hunting Ice Age mammals to smaller modern animals such as deer and elk. This shift coincided with the Archaic Tradition, which is subdivided into the Early, Middle, and Late Archaic periods. The social organization during the Early and Middle Archaic periods continued with mobile groups of hunter-gatherers with an increasingly sedentary lifestyle during the Late Archaic period.Cultural changes that occurred during the Woodland period (approximately 3000 years ago) included the use of pottery and bow and arrow, construction of conical and effigy mounds, and the existence of large villages. The Early Woodland period is characterized by the appearance of flat bottomed vessels tempered with grit, Kramer and Waubesa projectile points, and conical mounds. Subsistence practices during the Middle Woodland period included hunting, gathering of nuts and wild rice, and cultivation of squash. The Late Woodland period is characterized by more intensive cultivation of corn and the use of pottery consisting of globular jars with cord or fabric impressed decorations. The Mississippian period began about 1000 years ago; Native American occupants of Rock County were the Koshkonong Oneota. These people lived in large villages, grew corn, beans, and squash, and maintained a large trade network that crossed the continent. The Oneota are considered the ancestors of the modern-day Ho Chunk (Winnebago) tribe. The Indian tribes present in the state when it was first visited by Jean Nicolet in 1634 included the Ho Chunk, Potawatomi, Menominee, and Chippewa Indians. With the influx of European fur traders, loggers and early settlers in the late 1600s, and the succeeding Native American and European wars, Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-121Rev. 0many tribes of southeastern Wisconsin either migrated (or were removed) west of the Mississippi River.Euro-American settlers moved into Wisconsin during the 1830s and 1840s to take control of the territory ceded by Native American groups. Throughout the 19 th and 20th centuries, Rock County was primarily an agricultural economy that utilized the power of the Rock River for mills and transportation of trade commodities. Despite burgeoning industrial development and population growth after the Civil War, the farming industry expanded as railroads and urban markets developed in veins along the rail lines throughout the state. Urban growth and the advancements in transportation spurred along the shift in Wisconsin agriculture to focus on commercial dairy production, which helped to extend the viability of traditional agriculture in the region. Manufacturing boomed in Rock County in the 20th century, as General Motors (GM) and other firms began producing tractors, machinery, paper, pens, and refined farm products such as snack foods. Though manufacturing gained a large market share, agriculture has remained an important factor in the regional economy.19.3.6.2Previous InvestigationsTo ensure that all potential impacts to known historic properties were addressed prior to construction, SHINE completed the background records review for the project at the Historic Preservation Office, Wisconsin Historical Society (WHS) in Madison, Wisconsin and at the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency (IHPA) in Springfield, Illinois; NRHP-listed properties were identified using the online NRHP database. This investigation covered a 10-mi. (16-km) radius surrounding the SHINE site. This radius encompasses all of Rock County, Wisconsin and portions of Winnebago and Boone counties, Illinois (Knopf, Chad and Kari Krause, 2012).19.3.6.2.1Previously Conducted Cultural Resources SurveysA total of 126 cultural resource surveys in Wisconsin and 17 surveys in Illinois were completed and recorded at the WHS and IHPA within a 10-mi. (16-km) radius surrounding the project area. These included 38 records reviews, 102 Phase I investigations, and two archaeological site excavations. Only seven surveys were conducted within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the SHINE site (Knopf and Krause, 2012) (Table 19.3.6-1). None of these investigations were located within the project boundary. Two reports could not be examined because they were either missing or never received by the WHS. The remaining five surveys were documented and the reports were on file at the WHS. The five documented surveys were associated with the construction along US 51, I-90, the installation of a sewer line, and upgrades at the SWRA. Two surveys were conducted at the SWRA. The SWRA is located immediately to the west of US 51. No archaeological sites were identified for any of these five projects, and no additional fieldwork was recommended.19.3.6.2.2Previously Recorded Archaeological SitesEligible or listed archaeological sites located within a 10-mi. (16-km) radius of the SHINE site were identified through a information request with the WHS and by a database search of Illinois Historic Preservation Agency (IHPA) records. There are 223 archaeological sites identified in Wisconsin, five sites identified in Illinois, and onesite that is bisected by the Wisconsin-Illinois state line (WHS, 2012a; IHPA, 2013). As is presented in Table 19.3.6-2, only one prehistoric site is listed on the NRHP, whereas a total of 87 sites are eligible for listing on the NRHP in Wisconsin; there are no eligible or listed sites in Illinois. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-122Rev. 0The majority of the 87 eligible sites consist of prehistoric burials or mounds (n=44), while one mound site is a listed NRHP property (the Strong Partridge Mound Group). The Strong Partridge Mound Group was listed on the NRHP on March1, 1994 and is located in Beloit, Wisconsin. It is a prehistoric effigy mound group from the Late Woodland period. The remaining eligible sites consist of 39 historic/modern period cemeteries and four archaeological sites. All cemeteries or burials/prehistoric mounds are protected under Wisconsin Statute 157.70. The Happy Hallow Cemetery is closest, located approximately 1.2 mi. (2.0 km) south of the SHINE site (Figure19.3.1-4).19.3.6.2.3Previously Recorded Historic Structures and Districts Table 19.3.6-3 lists historic structures and districts listed on the NRHP and located within a 10mi. (16-km) radius of the SHINE site. A total of 85NRHP-listed distri cts or properties are identified in Wisconsin as illustrated in Figure 19.3.6-1. However, no NRHP-listed properties are located in Illinois (IHPA, 2013).Recorded sites within Wisconsin summarized in Table 19.3.6-3 include districts and numerous individual properties located in Janesville and Be loit. Individually listed properties have also been identified in the communities of Bradford, Clinton, Footville, Turtle, and La Prairie. Janesville contains 14 historic districts and 20 historic properties. The Benton Avenue, Bostwick Avenue, Columbus Circle, Conrad Cottages and the Look West Avenue Historic Districts contain domestic architecture of such styles as Colonial Revival, Tudor Revival, Mission Revival, Greek Revival, Italianate, Queen Anne, Late Victorian, and bungalow/craftsman. The remaining historic districts, including Courthouse Hill, East and West Milwaukee, Jefferson Avenue, North Main and South Main Historic Districts, are associated with the city's residences, commerce, industry, and government. The Old Fourth Ward and Prospect Hill Historic Districts are of Italianate or Queen Anne construction and contain residential dwellings, as well as educational and religious facilities. The remaining individual historic properties are primarily houses distributed throughout Janesville; additional properties include a business, educational facilities, an armory, and churches. The nearest listed NRHP property, the John and Martha Hugunin House, is located 1.1mi. (1.7 km) northeast of the SHINE site. The Hugunin House is Italianate in style, and is significant for its architectural design and relation to historic farming in the region. It was listed on the NRHP on June1, 2005.Three historic districts are located in the City of Beloit, located 3.7 mi. (6.0 km) south of the SHINE site. The Bluff Street Historic District contains domestic dwellings dating from 1847 to 1915 and is significant for its association with European exploration and settlement. The Merrill Avenue Historic District contains domestic dwellings dating from 1891 to 1942 and is composed of 19th to 20th century revival architectural styles. The Near East Side Historic District is composed of a mix of architectural styles dating from 1850 to 1932 and contains two prehistoric archaeological mound groups as contributing elements to the district. While the remaining 27individual historic properties are primarily houses distributed throughout the area, additional properties include an apartment complex, municipal facilities, a museum, college buildings, and churches. Constructed in 1917, Fairbanks Flats were built exclusively for African-American workers after World War I and played a prominent role in community planning during the twentieth century. The apartments are located 6.9 mi. (11.1 km) south of the SHINE site. Another 21 NRHP-listed historic properties are scattered within the 10-mi. (16-km) radius around the SHINE site (Figure 19.3.6-1). The community of Clinton, located 8.2 mi. (13.2 km) southeast Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-123Rev. 0of the SHINE site, contains examples of governmental and commerce architecture with the Clinton Village Hall, water tower, Citizens Bank, and the Crosby Block. The remaining NRHP-listed properties are residential dwellings dating from the late 19 th century constructed in Italianate, Queen Anne, and Greek Revival architectural styles. Two farmsteads in Bradford Township; two dwellings in Plymouth and LaPrairie Townships; a house, church, and an iron bridge in Turtle Township; and two stores, one bank, and one house in the Town of Footville comprise the last of the NRHP-listed properties within the 10-mi. (16-km) radius of the SHINE
site.19.3.6.3Results of Phase I Cultural Resource Investigation A Phase I archeological survey was conducted on lands within the project boundary. The survey was supervised in the field by Mr. Chad Knopf while Ms. Kari Krause served as the Principal Investigator. Mr. Knopf has a Bachelor's degree in Anthropology and has over 2years of experience in historic and prehistoric archaeology. Kari Krause is a Registered Professional Archaeologist with a Master of Arts degree in Anthropology. Ms. Krause has over 17 years of experience conducting archaeological projects throughout the Midwestern United States. Fieldwork was performed following methodologies established by the WHS. The survey was completed utilizing a pedestrian survey at closely spaced transect intervals (less than 49 ft.[15m] between transects) that allowed crews to systematically inspect the ground surface of the tilled agricultural field. Three shovel test pits were judgmentally placed and excavated across the project area to provide an understanding of the soil stratigraphy. No archaeological sites or evidence of cultural resources were identified within the survey area, and no further archaeological investigations are recommended (Knopf, Chad and Kari Krause, 2012). The report was submitted to the WHS for review and comment. In a letter dated February 16, 2012 (WHS, 2012), the WHS indicated that they had reviewed the report and found it complete and concluded that consultation regarding the SHINE project was complete.19.3.6.4Native American and State Agency ConsultationSHINE initiated consultation with 13 tribes that are federally recognized in Wisconsin. A single response letter was received from the Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska who indicated that they have cultural properties of interest in the project area, but had no concerns regarding the project. However, they did indicate the desire to be contacted in the event burial sites or other cultural materials were discovered during construction. Follow-up calls were made to representatives of the remaining 12 tribes; however, no return calls to SHINE were received. Illinois currently does not have a federally recognized Nati ve American tribe. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-124Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-1 Previously Recorded Cultural Resources Surveys within 1-mi. (1.6-km) of the Site Report No.Survey TypeDateResultsDistance from Site (centerpoint)88-2033Interviews for planned project associated with US Highway 511988No sites identified; no additional fieldwork recommended0.2-mi. (0.3-km)
West00-0787Phase I archaeological survey at the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2000No sites identified; no additional fieldwork recommended0.6-mi. (1-km) West 93-2029Records review for proposed sewer and water main route 1993No sites identified; no additional fieldwork recommended0.3-mi. (0.5-km) West84-1001Phase I archaeological survey of Route 11 - pedestrian survey1985No sites identified; no additional fieldwork recommended0.8-mi. (1.3-km)
North05-0607Phase I archaeological survey at Rock County Airport - shovel testing2005No sites identified; no additional fieldwork recommended0.6-mi. (1-km) West 97-1131Phase I archaeological survey of proposed Janesville bypass1997Not available0.8-mi. (1.3-km) North89-5527Records review1989Not available0.8-mi. (1.3-km) North
Reference:
Knopf, Chad and Kari Krause, 2012 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-125Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-2 Eligible or Listed Archaeological Sites within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site, Rock County, Wisconsin(Sheet 1 of 4) State NumberBurial NumberSite NameAgeNRHP StatusRO-0130BRO-0179Spring Brook Burial SiteUnknownEligibleRO-0286BRO-0127Morgan School EnclosureUnknownEligibleRO-0036BRO-0126McLenegan Group SouthUnknownEligible RO-0141BRO-0085McLenegan Group NorthUnknownEligibleRO-0138BRO-0111Pierce GroupUnknownEligibleRO-0136BRO-0110Baarz MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0097BRO-0147Chrispinsen MoundUnknownEligibleRO-0007BRO-0181Crystal and Hiawatha SpringsUnknownEligible RO-032490J-WUnknownEligibleRO-0009Riverside Park VillageUnknownEligibleRO-0076BRO-0176Riverbank Quarry BurialsUnknownEligible RO-032590J-XUnknownEligibleRO-0080BRO-0140McElroy TrioUnknownEligibleRO-0082BRO-0142Sutherland GravesUnknownEligible RO-0103BRO-0150Bailey MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0104BRO-0151Spring Brook MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0107BRO-0152Several Small TumuliUnknownEligible RO-0117BRO-0153Woodstock Mound GroupUnknownEligibleRO-0290BRO-0102Rockport Park MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0307 JonesUnknownEligibleRO-0126BRO-0107Afton Mound GroupUnknownEligibleRO-0122BRO-?InmanUnknownEligibleRO-0291BRO-0099Six House MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0125BRO-0155Reynolds GroupUnknownEligibleRO-0119BRO-0154Afton MillUnknownEligibleRO-0127BRO-0108Henbest MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0021BRO-0116Roth Mound GroupUnknownEligibleRO-0023BRO-0117Yost MoundUnknownEligibleRO-0030BRO-0122Weirick Mound GroupUnknownEligible Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-126Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-2 Eligible or Listed Archaeological Sites within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site, Rock County, Wisconsin(Sheet 2 of 4) State NumberBurial NumberSite NameAgeNRHP StatusRO-0027BRO-0119Henderson MoundUnknownEligibleRO-0031BRO-0123Adams - DuquyUnknownEligibleRO-0143BRO-0087Strong Partridge Mound GroupUnknownNRHPRO-0142BRO-0086Joint Switch GroupUnknownEligibleRO-0034BRO-0125Poe MoundUnknownEligibleRO-0144BRO-0088Whitfield CampsiteUnknownEligibleRO-0019BRO-0115Water Tower MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0038BRO-0128JonesUnknownEligible RO-0015BRO-0114Beloit College Mound Group300-600 A.D. (un-calibrated); Date most likely between 500-900 A.D.EligibleRO-0039/ WO-0460(a)BRO-0129State Line Mound Group800-1300 A.D.EligibleRO-0390BRO-?Henbest MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0083BRO-0141Duplicate of RO-0104 Spring Brook MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0028BRO-0120Baldwin MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0396BRO-0174Buells BearUnknownEligibleRO-0407BRO-0172Oakwood Cemetery MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0041BRO-0131HillcrestUnknownEligibleRO-0219BRO-0173Ho-Chunk Council HouseUnknownEligibleRO-0140BRO-0082Murphy GroupUnknownEligibleRO-0425BRO-0171Nyman-Inman BurialsUnknownEligibleRO-0426BRO-0050Dillenback CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0076Turtle Cemetery (aka Turtleville Cemetery)Currently activeEligible BRO-0078Shopiere Cemetery (aka Bethel Cemetery)Currently activeEligible BRO-0077Clinton Corners CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0167Jack Family CemeteryUnknownEligible Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-127Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-2 Eligible or Listed Archaeological Sites within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site, Rock County, Wisconsin(Sheet 3 of 4) State NumberBurial NumberSite NameAgeNRHP Status BRO-0168Murray Settlement CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0066Newark CemeteryCurrently activeEligible BRO-0067Unnamed CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0064Luther valley east CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0069Unnamed CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0070Plymouth Cemetery (aka Hanover Cemetery)Presently activeEligible BRO-0068Naugle Cemetery (aka Norwegian Cemetery; Baptist Church Cemetery)UnknownEligible BRO-0044Mount Zion Cemetery (Clarke)UnknownEligible BRO-0043Emerald Grove Cemetery1850-presentEligible BRO-0042Milton Lawn Memorial Park1932-presentEligible BRO-0053Mt. Pleasant CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0051Rock County Institution CemeteryUnknownEligibleBRO-0049Unnamed CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0048Mt. Olivet Cemetery1852Eligible BRO-0047Oak Hill Cemetery1851Eligible BRO-0046Unnamed CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0165Trinity Episcopal Church CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0045Unnamed cemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0081Indian CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0040Grove Cemetery1848Eligible BRO-0041Bethel Cemetery (aka Disciples Cemetery; Center Cemetery)1869-presentEligible BRO-0018Carver's Rock Burial1843Eligible BRO-0019Clinton Cemetery1860-presentEligibleBRO-0088Polander Mound GroupUnknownEligibleBRO-0122Haggerty Mound GroupUnknownEligible Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-128Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-2 Eligible or Listed Archaeological Sites within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site, Rock County, Wisconsin(Sheet 4 of 4) State NumberBurial NumberSite NameAgeNRHP Status BRO-0007Oakwood Cemetery (aka Beloit Cemetery)1840-presentEligible BRO-0006Calvary Catholic Cemetery1850sEligible BRO-0008East Lawn Cemetery1919-presentEligible BRO-0009Isolated GraveUnknownEligible BRO-0010Mt. Thabor Cemetery (aka Tabor Cemetery or Thabor Cemetery)1952Eligible BRO-0011Baldwin CemeteryPresently activeEligibleBRO-0129Nine Mile SwallowUnknownEligible BRO-0005Afton Cemetery (aka Town of Rock Cemetery)UnknownEligible BRO-0012Happy Hollow Cemetery (aka Gower or Rock Vale Cemetery)1850sEligibleBRO-0133Langford MoundUnknownEligiblea) Rock County, WI/Winnebago County, IL
References:
WHS, 2012a; IHPA, 2013 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-129Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-3 Historic Structures and Districts Listed on the NRHP within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site(Sheet 1 of 5)Historic NameCityDate State ListedNRHP Date ListedDistrict DescriptionArmory, TheJanesville1/1/198911/21/1978Bartlett Memorial Historical MuseumBeloit1/1/19894/11/1977Beloit Water TowerBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983Benton Avenue Historic
DistrictJanesville4/25/19959/7/199684 contributing buildingsBlodgett, Selvy, HouseBeloit1/1/19895/23/1980Bluff Street Historic DistrictBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983109 contributing and 5 non-contributing buildings, 5 non-contributing archeological sitesBostwick Avenue Historic
DistrictJanesville1/20/20064/24/20067 contributing buildings, 1contributing archeological siteBrasstown CottageBeloit1/1/19893/4/1983Church of St. Thomas the
ApostleBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983 Citizens BankClinton1/1/19898/1/1985City of Beloit Waterworks and Pump StationBeloit7/20/19909/13/1990 Clark-Brown HouseBeloit1/1/19899/13/1985Clinton Village HallClinton1/1/19898/1/1985Clinton Water TowerClinton1/1/19893/7/1985 Columbus Circle Historic
DistrictJanesville10/15/20045/19/200564 contributing and 8 non-contributing buildingsConrad Cottages Historic
DistrictJanesville2/3/19933/11/19937 contributing buildingsCourt Street Methodist ChurchJanesville1/1/198911/17/1977Courthouse Hill Historic DistrictJanesville1/1/19891/17/1986274 contributing and 72 non-contributing buildingsCrist, J. W., HouseBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-130Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-3 Historic Structures and Districts Listed on the NRHP within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site(Sheet 2 of 5)Historic NameCityDate State ListedNRHP Date ListedDistrict Description Crosby BlockClinton1/1/19898/1/19851 contributing buildingCrosby, James B., HouseJanesville4/25/199512/14/199810 contributing buildingsDean, Erastus, FarmsteadBradford (township)1/1/198912/4/1978DeLong, Homer B., HouseClinton1/1/19898/1/1985Dougan Round BarnBeloit1/1/19896/4/1979Dow, J.B., House and Carpenter Douglas BarnBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983East Milwaukee Street Historic
DistrictJanesville1/1/19892/8/19807 contributing buildingsEmerson HallBeloit1/1/19899/20/1979Fairbanks FlatsBeloit1/1/19891/7/19834 contributing buildingsFirst Congregational ChurchBeloit1/1/19891/23/1975Footville CondenseryFootville1/1/19895/7/1982Footville State BankFootville1/1/19895/7/1982Fredendall BlockJanesville1/1/19893/25/1982 Hanchett BlockBeloit1/1/19893/20/1980 Hilton House HotelBeloit7/18/200311/7/2003Hugunin, John and Martha,
HouseJanesville1/21/20056/1/2005Janesville Cotton MillJanesville1/1/19897/16/19802 contributing buildingsJanesville High SchoolJanesville1/15/19996/25/1999Janesville Public LibraryJanesville1/1/19897/1/1981Janesville Pumping StationJanesville1/1/19893/7/1985Jefferson Avenue Historic
DistrictJanesville1/20/20064/19/200677 contributing and 7 non-contributing buildingsJones, John W., HouseJanesville7/20/20073/14/2008Lappin-Hayes BlockJanesville1/1/198911/7/1976 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-131Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-3 Historic Structures and Districts Listed on the NRHP within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site(Sheet 3 of 5)Historic NameCityDate State ListedNRHP Date ListedDistrict DescriptionLaPrairie Grange Hall No. 79LaPrairie (township)1/1/19894/11/1977Lathrop-Munn Cobblestone HouseBeloit1/1/19898/22/1977Look West Historic DistrictJanesville1/1/19893/26/1987547 contributing and 92 non-contributing buildings, 1contributing archeological
siteLook West Historic District
ExtensionJanesville12/11/199312/10/199371 contributing and 4 non-contributing buildingsLovejoy and Merrill-Nowlan
HousesJanesville1/1/19891/21/19802 contributing buildingsMerrill Avenue Historic DistrictBeloit1/1/19892/19/19934 contributing buildingsMoran's SaloonBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983Murray-George HouseTurtle (township)1/1/19899/13/1985Myers-Newhoff HouseJanesville1/1/19895/18/1979Myers, Peter, Pork Packing Plant and Willard Coleman
BuildingJanesville1/1/19897/7/19833 contributing buildingsNear East Side Historic
DistrictBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983166 contributing and 14 non-contributing buildings, 2 contributing archeological sites, 1 contributing objectNeese, Elbert, HouseBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983North Main Street Historic DistrictJanesville1/1/19897/22/19834 contributing buildings Nye, Clark, HouseBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983Old Fourth Ward Historic DistrictJanesville2/7/19905/30/19901100 contributing and 443 non-contributing buildings, 1contributing and 1 non-contributing archeological
siteOwen, William J., StoreFootville1/1/19895/7/1982 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-132Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-3 Historic Structures and Districts Listed on the NRHP within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site(Sheet 4 of 5)Historic NameCityDate State ListedNRHP Date ListedDistrict DescriptionPangborn, J. L., HouseClinton1/1/19898/1/1985Payne-Craig HouseJanesville1/1/19897/2/1987Pearsons Hall of ScienceBeloit1/1/19896/30/1980Prospect Hill Historic DistrictJanesville7/22/199211/5/1992115 contributing and 12 non-contributing buildingsRandall, Brewster, HouseJanesville1/1/19893/1/1984Rasey HouseBeloit1/1/198912/27/1974Rau, Charles, HouseBeloit1/1/19898/13/1976Richardson-Brinkman Cobblestone HouseClinton1/1/19897/28/1977Richardson, Hamilton, HouseJanesville1/1/19897/17/1978Rindfleisch BuildingBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983Shopiere Congregational
ChurchTurtle (township)1/1/19898/13/1976Slaymaker, Stephen, HouseBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983Smiley, Samuel, HousePlymouth (township)1/1/198910/21/1982Smith, John, HouseClinton1/1/19898/1/1985South Main Street Historic DistrictJanesville4/19/19906/1/199014 contributing buildingsSt. Paul's Episcopal ChurchBeloit1/1/19894/4/1978Stark-Clint House1/1/19899/13/1985Strang, Soloman J., HouseFootville1/1/19895/7/1982Strong BuildingBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983Strunk, John and Eleanor, HouseJanesville7/20/20073/11/2008Tallman HouseJanesville1/1/198910/15/1970Taylor, A. E., HouseClinton1/1/19898/1/1985 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-133Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-3 Historic Structures and Districts Listed on the NRHP within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site(Sheet 5 of 5)
References:
WHS, 2012a; WHS, 2013Historic NameCityDate State ListedNRHP Date ListedDistrict DescriptionTurtleville Iron BridgeTurtle (township)1/1/19899/15/1977West Milwaukee Street Historic DistrictJanesville2/19/19905/17/199054 contributing and 10 non-contributing buildingsWillard, Frances, SchoolhouseJanesville1/1/198910/5/1977Wyman-Rye FarmsteadBradford (township)1/1/198911/7/1977; 11/21/19772 contributing and 3 non-
contributing buildingsYates, Florence, HouseBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-134Rev. 019.3.7SOCIOECONOMICSThis subsection characterizes the current socioeconomic conditions within the region of influence (ROI) surrounding the SHINE site. It provides the basis for assessing potential socioeconomic impacts as a result of the construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Janesville site. The socioeconomic characterization addresses demographics (resident and transient population growth rates, race and ethnicity), community characteristics (the economy, housing availability, public services, local transportation), and tax payment information. The socioeconomic characterization is presented on a spatial and temporal (demography) basis. The appropriate nature and extent of socioeconomic characterization is described in the Final ISG Augmenting NUREG-1537, Part 1, Section 19.3.7, that requires the applicant or licensee to briefly describe socioeconomic conditions in the region (affected counties) around the proposed site, including sufficient detail to permit the assessment and evaluation of impacts from the proposed action. Geographic Area of AnalysisFor this assessment, the ROI has been established as the appropriate geographic area of analysis to support the characterization of socioeconomic baselines. The ROI corresponds to the area that incurs the greatest stresses to community services resulting from the SHINE project's demand for construction/operations workers.For purposes of demographic and community characteristics analysis, the ROI is considered to correspond to the residential distribution of the majority of the construction and operational workforces for the SHINE facility. As shown in Table 19.3.7-1, approximately 83percent of the total labor force of Rock County, Wisconsin resides within Rock County. Approximately 15 percent out of the remaining 17percent of the Rock County labor force commutes from counties adjacent to Rock County, or very nearly adjacent, including Winnebago County in Illinois (6.0percent); and Dane County (2.9percent), Walworth County (2.1percent), Green County (1.9percent), and Jefferson County (1.6percent) in Wisconsin. This suggests that the Rock County resident population contains a large workforce that is capable of supporting both construction and operation of the SHINE facility. Table 19.3.7-2 provides a summary of the workforce of Rock County by labor type specific to the occupation categories which are projected to require 20 or more employees at peak times in the construction schedule and subsequent operational phase. This table demonstrates that the workforce of the county is substantial in most categories of projected need for construction labor force and is likely to support the SHINE project. Also demonstrated is the fact that Rock County has a substantial labor force in the areas of industrial process operations, technical support and production management. Available data support the assumption that the local resident labor force of Rock County is capable to meet much of the demand of the SHINE project. Therefore, Rock County, WI is determined to represent the socioeconomic ROI and serves as the basis for assessment of potential project effects from construction and operation.19.3.7.1DemographyThe demography statistics within the ROI are characterized in the following subsections. Within the ROI, there are two municipalities of greater than 25,000 population: Janesville and Beloit. Therefore, demographic analysis includes statistics for these municipalities in addition to Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-135Rev. 0statistics for the overall ROI. This characterization provides a description of the resident population and includes resident population from the 2000 U.S. Census Bureau (USCB), resident population from the 2010 USCB, and population projection through 2055.Population projections at the county level are provided through 2055 to support the assessment of potential effects during the period of the facility's operational license (30 years) and decommissioning. The initial date of operation is anticipated to be 2016. Population projections presented in this subsection are based on published county population projections through the year 2035 and are extended through the year 2055. 19.3.7.1.1Resident Population19.3.7.1.1.1Resident Population of Communities in ROI The resident population of the ROI and its 29 municipalities is 160,331. Between 2000 and 2010, the county experienced a 5.3percent increase in population. During the same period, the city of Janesville, which is the municipality having the largest population in Rock County, grew 6.9percent from a population of 59,498 in 2000 to 63,575 in 2010. The city of Beloit has the second greatest population within Rock County with a population of 36,966 (USCB, 2010c). Other municipalities having a population exceeding 5,000 include the town of Beloit, Edgerton, Evansville, and Milton. All other municipalities have population levels less than 5,000 with the majority being less than 2,000 (Table19.3.7-3). The municipalities in Rock County are shown on Figure 19.3.7-1.19.3.7.1.1.2ROI Resident Population Growth ProjectionThe SHINE Operating License is expected to extend to year 2046. Population projections beyond 2035 are based on extrapolation of the county-specific growth rate of 5 percent that is the resulting equivalent rate of growth projected between 2025 and 2035 based on published projections. The resulting projections for 2045 and 2055 are shown in Table 19.3.7-4. Population projections published by Rock County (Rock County, 2009) anticipate that the county's population will increase by 22,313 persons between 2010 and 2035. As shown in Table19.3.7-4, the projected population for the year 2025 is 174,018 and the projected population for the year 2035 is 182,644. The projected growth rate for this 10-year time period equates to 4.96 percent. Extrapolation of this growth rate for two additional 10-year periods yields population projections of 191,703 for the year 2045 and 201,212 for the year 2055. 19.3.7.1.1.3Transient Population within 5 mi. (8 km)Transient population within the 5-mi. (8-km) area around the SHINE site has been estimated. This subsection establishes an estimate of transient population within 5mi. (8km) from the SHINE site.Significant sources of transient population in the 5-mi. (8-km) area around the SHINE site include major employers, schools (including elementary, middle, and high schools, colleges and universities), recreation areas, medical facilities, lodging facilities, and the SWRA. Estimation of transient populations within a given area may vary according to the time spent in the area Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-136Rev. 0(duration). This estimate is based on raw transient population estimates weighted according to the length of time each transient population group is expected to be in the area as follows:*Employer and school estimates x 0.27, which assumes that each employee or student is present at the facility 9 hours per day and 5 days per week.*Recreation area estimates x 0.33, which assumes that each daily visitor is present at the recreation area 8 hours per day.*SWRA estimates (passengers and crew) x 0.0833, which assumes that each person is present for 2 hours for each takeoff or landing.*Medical facilities and lodging facilities were not multiplied by a weighting factor; the assumption is that each bed at a medical facility and each room in a lodging facility is occupied 24 hours per day and 7 days per week.The 2010 weighted transient population estimate is provided in Table 19.3.7-5. Schools and major employers account for the majority of the transients within the 5-mi. (8-km) area.19.3.7.1.1.4Race and Ethnicity of the Resident Population in the ROIRace and ethnicity information is described for Rock County and for major population centers having a resident population exceeding 25,000. Rock County's population is predominantly white (87.6percent). The county population in 2010 is slightly more diverse overall when compared to 2000 USCB data. In 2000, the county's white population was 91.0percent, and the percentages of Black or African American population (4.6percent) and population classified by the USCB as "Some Other Race" (1.8percent) were slightly less than 2010 USCB numbers (5.0percent and 3.7percent, respectively). Comparative data for persons of Hispanic origin indicate a growth rate that is higher than the statewide rate of growth but is consistent with the national trend. In 2000, the percentage of Rock County's total population that was classified as Hispanic or Latino was 3.9percent and in 2010, the percentage increased to 7.6percent (Table 19.3.7-6). The trends in the city of Janesville are similar to countywide trends, with a slightly more diverse population in 2010 than in 2000 due in part to increases of the Hispanic or Latino population (2.6percent of the total population in 2000, compared to 5.4 percent in 2010). In addition, the percentage of Janesville's population that is Black or African American doubled from 2000 to 2010 (1.3 percent to 2.6 percent), and the population classified as "Some Other Race" also grew, from 1.0 percent to 2.0 percent of the overall population. While there is increased diversity, approximately 92 percent of the Janesville population is white (see Table 19.3.7-6). The city of Beloit is more diverse in comparison with Janesville and Rock County's overall population. Beloit's population is approximately 69percent white, a reduction from 75.6percent in 2000. The City's gains in Hispanic or Latino population and population classified as "Some Other Race" are much more significant than in Janesville, Rock County, the state, and the nation. The percentage of "Some Other Race" and Hispanic populations increased in the city of Beloit from 4.6 percent to 10.0 percent and from 9.1 percent to 17.1percent, respectively (seeTable19.3.7-6).Total minority population percentage for a defined population reflects minority racial status in conjunction with Hispanic or Latino ethnicity. The total minority population percentage is highest Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-137Rev. 0in Beloit, and has increased from 28.1 percent in 2000 to 36.5 percent in 2010. This rate of increase is over twice the statewide rate of increase, and significantly greater than the national rate of increase. Janesville saw total minority population grow at approximately the same rate as the national rate of increase, reaching 11.2 percent in 2010, up from 6.1 percent in 2000. Rock County's total minority population increase, from 10.8 percent in 2000 to 15.5 percent in 2010, was less than the national rate of increase, but greater than that for the State of Wisconsin (seeTable 19.3.7-6).19.3.7.2Community CharacteristicsThe term "community characteristics" is used to describe those socioeconomic attributes that pertain to the local economy, local housing statistics, public services, infrastructure including major transportation facilities, and tax payment information. The data presented are at the level of the ROI with the exception of descriptions of some transportation infrastructure such as highways and railroads that are regional and trans-regional in nature. 19.3.7.2.1EconomyThe economy of the ROI has experienced notable change in recent years. Economic data presented in this subsection include key economic indicators and address the following economic characteristics within the ROI:*Income
- Labor force*Unemployment*Poverty rates19.3.7.2.1.1Income (Population and Household)The per capita income for the ROI is $23,209, which is almost equal to that for the city of Janesville ($23,300) but less than both the statewide ($26,279) and national ($26,942) averages. The per capita income for the city of Beloit ($17,180) is markedly lower. Compared to the 2000 to 2010 rates of change for the state and the nation, the ROI, Janesville, and Beloit experienced much more notable decreases in per capita income from 2000 levels when adjusted for inflation (decreases of 12.3 percent, 17.2percent, and 19.8 percent, respectively). Comparative state and national numbers reflect a more moderate decrease in per capita income (decreases of 2.4percent and 1.4percent, respectively) (Table19.3.7-7). Median household income in the ROI is $49,144, which represents a 14.8percent decline from 2000 when adjusted for inflation. The 2010 median household income for Janesville ($48,257) is slightly less than the ROI, although the city's rate of change from 2000 to 2010 is greater, a 17.1percent decline. The city of Beloit's median household income is comparatively lower at $37,430, which is an 18.8percent decline from 2000 when adjusted for inflation. The 2000 ROI median household income was greater than state and national levels. The 2010 USCB data show that the ROI's median household income ($49,144) is less than the state ($50,814) and the nation ($51,222), although the difference is not as great as that for per capita income levels (seeTable 19.3.7-7).
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-138Rev. 019.3.7.2.1.2Labor Force and UnemploymentThe 2012 civilian labor force in Rock County is 78,132, which represents a 5.2percent decrease from the total labor force in 2002. In contrast, the state of Wisconsin and national labor force have increased over this same time period, at 1percent and 6.8percent, respectively. Although the ROI labor force has been decreasing since 2006, unemployment rates are consistently higher than the statewide total number and national unemployment rates (Table19.3.7-8). This can be attributed mostly to layoffs by GM at its Janesville plant beginning in 2006, followed by the plant's closure in 2008. Overall, the GM plant closure resulted in the elimination of approximately 4,700 jobs, and subsequent closures of local automotive suppliers resulted in additional job losses (SWWDB, 2009). At the ROI, state, and national levels, the number of unemployed workers has increased significantly over a 10-year period (change of 43.3percent for county, 43.5percent for the state, and 51.3 percent for the nation); however, the unemployment rates are much higher for the ROI, peaking at 12.8 percent in 2009 compared to 8.7 percent for the state and 9.3 percent for the nation. The most current 2012 data available show a 9.2 percent unemployment rate for the ROI, a decrease compared with the previous 3 years, but higher than both the state (7.5percent) and the national unemployment rate (8.2percent) (seeTable19.3.7-8).As evidenced by the 2008 GM plant closure, a contributing factor to the higher unemployment rate in the ROI is the decline of its manufacturing base. In 2000, manufacturing was the largest employment category in the ROI (29.7 percent of total jobs in the ROI), followed by education and health services (18.6 percent) and retail trade (12.1 percent). These industry rankings are consistent with state data for 2000 (22.2 percent, 20 percent, and 11.6percent, respectively), although in the ROI a larger percentage of employment was manufacturing-based. Since 2000, the number of manufacturing employees in the ROI has decreased by 62.9percent, and the largest employer is now the education and health services industry. Manufacturing is estimated to currently comprise 13.9percent of the ROI's total jobs, compared to 16.3 percent of total jobs at the state level. Statewide there has been a significant decrease in manufacturing employment (declined by 27.1percent); however, the manufacturing industry remains the largest employer in the state. Other industries (retail trade, transportation/warehousing/utilities, information, finance/ insurance/real estate, and education and health services) also experienced employment losses at both the ROI and state level, and the rate of decline in employment for these industries is greater for the ROI than statewide. Both the ROI and statewide levels of employment in construction, mining, and natural resources declined based on comparative analysis of the 2012 estimates with 2000 data (declines of 65.1percent and 65.4percent, respectively) (Table19.3.7-9). The actual change is likely not as high, however, due to the fact that the construction, mining, and natural resources category in 2000 included farm employment (under agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting, and mining), whereas the 2012 data exclude farming. The 2012 data also do not identify a stand-alone category of construction, making it difficult to calculate the extent to which construction employment has decreased.Industry sectors in the ROI that have experienced growth are public administration (309.7percent increase from 2000), wholesale trade (31.2percent increase), other services except public administration (21.1percent increase), professional and business services (15.5percent increase), and leisure and hospitality (10.4percent increase) (Table 19.3.7-9). The top 10 employers in Rock County provide an illustration of the diversity of the local economy, although manufacturing represents the smallest share of the individuals employed by the largest employers (Table 19.3.7-10). Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-139Rev. 0Based on comparison with the overall ROI (Rock County) employed labor force of 70,949 (seeTable19.3.7-8), the combined employment of the top 10 employers accounts for approximately 18percent of the total ROI employment (BLS, 2012a; Rock County Development Alliance, 2011).As shown in Table 19.3.7-10, the top employers in the city of Janesville include seven employers with greater than 500 employees: Mercy Health System, Janesville School District, Rock County Government, Wal-Mart/Sam's Club, GHC Specialty Brands, Blackhawk Technical College, and Woodman's Food Market, Inc. These largest employers in Janesville are in the medical, government, and retail/wholesale industries; none within the manufacturing sector. The largest manufacturing sector employers in Janesville are Seneca Foods Corporation, SSI Technologies, Inc., Prent Corporation, Simmons and HUFCOR, Inc. (Rock County Development Alliance,2011).19.3.7.2.1.3Poverty RatesIn 2000, poverty rates for individuals (7.3 percent) and families (5.1 percent) in the ROI were less than rates for both the state (8.7 percent for individuals and 5.6 percent for families) and the nation (12.4 percent and 9.2 percent). Compared to the ROI, state, and nation, poverty rates for individuals and families were lower in the city of Janesville (6.5 percent and 4.3 percent) and higher in the city of Beloit (12.5 percent and 9.6 percent). In 2010, the percent of individuals (12.8percent) and families (9.4percent) in the ROI living below the USCB poverty threshold was greater than the comparable rates for the state of Wisconsin (12.1percent and 8.1percent) and less than those for the nation (14.4percent and 10.5percent) (Table 19.3.7-11). While a larger percentage of individuals and families in the ROI, Janesville, Beloit, statewide, and nationwide now live below the poverty threshold than was the case in 2000, the cities of Janesville and Beloit experienced more marked increases in poverty between 2000 and 2010. In Janesville, the percent of individuals and families living below the poverty threshold more than doubled over 10years from 6.5 percent to 13.6 percent (individuals) and 4.3 percent to 10.4 percent (families). Poverty in Beloit in this same 10-year period also increased notably, with almost a quarter of individuals living below the poverty threshold (up from 12.5 percent in 2000), and 18 percent of families living below the poverty threshold, compared to 9.6 percent in 2000. The ROI experienced greater increases in poverty relative to the state and the nation, with reported rates of 7.3percent and 5.1percent (individuals and families) in 2000 that increased to 12.8percent and 9.4percent, respectively, in 2010 (see Table 19.3.7-11).19.3.7.2.2Housing Based on 2010 USCB data, the total number of housing units in the ROI is 68,392 with 62,406 occupied units and 5,986 vacant units. Additionally, the vacancy rate is 8.8percent, which is an increase from 5.7percent in 2000. The ROI housing vacancy rates are slightly higher than those for Janesville, which increased from 4.7 percent in 2000 to 7.9percent in 2010. The city of Beloit's vacancy rate (11.4 percent) is higher than vacancy rates in Janesville and the ROI. Beloit's vacancy rate in 2000 was 6.3 percent. Vacancy rates have also increased statewide in Wisconsin and nationally. The current vacancy rate of 8.8 percent in the ROI is less than that for the state (12.6percent) and the nation (12.7percent) (Table19.3.7-12). The 2010 median home value in the ROI is $140,300, which is less than the state and the national median home value ($171,000 and $187,500, respectively). Median home values in the Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-140Rev. 0cities of Janesville ($135,400) and Beloit ($90,500) are lower than the median home value in the ROI. When accounting for inflation, the ROI median home value increased by 12.8percent between 2000 and 2010, compared to 20.4percent increase for the state of Wisconsin and 23.8percent increase at the national level. These increases are significantly higher than those for Janesville and Beloit, which are 6.9 percent and 4.8 percent, respectively (seeTable19.3.7-12).19.3.7.2.3Transportation19.3.7.2.3.1Roads and Highways Major highways in the ROI and in proximity to the SHINE site are shown on Figures 19.3.7-2 and 19.3.7-3, respectively. Within the Rock County, there are three major interstate highways and several U.S. Highways (see Figure 19.3.7-2): *I-39
- I-43
- I-90 I-39 and I-90 share common pavement (signed as I-39/90) across the length of the county.
Additionally, Rock County is served by Interstate Highway 43 (I-43), which begins in Beloit and extends northeasterly toward Milwaukee and then north to Green Bay. In relation to the site,I-39/90 is located 2.2 mi. (3.5 km) to the east and I-43 is located approximately 6.9mi. (11.1km) to the southeast.The U.S. highways include US 14 and US 51. US 14 generally extends from east to west, whereas US 51 is oriented north to south. Both highways pass through Janesville in central Rock County.From the site, I-39/90 is accessible via US 51 and SH 11. Major highways/roadways and their pavement condition are listed below.*US 51, a minor arterial that is oriented north-south along the west side of the site is in good condition.*SH 11, a major collector that extends east-west just north of the site is in good condition. *I-39/90, a principal arterial that is oriented north-south about 2.2 mi. (3.5 km) east of the site, is in fair condition.*Town Line Road, a major collector that runs east-west about 2.7 mi. (4.3 km) south of the site, is in good condition.Traffic volumes, obtained from the Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WisDOT), are for 2010 and are listed below (WisDOT, 2010):*I-39/90 - 45,700 vehicles per day (vpd), south of SH 11
- I-39/90 - 50,400 vpd, north of SH 11
- US 51 - 9,000 vpd, south of SH 11*SH 11 - 8,400 vpd, east of US 51*SH 11 - 12,400 vpd, west of I-39/90 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-141Rev. 0*Town Line Road - 3,400 vpd, east of US 5119.3.7.2.3.2Transit Public transportation in the city of Janesville is provided by the Janesville Transit System, which operates a regular bus service Monday through Saturday on six routes inside Janesville (City of Janesville, 2012b). Additionally, the Beloit-Janesville Express operates on weekdays between the two cities. The route of the Beloit-Janesville Express passes directly to the west of the SHINE site on US 51. The nearest stops along this route are at Kellogg Avenue to the north and at Sunny Lane to the south (City of Janesville, 2012b). The Kellogg Avenue Route extends south from the Janesville Transfer Center to Kellogg Avenue, which is approximately 2.3 mi. (3.7 km) north of the SHINE site (City of Janesville, 2012c).19.3.7.2.3.3RailThe nearest railroad to the SHINE site is the Union Pacific Railroad, which is approximately 1.6mi. (2.6km) northeast of the site and is oriented in a northwest-to-southeast direction. The Union Pacific Railroad manages a rail yard just north of SH 11 and west of I-39/90 (see Figure19.3.7-3). No passenger rail service is currently available in Janesville (Vandewalle & Associates, 2009a). There is no direct access to rail from the site.19.3.7.2.3.4AirSWRA is a general aviation airport immediately west of the SHINE site off of US 51. The airport has three paved runways. The runways have a length of 7300 ft. (2225 m), 6701 ft. (2042 m), and 5,000 ft. (1524 m) long. The airport has more than 50,000 operations per year (landings and take-offs) and there are 94 aircraft based at the airport (Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, 2012b). The airport recently began a project to modernize, enlarge and increase the functionality of the 50-year old terminal building. Phase one of this four-phase project began in May 2012 at a cost of $1.46 million. This last phase of construction is expected to be complete by 2014/2015 (Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, 2012c).19.3.7.2.4Tax Payment InformationThe construction and operation of the SHINE facility results in the payment of taxes to political jurisdictions (Table 19.3.7-13). It is probable, over the course of construction and operation, that tax payments are directly or indirectly made by SHINE to many different jurisdictions, including multiple states, due to the likelihood that some materials used for construction and operational purposes are purchased from suppliers in other states where sales taxes are applied. As discussed in Subsection 19.3.7, it is assumed that the majority of the SHINE workforce resides within the ROI (Rock County). This includes current residents of Rock County who have been contributing to the local tax base as well as some individuals and families who are anticipated to relocate to Rock County and add to the local tax base. Thus the effects of tax payments associated with development and operation of the SHINE plant are expected to be greatest on the city of Janesville, Janesville School District, and Rock County, as well as the state of Wisconsin. The tax rates for these jurisdictions are discussed below.The state of Wisconsin has a flat corporate tax rate of 7.9 percent. Wisconsin assesses a variable tax rate on earned income. The income tax rate increases from 4.6 to 7.75percent depending on income level and marital status. Wisconsin has a statewide sales tax rate of Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-142Rev. 05percent. An additional 0.5 percent is added by Rock County as local sales tax. Property tax on owned property is assessed at the county and municipal levels. The property tax rates in Rock County vary among local school districts. Within the Janesville School District in the city of Janesville, the net property tax rate in 2011 was $25.0148 per $1,000 of assessed value. Of this net property tax rate, $6.4427 per $1,000 is allocated for the Rock County government, $7.0402 per $1,000 is allocated for the city of Janesville government (City of Janesville, 2012d), $10.1902 is allocated for the Board of Education, $1.8275 per $1,000 is allocated for the Blackhawk Technical College, $0.8612 per $1,000 is allocated for the Public Library System, $0.1738 per $1,000 is allocated for the state of Wisconsin, and a reduction of $1.5208 per $1,000 is applied due to state of Wisconsin tax credit. The SHINE site is located within the Janesville School District in the city of Janesville. 19.3.7.2.5Public ServicesThis subsection addresses the following public services within the ROI:*Public Water Supply and Wastewater Systems *Local Public Schools
- Public Recreat ional Facilities19.3.7.2.5.1Public Water Supply and Wastewater SystemsPublic Water SuppliesThis subsection provides a characterization of the existing public water supplies and waste water treatment systems within the ROI. All public water supplies in Rock County are from groundwater. Table 19.3.7-14 lists the nine major municipal water suppliers that each serve communities in Rock County. Six of the nine municipal water systems in Rock County have a wellhead protection plan, including Clinton, Evansville, Footville, Janesville, Milton, and Orfordville. Wellhead protection ordinances are in place for only Evansville and Janesville (USGS, 2007).The water systems serving the largest populations are those in Beloit and Janesville. In addition to the public water systems, numerous private wells provide drinking water to residents not connected to municipal water supplies. The Janesville Water Utility provides water supply for both public drinking water and for fire protection utilizing eight wells. The water supply system for the city of Janesville includes two water storage reservoirs and one water tower. According to the city of Janesville, the total pumping capacity of its eight groundwater wells is 29 Mgd (109.8 Mld). Average water usage is about 11 Mgd (41.6 Mld). Accordingly, the excess capacity of the Janesville water supply system is approximately 18 Mgd (68.1 Mld). Public water supplies within Wisconsin are monitored to ensure public health protection, whereas individual well owners are responsible for monitoring and testing private wells. The public water use index for Rock County is 80 (Table 19.3.7-15), which estimates how many people are served by public water supplies. A number greater than 50 means more people are served by public water versus private wells.
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-143Rev. 0Wastewater Treatment SystemsWaste water treatment is provided by local jurisdictions. Table 19.3.7-16 details public waste water treatment systems, their permitted capacities, and their average daily usage for each community in Rock County. Sewage within the city of Janesville is collected from about 300mi. (483km) of sewer main, and treated at a plant off Afton Road, near the City's south- west corner. The treatment plant has an average design peak flow of 25 Mgd (94.6 Mld). The average daily discharge flow is 13 Mgd (49.2 Mld). Accordingly, the excess capacity of the Janesville wastewater treatment system is approximately 12 Mgd (45.4 Mld) (Vandewalle & Associates, 2009a). 19.3.7.2.5.2Local Public SchoolsRock County is served by eight local public school districts, in addition to one state of Wisconsin facility (Table 19.3.7-17). Current student enrollment is 27,807. The Janesville School District has an enrollment of 10,325. Collectively, the school districts operate 39elementary schools, 11middle schools, and 15 high schools. Three additional schools are classified as elementary/, providing classes from kindergarten or first grade through 12 th grade (DPI, 2012). The closest public schools to the SHINE site, defined as those within 2.5 mi. (4 km), are units of the Janesville School district and are located to the north of the SHINE site: Janesville Academy for International Studies (20 enrollment), Jackson Elementary School (325 enrollment), Lincoln Elementary School (397 enrollment), and Edison Middle School (724 enrollment). Janesville Academy for International Studies is located at 2909Kellogg Avenue, Jackson Elementary School is located at 441 West Burbank Avenue, Lincoln Elementary School is located at 1821 Conde Street, and Edison Middle School is located at 1649 South Chatham Street (Janesville School District, 2012).Other educational institutions are located in the vicinity of the SHINE site. Private schools located within 2.5 mi. (4 km) of the SHINE site include Rock County Christian School (111enrollment), and Oakhill Christian School (69 enrollment). Higher education institutions located within 2.5 mi. (4 km) of the SHINE site include Blackhawk Technical College (Janesville Aviation Center and Janesville Central Campus), and the University of Wisconsin-Rock County.19.3.7.2.5.3Public Recreational FacilitiesFigure 19.3.7-4 and Table 19.3.7-18 identify the major recreational facilities within the ROI and provide information relative to their distance from the SHINE site. Rock County owns and maintains 888.2 ac. (359.4 ha) of park space (Design Perspectives Inc., 2009). The county parks are classified as regional parks, community parks, and trails. Other community and regional recreational facilities in the county are owned and maintained by the city of Janesville and the city of Beloit. Janesville maintains 64 improved parks, 10 of which are regional or community parks (City of Janesville, 2012f). Beloit's park system is comprised of 42 parks, including one regional park and four community parks (Vandewalle & Associates, 2006). The WDNR owns and maintains 17,000 ac. (6879.7 ha) of State Wildlife Areas, which are open to the public for recreational use, including seasonal hunting. As is illustrated in Figure 19.3.7-4, each of the State Wildlife Areas is located a minimum of 10mi. (16km) from the SHINE site (WDNR, 2009). Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-144Rev. 0Regional and community parks in the Rock County, Janesville, and Beloit park systems are identified on Table 19.3.7-18 and shown on Figure 19.3.7-4. Included is indication of the distance from each park to the SHINE site and the recreational purpose of each park in terms of active (recreation facilities such as ball fields and recreation centers) or passive (recreation facilities such as trails and picnic facilities). One park, Airport Park, is located within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the SHINE site. It is a two-acre (0.8-ha) passive use park with picnic tables, benches, and a picnic shelter (Design Perspectives Inc., 2009). Eight parks are located at distances between 1mi. and 5 mi. (1.6km and 8 km) from the SHINE site; they include a mix of passive and active recreational amenities (Table 19.3.7-18). Trails in the area of the SHINE site are primarily for recreational use. The city of Janesville manages the South Connector Trail, a multi-use trail that runs adjacent to the north of, and parallel to, SH 11 from west of the Rock River eastward to near the Union Pacific Railroad. There are no direct trail connections or marked bike routes to the SHINE site. Rock County also maintains 226 mi. (364 km) of snowmobile trails, with the nearest snowmobile trail located approximately 2.4 mi. (3.9 km) south of the site. Though not classified as public recreational facilities, there are two private golf facilities within the immediate area of the SHINE site. Glen Erin Golf Course (1417 W. Airport Road) is located immediately southwest of the site (adjacent to the south of SWRA), and Mid City Golf Range (4337 S. US 51) is located immediately south of the site. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-145Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-1 Rock County Labor Force Distribution by County of Employee ResidenceCounty of Employee ResidenceStateRock County Labor ForceNumberPercentRock CountyWI56,85082.9%Winnebago CountyIL4,0956.0%Dane CountyWI1,9902.9% Walworth CountyWI1,4552.1%Green CountyWI1,3251.9%Jefferson CountyWI1,0901.6% Milwaukee CountyWI2650.4%Boone CountyIL2500.4%Stephenson CountyIL850.1%
Reference:
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), 2012 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-146Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-2 Comparison of Estimated Major SHINE Labor Force Needs with Estimated Rock County Available Work ForceOccupationSHINE Peak Need(a)Estimate of Labor Force Availability in Rock County(b)Construction Phase Boilermaker24No DataCarpenter 45360Electrician55190Ironworker50No DataLaborer70340Equipment Operator/Eng. 26130Plumber/Pipefitter 7070Sheet Metal Worker 3080(c)Construction Supervisor 20160Total Construction Labor Force(d)420Operational PhaseOperation Support40340 first-line supervisors of production and operating workers Productions/Operations37110 industrial production managers Tech Support (e)40500 maintenance, 90 engineers, 2,000 craftspeopleTotal Operational Labor Force(d)150b) Rock County labor force estimate from BLS, 2011 unless otherwise notedc) Labor force estimates from BLS, 2009; no data available for 2011 d) SHINE total labor force estimate at peak month includes all labor categories e) Tech support subcategories include: maintenance (machinery maintenance workers and general maintenance and repair workers), engineers (industrial engineers and mechanical drafters), and craftspeople (janitors and cleaners, landscaping and groundskeepers, electricians, plumbers and pipefitters, industrial
References:
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), 2009 and BLS, 2011 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-147Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-3 Population and Growth Rates of Municipalities within Rock CountyMunicipalityPopulation 2000Population2010Observed Growth Rate (%)TownAvon5866083.8%Beloit 7,0387,6628.9%Bradford 1,0071,12111.3%Center1,0051,0666.1%Clinton8939304.1%Fulton 3,1583,2523.0%Harmony2,3512,5699.3%Janesville3,7503,434-8.4%Johnstown802778-3.0%La Prairie 929834-10.2%Lima1,3121,280-2.4%Magnolia 854767-10.2%Milton2,8442,9232.8%Newark 1,5711,541-1.9%Plymouth1,2701,235-2.8%Porter9259452.2%Rock3,3383,196-4.3%Spring Valley813746-8.2%Turtle2,4442,388-2.3%Union1,8602,09912.8%VillageClinton 2,1622,154-0.4%Footville 7888082.5%Orfordville 1,2721,44213.4%CityBeloit 35,77536,9663.3%Broadhead(a)N/A90Edgerton4,8915,3649.7%Evansville 4,0395,01224.1%Janesville 59,49863,5756.9%Milton5,1325,5468.1%Total Rock County152,307160,3315.3%a) 2000 data for Broadhead, Rock County is unavailable. The majority of Broadhead is located in Green County, WI.
References:
USCB, 2000a; USCB, 2010c Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-148Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-4 Resident Population Distribution, Growth Rates, and Projections for Rock CountyCountyPopulationProjected Population (a)200020102000-2010 Growth Rate (%)201520252035204520552015-2055 Projected Growth Rate (%)Rock County152,307160,3315.3165,354174,018182,644191,703201,21221.7a) The growth rate of 4.96 percent per ten year time period, calculated based on the projected ten year growth from 2025 and 2035 published projections, is extrapolated to determine projections for the years 2045 and 2055
References:
Rock County, 2009; USCB, 2000a; and USCB, 2010d Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-149Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-5 Estimated Transient Population within 5 mi. (8 km) of the SHINE Site (2010)Transient SourceNumber of FacilitiesRaw Population EstimateWeighted Population EstimateMajor Employers 149,8412,657Schools, Colleges, Universityies3214,8604,014Recreation Areas431,366451Medical Facilities21717717 Lodging Facilities3149149 Total11326,933 8,073(a)a)Total Weighted Population Estimate includes passengers, crew, and all employees of various companies at the SWRA which are not included in any individual transient source subtotal. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-150Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-6 Demographic (Race and Ethnicity) Characteristics of Rock CountyLocationYear Total PopulationPopulation by Race (%)Persons of Hispanic OriginWhiteMinority Population (including Hispanic Black or African AmericanAmerican Indian and Alaska NativeAsianNative Hawaiian and Other Pacific IslanderSome Other RaceCity of Janesville200059,49895.36.11.30.21.0012.6201063,57591.711.22.60.31.3025.4% Change6.9-3.65.11.30.10.3012.8City of Beloit200035,77575.628.115.40.41.20.14.69.1201036,96668.936.515.10.41.101017.1% Change3.3-6.78.4-0.30-0.1-0.15.48 Rock County 2000152,30791.010.84.60.30.801.83.92010160,33187.615.55.00.31.003.77.6% Change5.3-3.44.70.400.201.93.7State of WI20005,363,67588.912.75.70.91.701.63.6 20105,686,98686.216.76.31.02.302.45.9% Change6.0-2.74.00.60.10.600.82.3 Nation2000281,421,90675.130.912.30.93.60.15.512.5 2010308,745,53872.436.312.60.94.80.26.216.3% Change9.7-2.75.40.301.20.10.73.8
References:
USCB, 2000a and 2010a Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-151Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-7 Median Household and Per Capita Income Levels within RockCountyIncome2000 (a)2010% ChangeMedian Household City of Janesville$58,200$48,257-17.1City of Beloit$46,111$37,430-18.8Rock County$57,638$49,144-14.8State of WI$55,452$50,814-8.4Nation$53,177$51,222-3.7Per Capita City of Janesville$28,142$23,300-17.2City of Beloit$21,416$17,180-19.8Rock County$26,459$23,209-12.3State of WI$26,935$26,279-2.4Nation$27,336$26,942-1.4a)Adjusted for inflation to year 2010 dollars based on the BLS Consumer Price Index Inflation Calculator
References:
USCB, 2008-2010; USCB, 2000b; BLS, 2012b Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-152Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-8 Civilian Labor Force and Unemployment Rates within Rock County, 2002-201220022003200420052006200720082009201020112012 (a)Growth Rate (%)2002-12Rock CountyLabor Force82,43382,48882,72983,60884,66484,61983,45982,87480,96578,68778,132-5.2Employed77,42277,39178,07178,66580,41079,97978,28372,27471,89171,22370,949-8.4Unemployed5,0115,0974,6584,9434,2544,6405,17610,6009,0747,4647,18343.3 Unemployment Rate (%)6.16.25.65.95.05.56.212.811.29.59.2State of WisconsinLabor Force3,021,0683,033,6743,020,4023,035,8083,077,0963,096,9263,089,3763,115,3573,082,6763,062,2593,049,7021.0Employed2,860,9152,862,5872,868,3762,890,1172,932,4822,948,7252,939,7732,842,9162,821,8032,833,4312,819,901-1.4Unemployed160,153171,087152,026145,691144,614148,201149,603272,441260,873228,828229,80143.5Unemployment Rate (%)5.35.65.04.84.74.84.88.78.57.57.5United StatesLabor Force(b)144,863146,510147,401149,320151,428153,124154,287154,142153,889153,617154,7076.8Employed(b)136,485137,736139,252141,730144,427146,047145,362139,877139,064139,869142,0344.1Unemployed(b)8,3788,7748,1497,5917,0017,0788,92414,26514,82513,74712,67351.3Unemployment Rate (%)5.86.05.55.14.64.65.89.39.68.98.2a) Through March 2012. b) Numbers in thousands
Reference:
BLS, 2012a Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-153Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-9 Employment by Industry within Rock CountyEmployment Industry20002012(a)2000-2012 Change (%)NumberPercentNumberPercentRock CountyConstruction, Mining and Natural Resources (b)5,7387.52,0003.3-65.1Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting, and Mining 1,3141.7No dataNo data--Construction 4,4245.8No dataNo data--Manufacturing 22,64029.78,400 13.9-62.9Wholesale Trade2,5923.43,4005.631.2Retail Trade 9,27012.18,300 13.8-10.5Transportation, Warehousing, Utilities3,4994.62,6004.3-25.7Information 1,4972.01,1001.8-26.5Finance, Insurance, Real Estate3,0294.02,0003.3-34.0Professional and Business Services 3,7244.94,3007.115.5Education and Health Services14,19718.610,400 17.2-26.7Leisure and Hospitality5,1626.85,7009.510.4Other Services (except Public Administration) 2,8893.83,5005.821.1Public Administration 2,0992.78,60014.3309.7State of Wisconsin Construction, Mining and Natural Resources (b)237,0438.781,9003.0-65.4Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting, and Mining 75,4182.8No dataNo dataConstruction161,6255.9No dataNo dataManufacturing606,84522.2442,300 16.3-27.1Wholesale Trade 87,9793.2115,7004.331.5Retail Trade317,88111.6287,400 10.6-9.6Transportation, Warehousing, Utilities123,6574.597,4003.6-21.2Information 60,1422.246,0001.7-23.5Finance, Insurance, Real Estate168,0606.1155,5005.7-7.5Professional and Business Services179,5036.6280,900 10.456.5Education and Health Servic es548,11120.0416,000 15.3-24.1Leisure and Hospitality198,5287.3235,6008.718.7Other Services (except Public Administration)111,0284.1134,1004.920.8Public Administration 96,1483.5420,100 15.5336.9a) Through April 2012b) 2012 figures reflect non-farm employment and do not isolate "construction," contrasted to 2000 data.
References:
USCB, 2000b; Department of Workforce Development (DWD), 2012 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-154Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-10 Top 10 Employers within the ROI (Rock County), City of JanesvilleEmployerNumber of EmployeesPercentProduct/ServiceTop 10 Employers within Rock CountyMercy Health System (a)3,68729.0Medical ServicesBeloit Health System 1,48611.7Medical ServicesJanesville School District 1,36810.8Public EducationRock County 1,1709.2GovernmentHendricks Holdings (ABC et. al.) 8576.7Wholesale DistributorBeloit School District 8496.7Public EducationWal-Mart/Sam's Club(a)8556.7RetailGHC Specialty Brands 8436.6Wholesale DistributorBlackhawk Technical College 8256.5Educational Services Kerry Americas(a)7596.0Food ProductsTotal12,699100.0Top 10 Employers within the City of JanesvilleMercy Health System (a)3,68734.8Medical ServicesJanesville School District 1,36812.9Public EducationRock County 1,17011.1GovernmentWal-Mart/Sam's Club(a)8558.1RetailGHC Specialty Brands 8438.0Wholesale DistributionBlackhawk Technical College 8257.8Public EducationWoodman's Food Market, Inc.5415.1RetailLemans Corporation4504.3Wholesale DistributionJ.P. Cullen & Sons4324.1ConstructionSeneca Foods Corporation4153.9Food ProcessingTotal10,586100.0Top 5 Manufacturing Sector Employers within the City of JanesvilleSeneca Foods Corporation41526.0Food ProcessingSSI Technologies, Inc.38223.9Metal Components and SensorsPrent Corporation34221.4Plastic PartsSimmons23915.0MattressesHUFCOR, Inc.22013.8Accordion Doors & WallsTotal1,598100.0a) Employees located at multiple locations
Reference:
Rock County Development Alliance, 2011 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-155Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-11 Percent of Individuals and Families Living Below the Census PovertyThreshold within Rock CountyCategory2000 (%)2010 (%)IndividualsCity of Janesville6.513.6City of Beloit12.521.8 Rock County7.312.8 State of WI8.712.1Nation12.414.4Families City of Janesville4.310.4City of Beloit9.618.0 Rock County5.19.4 State of WI5.68.1 Nation9.210.5
Reference:
USCB, 2008-2010; USCB, 2000b Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-156Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-12 Housing Unit Characteristics within Rock CountyHousing Category200020102000-2010 ChangeCity of JanesvilleTotal Number of Units25,08327,4339.4%Number of Occupied Units23,89425,2595.7%Number of Vacant Units1,1892,17482.8% Vacancy Rate4.7%7.9%3.2%Median Value (a)$126,630$135,4006.9%City of BeloitTotal Number of Units14,26215,3307.5%Number of Occupied Units13,37013,5831.6%Number of Vacant Units 8921,74795.9% Vacancy Rate6.3%11.4%5.1%Median Value (a)$86,361$90,5004.8%Rock CountyTotal Number of Units62,18768,39210.0%Number of Occupied Units58,61762,4066.5%Number of Vacant Units3,5705,98667.7% Vacancy Rate5.7%8.8%3.1%Median Value (a)$124,350$140,30012.8%State of WisconsinTotal Number of Units2,321,1442,612,29912.5%Number of Occupied Units2,084,5442,282,5079.5%Number of Vacant Units236,600329,79239.4% Vacancy Rate10.2%12.6%2.4%Median Value (a)$142,078$171,00020.4% NationTotal Number of Units115,904,641131,210,60613.2% Number of Occupied Units105,480,101114,596,9278.6%Number of Vacant Units10,424,54016,613,67959.4% Vacancy Rate9.0%12.7%3.7%Median Value (a)$151,449$187,50023.8%a)Adjusted for inflation to year 2010 dollars based on the BLS Consumer Price Index Inflation Calculator
References:
BLS, 2012a, USCB, 2008-2010; USCB, 2000a; USCB, 2000b Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-157Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-13 Tax Rates in Rock County and State of Wisconsina)Includes County, City, Janesville School District Board of Education, and Other (Blackhawk Vocational Technical Adult Education (VTAE) - 1.8275, Public Library - 0.8612, State - 0.1738, State Tax Credit - -1.5208)
References:
City of Janesville, 2012d; Department of Revenue (DOR), 2011; and DOR, 2012LocationCorporate Tax Rate(%)Income Tax Rate(%)Property Tax Rate (Dollars per $1,000 value)Sales Tax Rate (%)CountyCity Board of EducationNet(a)Rock Countyn/an/a6.44277.040210.190225.01480.50State of WI 7.9 4.6-7.755.0 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-158Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-14 Major Municipal Water Suppliers in Rock County
Reference:
USGS, 2007MunicipalWater SystemWellheadProtection PlanWellheadProtection OrdinanceCity of BeloitNoNoClinton WaterworksYesNo Edgerton WaterworksNoNoEvansville WaterworksYesYesFootville WaterworksYesNo Fulton Utility DistrictNoNoJanesville Water UtilityYesYesMilton WaterworksYesNo Orfordville WaterworksYesNo Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-159Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-15 Rock County Community Water Supply Characteristics (2010) Groundwater PopulationSurface Water PopulationPopulation ServedCounty PopulationPublic Water Use Index122,5850122,585152,30780
Reference:
Wisconsin Department of Health Services, 2010 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-160Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-16 Public Wastewater Treatment Systems in Rock Countya) Vandewalle & Associates, 2009a
References:
USEPA, 2008 and Vand ewalle & Asso ciates, 2009aTreatment Facility/ Project Name Existing Total Flow(Mgd)Present Design Total Flow (Mgd)ExcessCapacity(Mgd)ExcessCapacity(Percent)Beloit WWTP9.0011.002.0018%Clinton STP 0.130.380.2566%Edgerton STP 0.530.700.1725% Evansville WWTP 0.450.600.1626%Footville STP 0.080.110.0328%Janesville WWTP (a) 13.0025.0012.0048%Milton STP 0.380.630.2540%Orfordville STP 0.120.400.2870%Consolidated Koshkonong STP0.420.600.1830% Plymouth #1STP0.020.030.0133%Beloit, Town0.450.650.2132% Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-161Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-17 Public School Enrollment (2012) within Rock County DistrictStudentEnrollmentNumber of SchoolsElementaryElementary/Secondary Middle SchoolHigh SchoolBeloit School District6,96711223Beloit Turner School District1,4612011Clinton Community School District1,1901011Edgerton School District1,7862011Evansville Community School District1,7752011Janesville School District10,32513036Milton School District3,3635011Parkview School District940 3011WI Department of Public Instruction00100Total, Rock County27,8073931115
Reference:
Department of Public Instruction (DPI), 2012 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-162Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-18 Recreation Facilities within Rock County (Sheet 1 of 2) ParkAmenitiesAcreageDistance from SHINE SitePassiveActiveac.hami.kmRegional Parks Rock CountyBeckman Mill County Park51.620.910.817.4Carver-Roehl Park5221.010.216.4 Gibbs Lake ParkX286.6116.013.621.9Happy Hollow ParkX191.277.41.93.1Lee ParkXX4016.211.318.2 Magnolia Bluff ParkX112.145.418.129.1Murwin ParkX4217.013.922.4City of JanesvilleNortheast Regional ParkX8735.27.411.9 Palmer ParkX16466.446.4Riverside ParkXX8735.26.310.1 Rockport ParkXX24699.63.45.5City of BeloitBig Hill Memorial ParkX197.279.84.77.6Community Parks Rock CountyAirport ParkX20.80.50.8 Avon ParkX176.916.827.0Koshkonong Lake AccessX12.75.115.424.8Ice Age ParkX3.41.48.814.2 Indianford ParkX1.20.512.820.6Royce Dallman ParkX2.30.915.324.6Schollmeyer ParkX10.45.58.9 Sugar River ParkX6.52.616.125.9Sweet-Allyn ParkXX3915.85.58.9 Walt Lindemann Sportsman's ParkXX104.06.911.1City of JanesvilleBond ParkX124.946.4 Kiwanis Community ParkX93.66.410.3Lustig ParkX3212.934.8Monterey ParkX4217.03.25.1 Optimist Community Park3514.25.18.2Traxler ParkX2710.94.67.4City of BeloitKrueger Recreation AreaX15.76.47.111.4 Leeson ParkX41.516.87.712.4Riverside ParkX24.910.17.712.4 Telfer ParkX28.811.76.310.1 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-163Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-18 Recreation Facilities within Rock County (Sheet 2 of 2) ParkAmenitiesLength (a)Distance from SHINE SitePassiveActivemi.kmmi.kmRock County TrailsSouth Connector TrailX4.06.40.81.3Ice Age Connector TrailX3.76.07.712.4Pelishak-Tiffany Nature TrailX6.09.79.715.6Hanover Wildlife Area 1X17.67.16.810.9a) Hanover Wildlife Area is measured in acres/hectares
References:
City of Janesville, 2012c; City of Janesville, 2012f, Design Perspectives Inc, 2009, and Vandewalle & Associates, 2006 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-164Rev. 019.3.8HUMAN HEALTHThis subsection describes the existing public and occupational health issues.19.3.8.1Maps of Potentially Sensitive Surrounding Facilities Figures 19.3.8-1 and 19.3.8-2 show distances from the proposed action to the following points or areas:*Nearest full-time resident.*Nearest sensitive receptors. -Educational facilities-Medical facilities -Community centers -Animal production facilities-Parks-Religious institutionsThe site boundary distances to these locations are summarized in Table 19.3.8-1. The nearest site boundary is approximately 300m (0.19mi.) east of the production facility building centerpoint (see Figure19.2.1-1).The nearest drinking water intake is an active, drilled, private well (Wisconsin unique well number MF461) located northwest of the site at 1112 W. Knilans Road, Janesville, Wisconsin, 53545.19.3.8.2Background Radiation Exposure The major sources and levels of background radiation exposure, both natural and man-made, are discussed in this subsection. Based on the information contained in the following subsections, there are no abnormal radiation hazards in the vicinity of the SHINE site; therefore, the background radiation exposure due to both natural and man-made sources is 6.2 millisievert per year (mSv/yr) (620 millirem [roentgen equivalent man] per year [mrem/yr]) (NRC, 2012a).19.3.8.2.1Natural SourcesThe U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) divides natural sources of radiation into three categories: cosmic, internal, and terrestrial. Cosmic radiation is the result of radiation received from extraterrestrial sources, such as the sun and other stars, that penetrate the Earth's atmosphere. Internal radiation is the result of naturally occurring potassium-40 (K-40) and carbon-14 (C-14) in all humans. Lastly, terrestrial radiation is the result of dose received from naturally occurring uranium, thorium, and radium found in soil and rock. Also, radon gas seeps through the ground and into the air where it is inhaled; this source represents the majority of the background radiation for an average member of the public (NRC, 2012b). Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-165Rev. 0Based on information in the following subsections, there are no natural features of the SHINE site vicinity that would place natural background radiation at levels higher than the United States average. Therefore, the public receives an average natural background dose of 3.1 mSv/yr (310mrem/yr) (NRC, 2012a).19.3.8.2.1.1Cosmic RadiationCosmic radiation exposure depends on the site elevation. The terrain in the vicinity of the SHINE site is relatively flat, and the site elevation is well within the national elevation average. Therefore, it is appropriate to use the average annual dose due to cosmic radiation, 0.31 mSV/yr (31 mrem/yr) (NRC, 2012a).19.3.8.2.1.2Internal Radiation There are no above-normal sources of radioactivity contained in the food and water consumed in Janesville, Wisconsin based on publicly available USEPA data (USEPA, 2009). The average annual dose due to internal radiation, 0.31 mSv/yr (31 mrem/yr), is applicable (NRC, 2012a). 19.3.8.2.1.3Terrestrial RadiationThe national average for terrestrial radiation, 2.48 mSv/yr (248 mrem/yr), which includes uranium, thorium, radium, and radon gas, is applicable to the vicinity of the SHINE site (NRC,2012a).19.3.8.2.2Man-Made SourcesMan-made sources of radiation consist of medical sources, consumer products, and nuclear power sources. Medical procedures (e.g., X-rays, whole body CT scans, nuclear medicine procedures) account for a vast majority of the man-made radiation received annually. Consumer products, such as smoke detectors, televisions, and combustible fuels, also contribute to man-made radiation dose. Lastly, nuclear fuel cycle facilities (from uranium mining and milling to the disposal of spent nuclear fuel), nuclear power plants, and the transportation of radioactive material contribute to man-made radiation dose (NRC, 2012c). Based on the information in the following subsections, there are no abnormal sources of radiation located in the vicinity of the SHINE site; therefore, the public receives an average dose due to man-made radiation sources of 3.1 mSv/yr (310 mrem/yr) (NRC, 2012a).19.3.8.2.2.1Medical SourcesThe area surrounding the SHINE site contains three medical facilities: First Choice Women's Health Center, Mercy Clinic South, and Mercy Hospital, which are all located in Janesville, Wisconsin (see Table 19.3.8-1). First Choice Women's Health Center does not provide services that utilize ionizing radiation. Mercy Clinic South provides imaging services to patients (MHS,2012a). Mercy Hospital provides modern medical services to patients that include imaging services, radiation oncology, and nuclear medicine (MHS, 2012b).Those members of the public who are employed at Mercy Hospital or Mercy Clinic South may receive a higher dose due to medical sources than that of the average citizen medical dose, an Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-166Rev. 0average total dose of 2.98 mSv/yr (298 mrem/yr), but the medical workers do not receive a dose in excess of the occupational limits set in 10 CFR 20, 0.05 Sv/yr (5 rem/yr) (NRC, 2012a).19.3.8.2.2.2Consumer Products Ionizing radiation dose from the use of consumer products will fluctuate based on the lifestyle of the individual in question; therefore, a best estimate of the average annual dose due to consumer products, 0.12 mSv/yr (12 mrem/yr), is used (NRC, 2012a). 19.3.8.2.2.3Nuclear Reactor Facilities The contribution to man-made radiat ion from nuclear reactor facilities in the proposed action area is small. There are no nuclear fuel cycle facilities in the area; however, I-39/90 is approximately 2 mi. (3.2 km) from the site boundary, so there may be some radiation received from the transportation of radioactive material along that roadway. Railroads surround the proposed action area on all but the southeast sides, so transportation of radioactive materials along the railroads may contribute additional doses. In addition, the SHINE site is located between two nuclear reactors: Exelon's Byron Station (a two-unit pressurized water reactor (PWR) with a total net electrical generation of 2336 megawatts [MWe]) and the University of Wisconsin Nuclear Reactor (UWNR) research facility (variable thermal power up to 1 MWt) (Exelon, 2012; UWNR, 2011a). Byron Station is located approximately 40 mi. (64 km) south-southwest of the project facility (Google, 2012). Based on off-site dose calculations from Byron Station, the dose to the public near the SHINE site is very low due to the distance between the site and Byron Station (TBEES, 2011). Similarly, the UWNR is approximately 37 mi. (60 km) north-northwest of the project facility, and the dose to the public is very low due to the distance between the UWNR and the SHINE site (Google, 2012; UWNR,2011b). 19.3.8.3Description of Radioactive and Nonradioactive Liquid, Gaseous, and Solid Waste Management Effluent Control SystemsThere are no radioactive materials currently stored on the site or within the vicinity of the SHINE site; therefore, there are no radioactive effluent control systems on or within the vicinity of the site. See Subsection 19.3.8.8 for a description of nearby nuclear reactor facilities' radioactive effluent monitoring programs.Nonradioactive liquid, gaseous, and solid waste effl uents from facilities in the vicinity of the SHINE site report hazardous effluents to the USEPA (USEPA, 2012e). 19.3.8.4Information on Radioactive and Nonradioactive Effluents Released to the EnvironmentThere are no radioactive materials stored on the site; therefore, there are no radioactive effluents released to the environment on-site. Mercy Hospital stores medical isotopes for use in their nuclear medicine program (MHS, 2012b). See Subsection 19.3.8.2.2.3 for a discussion of nearest operating nuclear reactor facilities' radioactive releases. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-167Rev. 0See Table 19.3.8-2 for a list of hazardous materials stored within 5 mi. (8 km) of the SHINE site. It is assumed that any of these materials could be released to the environment in the vicinity of the SHINE site.19.3.8.5Radioactive and Nonradioactive Hazardous Material Stored On-Site or within the VicinityThere are no radioactive materials currently stored on the site. Mercy Hospital stores medical isotopes for use in their nuclear medicine program (MHS, 2012b). There are no hazardous industrial materials stored on the site. However, since the SHINE site is currently used for agricultural purposes (see Subsection 19.3.4.1.1.3), chemical fertilizers and pesticides may have been used on the site. See Table 19.3.8-2 for a list of hazardous material stored within 5 mi. (8 km) of the SHINE site.19.3.8.6Current On-Site or Nearby Sources and Levels of Exposure to Members of the Public and Workers from Radioactive MaterialsThere are no existing radioactive materials currently stored on-site; therefore there is no exposure to the public. Mercy Hospital is the only facility in the vicinity of the SHINE site that possesses radioactive material. Patients at the hospital may be exposed to this radiation in a planned and controlled manner based on professionally prepared treatments. See Subsection 19.3.8.2.2.1 for the average annual radiation dose from medical facilities. There may be some radiation dose received from the transportation of radioactive material along I-39/90, which is located approximately 2mi. (3.2km) east of the site boundary. Railroads surround the proposed action area on all but the southeast sides, so transportation of radioactive materials along the railroads may contribute additional doses. Contributions from these sources are discussed in Subsection 19.3.8.2.2.3.19.3.8.7Historical Exposures to Radioactive Materials to Both Workers and Members of the PublicThere are no recordable incidents involving radioactive material in the vicinity of the SHINE site (USEPA, 2012e). Any historical exposure to radioactive material would come from treatment in the Mercy Hospital nuclear medicine department. Patients at the hospital may have been historically exposed to this radiation in a planned and controlled manner, based on professionally-prepared treatments.19.3.8.8Description of Nearby Operatin g Facilities' Effluent Monitoring ProgramsExelon's Byron Station submits an annual radiological environmental operating report to the NRC, and the most recent results of the radiological environmental monitoring program are approximately the same as those found during the pre-operational studies conducted at Byron Station. Liquid effluents from Byron Station are released to the Rock River in controlled batches after radioassay of each batch. Gaseous effluents are released to the atmosphere and are calculated on the basis of analyses of weekly grab samples and grab samples of batch releases Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-168Rev. 0prior to the release of noble gases as well as continuously-collected composite samples of iodine and particulate radioactivity sampled during the course of the year. The results of effluent analyses are summarized on a monthly basis. Airborne concentrations of noble gases, iodine-131 (I-131), and particulate radioactivity in off-site areas are calculated using isotopic composition of effluents and meteorological data. C-14 concentration in off-site areas is calculated based on industry-approved methodology for estimation of the amount released and meteorological data. (TBEES, 2011)Environmental monitoring is conducted by sampling at indicator and control (background) locations in the vicinity of Byron Station to measure changes in radiation or radioactivity levels that may be attributable to station operation. If significant changes attri butable to Byron Station are measured, these changes are correlated with effluent releases. An environmental monitoring program is conducted which also includes all potential pathways at the site. Gaseous pathways include ground plane (direct), inhalation, vegetation, meat, and milk. Liquid pathways include potable water and freshwater fish. The critical pathway for 2010 gaseous dose was vegetation. The critical pathway for 2010 liquid dose was freshwater fish. (TBEES, 2011)The UWNR effluent monitoring program uses Landauer Luxel brand area monitors located in areas surrounding the reactor laboratory. Liquid effluents are monitored, recorded, and discharged to the sanitary sewer from the fac ility. Exhaust effluents are monitored, recorded, and discharged through the UWNR stack. Solid waste is monitored, recorded, and transferred to the UW Broad Scope license for ultimate disposal in accordance with the UWNR radioactive materials license. Quantities of released effluents are reported in the UWNR annual operating report. (UWNR, 2011b)19.3.8.9Relevant Occupational Injury Rates and Occupational Fatal Injury Rates Occupational injury and fatal injury rates for occupations relevant to the construction, operation, and decommissioning of the SHINE facility are discussed in this subsection. Recent BLS data, which lists the national incidence rates of nonfatal occupational injuries and illnesses by industry, was consulted to estimate relevant occupational injury rates for the SHINE project. The incidence rate is defined as the number of injuries and illnesses per 100 full-time workers. For this estimate the incidence rate of the total number of recordable cases was used. During the construction and decommissioning phases, the total number of recordable cases for construction workers in the construction industry is 3.9 per 100full-time workers. During the operation phase, SHINE employees work in environments found in multiple industries, therefore, the total number of recordable cases for all industries (3.8 per 100full-time workers), is used to estimate the occupational injury rate for SHINE employees. (BLS, 2012c)Comparable BLS data exists for national occupational fatal injury rates. The BLS defines fatal injury rates as the number of fatal occupational injuries per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers. For the construction industry, the fatal injury rate is estimated to be 8.9 per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers. As discussed above, SHINE employees work in varying environments, so the fatal injury rate for all industries (3.5 per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers) is used to estimate the occupational fatal injury rate for SHINE employees. (BLS, 2012d) Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-169Rev. 0Table 19.3.8-1 Distance to Nearest Agricultural and Urban FacilitiesFacility Type Location of InterestDistance to SHINE Site BoundaryResidentialNearest Full-Time Resident0.33 mi. (0.53 km) ParkAirport Park0.30 mi. (0.48 km)Paw Print Park1.16 mi. (1.87 km) Burbank Park1.38 mi. (2.22 km)MedicalFirst Choice Women's Health Center1.37 mi. (2.20 km) Mercy Clinic South1.58 mi. (2.54 km) Mercy Hospital4.21 mi. (6.78 km)EducationalRoessel Aviation0.78 mi. (1.26 km) Blackhawk Technical College Aviation Center0.89 mi. (1.43 km) Rock County Christian School1.14 mi. (1.83 km) Jackson Elementary School1.28 mi. (2.06 km)Community Kids Learning Centers1.36 mi. (2.19 km)Community CenterCaravilla Education and Rehabilitation Comm
Center1.62 mi. (2.61 km)Religious InstitutionsIglesia Hispania Pentecostes0.35 mi. (0.56 km)Summit Baptist Church1.37 mi. (2.20 km) Animal ProductionDairy Production0.51 mi. (0.82 km)Horse Pasture0.52 mi. (0.84 km) Goat Production0.69 mi. (1.11 km)MacFarland Pheasants, Inc.0.86 mi. (1.38 km)Beef Production Area0.97 mi. (1.56 km) Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-170Rev. 0Table 19.3.8-2 Chemicals Used/Stored Within Five Miles of the Site(Sheet 1 of 4)List of ChemicalsNo. 2 Diesel FuelNo. 2 Fuel Oil 1,2,3-Propanetriol10-34-0 Ammonium Polyphosphate Solution2,2-Dimethypropane - 1,3-Diol 2-Ethylhexnol 2-Phenoxyethanol 4,4-Diphenylmethane Diisocyanate77-80% Calcium Chloride AC-101 Acetic Acid
Acrylamide Copolymer AdogenAlkyl Dimethylamine C1295Aminoethylethanolamine Anhydrous Ammonia Ammonium Hydroxide Solution (29%) Ammonium Polyph, 4%N 10%P205 10%K20 1%S, .25Ammonium Polyphosphate Potassium ChlorideAmmonium Polyphosphate Potassium Hydro Ammonium Polyphosphate Potassium Hydroxide, 6-24-6 Ammonium Polyphosphate Potassium Solution Ammonium Polyphoste Potassium ChlorideAnionic Asphalt EmulsionAmmonium Thiosulfate
Aromatic Polyester Polyol
ArosurfBattery Acid Battery Electrolyte Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-171Rev. 0Table 19.3.8-2 Chemicals Used/Stored Within Five Miles of the Site (Sheet 2 of 4)List of Chemicals Benzoic Acid Benzyl Chloride Biodiesel ChlorineD-36 Condensate Treatement Diary Acid #5W De-icing Fluid
Diesel Fuel Diethyloxyester Dimethylammonium ChlorideDiethanolamine Diethyl Sulfate
Diethylene Glycol Diethylene TriamineDihydrogenated Tallowmethyl AmineDimethyl C12 Amine 95% Dimethyl C16 Amine 95%
Dimethyl Sulfate DimethylamineopropylamineDXP 5522-048DXP 5522-131 DXP 5558-66 DXP 5536-094
Ethyl AlcoholEthyl MercaptanEthylene Oxide Fatty Acid C8-C18 Fatty Alcohol C12-C18Fertilizer RinsatcFertilizer, Commercial BlenD Liquid N-P-K Furfuryl Alcohol Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-172Rev. 0Table 19.3.8-2 Chemicals Used/Stored Within Five Miles of the Site (Sheet 3 of 4)List of ChemicalsGasolineGlyphosphate
HerbicideHubercarb Q200 (Calcium Carbonate) Hydrogen Hydrogen Peroxide
INDULIN 747IsopropanolJet Fuel Lauric Acid 1299 Liquified Petroleum Propane
Metam-SodiumMethoxypolyglycol Basic Methyl Chloride Methyldiethanolamine
N-Butyl Alcohol Nitric Acid Oleic AcidP&G Code 10020418 P&G Code 65163 Pesticides/Insecticides Peracetic AcidPhosphoric AcidPolyethylene Glycol POLYHEED 997
Polyol Potassium ChloridePotassium HydroxidePropylene Glycol Propylene Oxide Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-173Rev. 0Table 19.3.8-2 Chemicals Used/Stored Within Five Miles of the Site (Sheet 4 of 4)List of ChemicalsPropaneQUESTAR CAF
REWOCOROS AC 100 US REWODERM S 1333REWOPAL 12 REWOQUAT (WE 18, E US, WE 28 US, WE 16, CQ 100) REWOTERIC AM TEG Road Saver Sealants Sodium Bisulfate Sodium Bisulfite Sodium Hydroxide Sodium Hypochlorite Soft Tallow DiesterSolvent Blend 19205Sorbitan Trioleate
Stearic Acid
Styrene Sulfuric AcidTEGO IL IMESTEGO AMID S 18 TEGOTENS EC 11 TEGOSOFT PBE Triethanolamine UreaVarious Oils
Varamide Varine OVariquatVarisoft Varonic Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTable of ContentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-iRev. 0SECTION 19.4IMPACTS OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION, OPERATIONS, AND DECOMMISSIONINGTable of Contents SectionTitlePage19.4IMPACTS OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION, OPERATIONS, AND DECOMMISSIONING..................................................................................19.4-119.4.1LAND USE AND VISUAL RESOURCES..................................................19.4-119.4.2AIR QUALITY AND NOISE.......................................................................19.4-619.4.3GEOLOGIC ENVIRONMENT....................................................................19.4-3119.4.4WATER RESOURCES..............................................................................19.4-3419.4.5ECOLOGICAL RESOURCES...................................................................19.4-40 19.4.6HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES.............................................19.4-4919.4.7SOCIOECONOMICS.................................................................................19.4-50 19.4.8HUMAN HEALTH......................................................................................19.4-61 19.4.9WASTE MANAGEMENT...........................................................................19.4-8119.4.10TRANSPORTATION.................................................................................19.4-8319.4.11POSTULATED ACCIDENTS.....................................................................19.4-92 19.4.12ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE...................................................................19.4-10419.4.13CUMULATIVE EFFECTS..........................................................................19.4-111 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-iiRev. 1List of Tables NumberTitle19.4.2-1Isotope Production Process - Gaseous Effluents19.4.2-2Standby Diesel Generator - Emissions19.4.2-3Emissions from Production Facility Building - Natural Gas-Fired Boiler19.4.2-4Emissions from Administration Building - Natural Gas-Fired Heater19.4.2-5Emissions from Support Facility Building - Natural Gas-Fired Heater19.4.2-6Emissions from Waste Staging & Shipping Building - Natural Gas-Fired Heater19.4.2-7Emissions from Diesel Generator Building - Natural Gas-Fired Heater19.4.2-8Total Annual Emissions19.4.2-9SHINE Facility Release Point Characteristics 19.4.2-10Pollutant Impacts Compared to the SIL19.4.2-11Pollutant Impacts Compared to the NAAQS19.4.2-12Typical Noise and Emissions from Construction Equipment19.4.5-1Summary of Impacts to 2006 Land Use/Land Cover(a)19.4.7-1Projected ROI Labor Availability and On-site Labor Requirements at Peak Month of Construction, Operations and Decommissioning Schedules19.4.7-2Summary of Traffic Impacts during Construction and Operations19.4.7-3Summary of the Effects of Mitigative Measures on Traffic ConditionsduringOperations19.4.8-1Summary of Major Chemical Inventory and Quantity 19.4.8-2Chemical Storage Area Characteristics19.4.8-3Potential Occupational Hazards19.4.8-4This table number not used 19.4.8-5Annual Total Effective Dose Equivalent to the Public at Bounding Dose Receptors Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-iiiRev. 0List of Tables(Continued) NumberTitle19.4.8-6Environmental Monitoring Locations19.4.8-7Administrative Dose Limits 19.4.10-1Population Density, Exposed Population, and the Adjustment Factor for Transportation Route to Andrews, Texas 19.4.10-2Population Density, Exposed Population, and the Adjustment Factor for Transportation Route to Clive, Utah19.4.10-3Population Density, Exposed Population, and the Adjustment Factor for Transportation Route to Hazelwood, Missouri19.4.10-4Population Density, Exposed Population, and the Adjustment Factor for Transportation Route to North Billerica, Massachusetts19.4.10-5Incident-Free Radiological Dose Summary (Person-Rem/Year) 19.4.11-1SHINE Hazardous (Toxic) Chemical Source Terms and Concentrations 19.4.12-1Minority and Low-Income Population Statistics for Block Groups within a 5-Mi. Radius of the SHINESite19.4.13-1Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Projects and Other Actions Considered in the Cumulative Effects Analysis19.4.13-2Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Projects and Other Actions Retained for the Cumulative Effects Analysis19.4.13-3Cumulative Impacts on Environmental Resources, Including the Impacts of the Proposed Project Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of FiguresSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-ivRev. 0List of Figures NumberTitle19.4.1-1Conceptual Rendering of SHINE Facility19.4.1-2SHINE Facility Construction Grading Plan19.4.8-1Location of Environmental Monitors19.4.10-1Population Density for Transportation Route to Andrews, Texas 19.4.10-2Population Density for Transportation Route to Clive, Utah19.4.10-3Population Density for Transportation Route to Hazelwood, Missouri19.4.10-4Population Density for Transportation Route to North Billerica, Massachusetts19.4.12-1Low Income Populations in the Vicinity of the SHINE Site19.4.13-1Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Projects and Other Actions Retained for the Cumulative Effects Analysis Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-vRev. 0Acronyms and AbbreviationsAcronym/Abbreviation Definition µg/m3micrograms per cubic meter/Qrelative atmospheric concentration ac.acreacfmactual cubic feet per minute ALARAAs Low As Reasonably Achievable AMSLabove mean sea level BLSBureau of Labor Statistics BMPbest management practice Btubritish thermal unitBtu/hrBtu per hour Btu/scfBtu per standard cubic foot Bu.bushelCCelsiusCAMcontinuous air monitor CEDEcommitted effective dose equivalent CEQCouncil on Environmental Quality CFRCode of Federal Regulations Ci/yrCuries per year COcarbon monoxide CO2carbon dioxide CO2eCO2 equivalentD/Qground level deposition factor dBAdecibels Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-viRev. 1Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition DBAdesign basis accident DOEU.S. Department of Energy DORWisconsin Department of Revenue DOTU.S. Department of Transportation DPIWisconsin Department of Public Instruction DSSIDiversified Scientific Services, Inc. EDEeffective dose equivalent EJEnvironmental Justice ESFengineered safety feature FFahrenheit FRFederal Register ft.feetft/secfeet per second GHGgreenhouse gas GISGeographic Information Systemgpdgallons per daygrams/bhp-hrgrams per brake horsepower-hour H1Hhigh, first high H2Hhigh, second high hahectareHATHazard Analysis Team HAZOPSHazard and Operability Study Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-viiRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd) Acronym/AbbreviationDefinition HChydrocarbons HEPAhigh-efficiency particulate air hr.hourHVACheating, ventilation, and air conditioningI-129iodine-129I-131iodine-131 IAIowaIEinitiating event ILIllinoisINIndianaISAIntegrated Safety Analysis ISCIndustrial Source Complex ISGInterim Staff Guidance JSDJanesville School District keffneutron multiplication factorkmkilometer km2square kilometerKr-85krypton-85L/cylliters per cylinder lb/hrpounds per hour lb/MMBtupounds per million Btu lb/yrpounds per year Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-viii Rev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd) Acronym/AbbreviationDefinition lb.poundLEUlow enriched uranium LNBlow NOx burnersLOSlevel of service lpdliters per day LSAlow specific activity mmeterm/smeter per second MAMassachusetts MARmaterial-at-risk MEBmass and energy balance MEImaximally exposed individual Mgdmillion gallons per day MHAmaximum hypothetical accident mi.mileMldmillion liters per dayMMBtu/hrmillion Btu per hour MOMissouriMo-99molybdenum-99 mremmilliremmrem/yrmillirem per year mSvmillisievert mSv/yrmillisievert per year NAAQSNational Ambient Air Quality Standards Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-ixRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd) Acronym/AbbreviationDefinition NAVD 88North American Vertical Datum 1988 NENebraskaNEPANational Environmental Policy Act of 1969 NESHAPNational Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants NHRPNational Register of Historic Properties NLCDNational Land Cover Database NO2nitrogen dioxide NOxnitrogen oxideNPDESNational Pollutant Discharge Elimination SystemNRNatural ResourcesNRCU.S. Nuclear Regulatory CommissionNSPSNew Source Performance Standards NWSNational Weather ServiceNYNew York O3ozoneOHOhioOKOklahomaOSHAOccupational Safety and Health Administration PAPennsylvania PCSprimary cooling system PHAPreliminary Hazard Analysis PMparticulate matter Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-xRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd) Acronym/AbbreviationDefinition PM10particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than 10 microns PM2.5particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than 2.5 micronsPOTWpublically owned treatment worksPPEpersonal protective equipmentPrHAProcess Hazard AnalysisPSARPreliminary Safety Analysis ReportPSBprimary system boundaryPSDPrevention of Significant DeteriorationPVVSprocess vessel vent system RCARadiologically Controlled AreaRCRAResource Conservation and Recovery Actremroentgen equivalent manrem/srem per secondROIregion of influence RPCSradioisotope process facility cooling system RPFRadioisotope Production Facility rpmrevolutions per minute RPSreactivity protection system RVZ1RCA ventilation system Zone 1 RVZ2RCA ventilation system Zone 2 RVZ3RCA ventilation system Zone 3 SACTISeasonal/Annual Cooling Tower Impact Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-xiRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd) Acronym/AbbreviationDefinition SCASsubcritical assembly system scfstandard cubic foot scf/hrstandard cubic foot per hour scfmstandard cubic feet per minute SDGstandby diesel generatorsec.secondSHINESHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. SH 11State Highway 11 SHPOState Historic Preservation Office SILSignificant Impact Level SOsulfur oxides SO2sulfur dioxideSPspecial purpose district SPCCSpill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure SSCsstructures, systems, and components SWPPPStorm Water Pollution Prevention Plan T/yrtons per year TBPtri-n-butyl phosphate TEDEtotal effective dose equivalent TIFTax Increment FinancingTLDthermoluminescent dosimeter TSVtarget solution vessel TXTexas Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-xiiRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd) Acronym/AbbreviationDefinition U.S.United States UREXuranium extraction US 14U.S. Highway 14 US 51U.S. Highway 51 USCBU.S. Census Bureau USEPAU.S. Environmental Protection Agency USFWSU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service UTUtahVOCvolatile organic compound WCSWaste Control Specialists WDNRWisconsin Department of Natural Resources WHSWisconsin Historical Society WIWisconsin WIAAQSWisconsin Ambient Air Quality Standards WPDESWisconsin Pollutant Discharge Elimination System WYWyomingXe-133xenon-133 yd.yardyryear Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-1Rev. 0CHAPTER 1919.4IMPACTS OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION, OPERATIONS, AND DECOMMISSIONINGThis chapter provides an analysis of the impacts of construction, operation and decommissioning of the SHINE facility. Overall impact rankings are given to each environmental resource evaluated. Unless otherwise defined, criteria followed the guidance given in NRC Impact Rankings 10 CFR 51 Subpart A, Appendix B, Table B-1, Footnote 3 as follows: *SMALL (S) - Environmental effects are not detectable or are so minor that they will neither destabilize nor noticeably alter any important attribute of the resource.*MODERATE (M) - Environmental effects are sufficient to alter noticeably, but not to destabilize, important attributes of the resource.*LARGE (L) - Environmental effects are clearly noticeable and are sufficient to destabilize important attributes of the resource.19.4.1LAND USE AND VISUAL RESOURCESThis subsection assesses the impacts of construction and operation on land use and visual resources for the SHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. (SHINE) site and region. As described in Subsection19.3.1, the land use for the site and region is analyzed using the National Land Cover Database 2006 (Fry et al, 2011). Impacts include effects from activities associated with construction and operation, including excavation, grading, placement of fill material, temporary staging and construction laydown, construction of permanent features, and potential operational disturbances. 19.4.1.1Land UseThis subsection discusses the land use impacts from construction and operation of the SHINE facility. 19.4.1.1.1Site and RegionAs described in Subsections19.3.1 and19.3.5, the SHINE site consists of a 91.27-acre(ac.) (36.94-hectare[ha]) parcel that has been historically farmed and is routinely disturbed by the disking, plowing, herbicide application and harvesting activities associated with row crop production. The region surrounding the SHINE site is defined in Subsection19.3.1.1.2 as the area within a 5-mile(mi.) (8-kilometer[km]) radius of the site centerpoint. The entire region is located within Rock County, Wisconsin. The potential construction-related land use impacts to the SHINE site and near off-site areas are based on the SHINE facility construction grading plan (Figure 19.4.1-2). Activities such as earthmoving, excavation, pile driving, erection, batch plant operation, and construction-related traffic generate potential disturbances to land use during the construction phase of the SHINE project. Construction-related direct impacts to the site and near site areas are limited to land previously utilized for agricultural/cultivated crop production. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-2Rev. 0Of the 91.27ac. (36.94ha) comprising the SHINE site, construction permanently converts 25.67ac. (10.39ha) of agricultural/cultivated crops to industrial facilities (Table19.4.1-1). Permanent conversions to industrial facilities include the construction of facility buildings, employee parking lot, facility access road/driveway, stormwater detention area, and access road drainage ditches. Direct construction impacts also include the temporary impact of 14.54ac. (5.88ha) of agricultural lands on-site used for the construction parking area, construction material staging or lay down area, and temporary disturbance from water and sewer line installation, as well as, the temporary indirect impact of 0.62ac. (0.25ha) of off-site agricultural lands immediately adjacent to the northern boundary of the site for temporary disturbance from water and sewer line installation. Temporary impact areas are either returned to agriculture or restored with either cool season grasses or native prairie. The loss of agricultural/cultivated crops to industrial facilities is minor when compared to the 25,236ac. (10,213ha) of agricultural land remaining within a 5-mi. (8-km) radius of the site (seeTable19.4.1-1). Furthermore, lands on-site not utilized for development of industrial facilities are returned to agriculture or restored using cool season grasses or native prairie species. As such, impacts to land use from construction and operations are SMALL.19.4.1.1.2Special Land UsesAs discussed in Subsection19.3.1.1.3, there are no federal special land use classification areas within the region of the SHINE site, but there are two state special land use areas in the region, with neither area located on-site. Permanent and temporary impacts from construction and operation of the facility occur on-site and in near off-site areas, but not within either state 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.19.4.1.1.3Agricultural Resources and FacilitiesThe agricultural resources and facilities on-site and within the region of the SHINE site are described in Subsection19.3.1.1.4. Both prime farmland and farmland of state-wide importance occur within the site boundaries, with approximately 41,950ac. (16,977ha) of the area within the region having soils classified as prime farmland and farmland of state-wide importance (see Subsection19.3.1.1.4). Based on the SHINE facility site layout (Figure19.2.1-1), the direct and indirect impacts from construction and operation of the facility occur on-site and near off-site, impacting 25.67ac. (10.39ha) of agricultural/cultivated crops on-site and 0.62ac. (0.25ha) of agricultural/cultivated crops near off-site (see Table19.4.1-1). As described in Subsection19.3.1.1.4, the potential relative value of the farmland for all 91.27ac. (36.94ha) comprising the SHINE site is 13,771bushels (Bu.) of grain corn or 3947Bu. of soybeans, while the 10-year production estimate average for Rock County, Wisconsin, is 22,075,540Bu. of grain corn and 3,786,415Bu. of soybeans. No other agricultural resources within the region of the SHINE site are located on-site or near off-site, as discussed in Subsection19.3.1.1.4, and therefore, will not be impacted by construction and operations-related impacts.The loss of on-site agricultural lands, including prime farmland and farmland of state-wide importance, and the subsequent loss of potential crop production to industrial facilities, is minor when compared to the amount of agricultural land, land designated as prime farmland or farmland of state-wide importance, and potential crop production remaining within the region surrounding the site (see Table19.4.1-1 and Subsection19.3.1.1.4). Furthermore, lands on-site not utilized for development of industrial facilities are returned to agriculture or restored using Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-3Rev. 0cool season grasses or native prairie species. As such, direct and indirect impacts to agricultural resources and facilities from construction and operations are SMALL.19.4.1.1.4Mineral ResourcesAs described in Subsection19.3.1.1.5, important mineral resources within the region include sand, gravel, and crushed stone. Two sand and gravel operations occur within the region of the SHINE site, but neither is located on-site. Permanent and temporary impacts from construction and operation 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 and operations of the facility are SMALL. Impacts to mineral resources are discussed further in Subsection19.4.3. 19.4.1.1.5Major Population Centers and InfrastructureSubsection19.3.1.1.6 summarizes the major population centers and infrastructure located within Rock County, which include the major population centers of Janesville and Beloit, several major transportation corridors, and the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport. While US51 and the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport are located just west of the SHINE site, none of the major population centers or infrastructure are located on-site. Permanent and temporary impacts from construction and operations of the facility occur on-site and immediately adjacent to the northern boundary of the site. Therefore, construction and operations-related direct and indirect impacts on major population centers and infrastructure are SMALL.19.4.1.1.6Impacts from Decommissioning Construction of the SHINE facility is expected to begin in 2015. Following the cessation of operations, the facility will be decommissioned. Decommissioning activities, however, are similar to construction activities and involve heavy equipment to dismantle buildings and remove roadway and parking facilities. Resultant land uses following decommissioning are undetermined but may consist of agricultural lands or open space. As such, direct and indirect impacts from decommissioning are anticipated to be similar to the impacts associated with construction and SMALL.19.4.1.2Visual ResourcesThe visual setting of the area affected by the construction and operation of the SHINE site is described in Subsection19.3.1.2. Illustrations of the bounding condition of the SHINE facility superimposed on the current viewshed are shown on Figure19.4.1-1.The existing site is composed entirely of land used for agricultural purposes and has no existing architectural features, established structures, or natural or built barriers, screens or buffers. Consequently, the SHINE facility alters the on-site condition and partially obstructs views of the existing landscape. However, the visual setting of the site is generally flat and uniform in landform with low vegetation diversity and a low visual quality rating (see Subsection19.3.1.2). Bounding dimensions of the production facility building for visual impact assessment include a height of 86 feet (ft.) (26 meters [m]), a length of 416ft. (127m), and a width of 167 ft. (51m). The high bay footprint has bounded dimensions of 58ft. (18m) wide by 190ft. (58m) long. The facility's main building has an exhaust vent stack that under the bounding condition extends to Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-4Rev. 096ft. (29m) above grade. Figure19.4.1-1 presents a conceptual rendering of the facility and the arrangements on-site based upon bounded dimensions. As discussed in Subsection 19.4.2.1.2.2.5, plume visibility from the production process is expected to be minimal. Additionally, the facility does not utilize cooling towers, radar towers or other large structures that visibly intrude upon the existing landscape. Based upon these site characteristics and the bounded dimensions of the facility as illustrated in Figure 19.4.1-1, facility structures have a relatively low profile, so any impacts to the viewshed are SMALL. The operation of the SHINE facility results in minor increases in noise as described in Subsection19.4.2. However, noise levels are localized to the SHINE site and not elevated above background noise emissions from US51, immediately adjacent to the site. Therefore, noise emissions from the site do not create audible intrusions that are out of character with the setting around the SHINE site.As described in Subsection19.3.1.2, two large warehouses are located immediately adjacent to the southern border of the site that support local agricultural operations and provide storage for large farming equipment. The viewshed to the west of the site across US51 is a light industrial development landscape that consists of the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport and its associated facilities, which include the airport control tower and several large warehouses and hangers. Additionally, the viewshed to the south includes several stacks associated with power generation facilities. Together with the buildings and structures to the south and west, the SHINE facility does not significantly alter the visual setting. Therefore, impacts to visual resources from construction and operation of the SHINE facility are SMALL. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-5Rev. 0Table 19.4.1-1 Summary of Impacts to Land Use/Land CoverNLCD 2006 Land Cover ClassPermanent Site ImpactsTemporary Site ImpactsTotal Land Cover within theRegion (a)Percentac.haac.haac.haOpen Water7963221.6Developed, Open Space0.180.07304312316.1Developed, Low Intensity5858237111.7Developed, Medium Intensity19687963.9Developed, High Intensity9924012Barren43170.1Deciduous Forest329813356.6Evergreen Forest68280.1 Mixed Forest100Shrub/Scrub5052041Grassland10494252.1 Pasture/Hay5896238611.7Cultivated Crops25.67(b)10.39(b)14.54(b)5.88(b)25,23610,21350.2Woody Wetlands7222921.4Emergent Herbaceous Wetland7873181.6Total(c)28.8510.4614.545.8850,26220,339100a)
Reference:
Fry et al., 2011. b)Cultivated Crops on the SHINE site are entirely prime farmland and farmland of state-wide importance.c)Total may add up to more or less than 100 percent due to rounding. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-6Rev. 019.4.2AIR QUALITY AND NOISEThis subsection addresses the direct physical impacts of construction and operation on the communities within the vicinity of the SHINE site. Direct physical impacts include the effects from air emissions and noise. This evaluation indicates the magnitude of potential impacts and whether mitigation measures are required. 19.4.2.1Air Quality19.4.2.1.1Impacts from Construction Construction activities result in localized increases in air emissions. Earthmoving, excavation, clearing, pile driving, erection, batch plant operation, and construction-related traffic generate fugitive dust and fine particulate matter that potentially impact both on-site workers and off-site residents of the community. Vehicles and engine-driven equipment (e.g., generators and compressors) generate combustion product emissions such as carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides and, to a lesser extent, sulfur dioxides. Painting, coating, and similar operations also generate emissions from the use of volatile organic compounds.People living near or working at or near construction sites may be subject to the physical impacts of construction activities. Activities associated with the use of construction equipment may result in varying amounts of dust, air emissions, noise, and vibration. The magnitude and area of extent of the impacts from these emissions depends on atmospheric conditions at the time of the activity. The magnitude of these potential impacts is typically related to the specific construction activities that occur at a given site, the nature and effectiveness of implemented environmental controls, and the proximity of the site to populated areas. Contractors, vendors, and subcontractors are required to adhere to appropriate federal and state occupational health and safety regulations. These regulations set limits to protect workers from adverse conditions, including air emissions. On-site equipment use and traffic due to constructi on activities can also result in local increases in emissions. Subsection19.4.7 provides information regarding the type and volume of traffic generated by the SHINE facility during construction. While guidance from the Final ISG Augmenting NUREG-1537 suggests that emissions from on-site and o ff-site vehicle use (including fugitive dust) be estimated, SHINE believes that this information is not necessary to evaluate the impacts of the SHINE facility given the absence of near off-site receptors, the short term duration of such emissions, and the classification of the regional air quality as "attainment." Analysis of on-site and off-site vehicle use, including fugitive dust, are more appropriate for projects requiring a Conformity Analysis in non-attainment areas. Because construction equipment use and generated traffic volumes are relatively minor compared to other regional traffic generated emissions, and because the SHINE site is largely surrounded by agricultural fields and other undeveloped areas associated with the airport, potential air quality impacts from construction are limited. Implementation of controls and limits at the source of emissions on the construction site result in reduction of impacts off-site. For example, the dust control program reduces dust due to construction activities to minimize dust reaching site boundaries. Transportation and other off-site activities result in emissions from vehicle usage. Off-site transportation activities generally occur on improved surfaces, limiting fugitive dust emissions. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-7Rev. 0Specific mitigation measures to control fugitive dust may include any or all of the following:*Stabilizing construction roads and spoil piles.*Limiting speeds on unpaved construction roads.
- Periodically watering unpaved construction roads.*Performing housekeeping (e.g., remove dirt spilled onto paved roads).
- Covering haul trucks when loaded or unloaded.
- Minimizing material handling (e.g., drop heights, double-handling).*Phased grading to minimize the area of disturbed soils.*Re-vegetating road medians and slopes.While emissions from construction activities and equipment are unavoidable, implementation of mitigation measures minimize impacts to local ambient air quality and the nuisance impacts to the public in proximity to the project. The mitigation may include any or all of the following:*Implementing controls to minimize daily emissions such as reducing engine idle time, using cleaner fuels (e.g., ultra low sulfur diesel fuel or biodiesel), installing pollution control equipment on construction equipment (e.g., diesel oxidation catalysts and particulate matter filters), and curtailing or controlling the time of day construction activities are performed.*Performing proper maintenance of construction vehicles to maximize efficiency and minimize emissions.In summary, air emission impacts from construction are SMALL because emissions are controlled at the source where practicable; maintained within established regulatory limits designed to minimize impacts; and located a significant distance from the public.19.4.2.1.2Impacts from OperationSection19.2 provides information regarding the cooling and heating dissipation systems and the waste systems for the SHINE facility. The design of the new plant includes a cooling system that does not require the use of either mechanical or natural draft cooling towers. The SHINE site is located in Rock County, Wisconsin, which is part of the Rockford (Illinois)-Janesville-Beloit (Wisconsin) Interstate Air Quality Control Region (40Code of Federal Regulations [CFR]81.71, Natural Resources [NR]404.03 Wisconsin Administrative Code) (Section14.4.3.2.2). The Clean Air Act and it s amendments establish National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ambient pollutant concentrations that are considered harmful to public health and the environment. Similarly, Wisconsin has established the Wisconsin Ambient Air Quality Standards (WIAAQS) (NR404.03 Wisconsin Administrative Code). Primary standards set limits to protect public health and secondary standards set limits to protect public welfare such as decreased visibility, and damage to animals, crops, vegetation, and buildings. The principal pollutants for which NAAQS have been set are carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), lead, sulfur dioxide (SO 2), particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than 10 microns (PM 10), particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than 2.5 microns (PM2.5), and ozone (O 3). One or more averaging times are associated with each pollutant for which the standard must be attained.
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-8Rev. 0Areas having air quality as good as, or better than, the NAAQS are designated as attainment areas. Areas having air quality that is worse than the NAAQS are designated as nonattainment areas. Rock County is designated as better than national Standards for SO 2 and unclassifiable/ attainment for CO, 1-hour (hr.) ozone, 8-hr. ozone (1997 and 2008 standards), NO 2, PM2.5, and lead (2008 standard) (40CFR81, SubpartC, §350). Rock County is near (but not part of) the Milwaukee-Racine PM 2.5 (2006) and 8-hr.ozone nonattainment areas (Subsection19.3.2.2). Walworth County separates Rock County from the nonattainment area.The nearest Class I area is Rainbow Lake, a U.S. Forest Service site about 311mi. (500km) north of Janesville, Wisconsin (Subsection19.3.2.2). Rainbow Lake is not a federally mandated Class I area (40CFR81, SubpartD). A Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) source within 31mi. (50km) of the Rainbow Lake Class I area must perform a significance analysis for the increase in emissions. In addition, any PSD source that locates within approximately 124mi. (200km) of a Class I Area, must notify the applicable Federal Land Manager. Since Rainbow Lake is well beyond the distance limits, the additional analysis and notification are not required.19.4.2.1.2.1Gaseous EffluentsGaseous effluents at the SHINE facility are from two types of processes: isotope production and fuel combustion. 19.4.2.1.2.1.1Isotope Production Gaseous effluents from the SHINE isotope production process originate from two main sources: Mo-99, Xe-133, and I-131 production and purification and uranium recycling. Process off-gases are treated in two separate, but connected, systems: the target solution vessel (TSV) off-gas system and the process vessel vent system (PVVS).Tritium gas is the accelerator target in the accelerator-based neutron source used in the production process. Maintenance operations on the accelerator will result in the release of tritium gas that will be exhausted by the ventilation system.The TSV off-gas system is dedicated to treating only the off-gas from the TSVs, with each TSV being equipped with its own system. The PVVS treats gases from the following sources: vent streams from process vessels in contact with streams containing fissile or radioactive materials, thermal denitration off-gas, after initial caustic scrubbing, and off-gas from the uranium oxidation furnace.The SHINE production facility utilizes a ventilation scheme for the process operating areas that is typical for nuclear processing facilities of this type. The operating areas are divided into zones, with each zone representing a specific hazard, and being subject to specific constraints, in terms of the potential for radioactive contamination or dose to the facility workers. Gaseous effluents resulting from the production process are summarized in Table19.4.2-1. These values are based on a 50-week per year operating schedule. There are no emissions of carbon monoxide, lead, ozone, or particulate matter (PM). Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-9Rev. 019.4.2.1.2.1.2Fuel CombustionSeveral combustion sources at the SHINE facility contribute to the gaseous effluents. These combustion sources are a natural gas-fired boiler that is used for the production facility building, natural gas-fired heaters in the administration building, support facility building, waste staging and shipping building, and the standby generator building. In addition to these natural gas-fired heaters, a diesel-fired standby diesel generator (SDG) is present at the facility. Each of these sources vents emissions to the outside through an associated stack. The boiler, heaters, and generator all emit CO, nitrogen oxides (NO x), PM, SO 2, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and carbon dioxide (CO 2), as summarized in Tables19.4.2-2 to 19.4.2-7. Total annual emissions are presented in Table 19.4.2-8.19.4.2.1.2.2Evaluation of Emission Impacts on Air Quality19.4.2.1.2.2.1Vehicle and Other Emissions During the operations phase, vehicular air emissions occur from the commuting workforce and from routine deliveries to/from the SHINE facility. As described in Subsection19.4.7, the volume of traffic generated during operations is considerably lower than that expected during construction. Additionally, the lands on the developed SHINE site are either developed surfaces (buildings, paved parking/access road) or consist of either agricultural or landscaped uses. Limitation of routine vehicle uses to paved areas reduces the emissions of fugitive dust. Impacts from vehicular air emissions and fugitive dust are far less than during the construction phase. Impacts during the operations phase are therefore, SMALL.The AERMOD modeling system was used to assess the impacts of pollutants expected to be generated by the new plant from the production unit and five natural gas-fired heaters. A SDG is only operated for limited periods of time for testing and therefore is not modeled. A March 2012 Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) memorandum on dispersion modeling of intermittent sources, states "In conjunction with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) document cited previously, dispersion modeling for intermi ttent units is not performed for any of the state or federal ambient air quality standards or increments." (WDNR, 2012a). 19.4.2.1.2.2.2Release Point CharacteristicsEmissions and stack characteristics for each emission source are based on the design parameters, assumptions, and emission factors. Exhaust characteristics for the SDG are estimated based on heat input to the source, fuel consumption, and combustion calculations assuming 25percent excess combustion air. Exhaust gas temperatures for the SDG are based on data in the CATC175-20 Diesel Engine Technical Data Sheet, and the calculated exhaust gas flow rates are benchmarked against exhaust flow data included in the CAT technical data sheet. Exhaust characteristics for the production facility building natural gas-fired boiler are estimated based on heat input to the source, fuel consumption, and combustion calculations assuming 25percent excess combustion air. Exhaust gas temperatures for the natural gas-fired boiler are based on temperature data provided by boiler vendors for other similar projects. Exhaust from the natural gas-fired boiler is vented to the atmosphere through a stack that is separate from the Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-10Rev. 0process stack, which is designed primarily to vent gaseous effluents from the SHINE isotope production process. Stack characteristics for the indirect-fired heaters are based on information available from equipment vendors for packaged indirect-fired heaters. Vertical convection stack vents equipped with a rain cap are assumed for each natural gas-fired heater for all buildings except the production facility. No rain cap is assumed for the main production facility. Each stack is assumed to be 5ft. (1.5m) higher than the highest point of the roof of the building. Natural gas heater information sources referenced for this evaluation include those by Reznor (Reznor, 2002) and Hastings (Hastings, 2011). Process-related and natural gas boiler exhaust flows are released through separate stacks. Release point characteristics for the process-related, boiler, and natural gas-fired heater gaseous effluents are presented in Table19.4.2-9.19.4.2.1.2.2.3Gaseous Effluent Control Systems Emission calculations included in this evaluation are intended to provide bounding values for emissions from the SHINE facility. As such, emission calculations assume that emissions are limited using standard combustion controls, but do not assume the installation of post-combustion control systems.The SHINE facility generates gaseous effluents resulting from process operations and the ventilation of operating areas. The gaseous effluent from ventilation of operating areas includes the following control systems: *The Zone 1 exhaust airstream passes through two stages of HEPA filtration and a single stage activated carbon bed prior to discharge from the stack.*The Zone 2 and Zone 3 exhaust airstreams pass through two stages of HEPA filtration prior to discharge from the stack.*Additional controls may be implemented as required by local permit conditions. Acid gases from the thermal denitration process pass through a scrubber before being emitted to the atmosphere. All the gaseous effluents from the production process are vented to the atmosphere through the main stack on the production facility building.The diesel generator specified for the SHINE facility is required to meet all applicable New Source Performance Standards (NSPS, 40CFRPart 60 SubpartIIII) and National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP, 40CFRPart63 Subpart ZZZZ). The NSPS and NESHAP standards applicable to the diesel generator depend upon several design parameters and operating variables which have not yet been established, including the year the engine is manufactured, size of the engine, displacement liters per cylinder(L/cyl), speed (revolutions per minute [rpm]), annual hours of operation, and classification of the facility as a major or area source of hazardous air pollutants. Therefore, diesel engine emissions for this evaluation are based on published emissions data for a CATC175-20 engine, which are expected to be typical of emissions from large diesel-fired engines with no post-combustion emission control systems. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-11Rev. 0Emissions of NO x from the natural gas-fired boiler are controlled using low NO x burners (LNB), which are standard equipment on most new boilers manufactured in the United States. LNBs limit NOx formation by controlling both the stoichiometric and temperature profiles of the combustion flame in each burner flame envelope. This control is achieved with design features that regulate the aerodynamic distribution and mixing of the fuel and air, yielding reduced oxygen in the primary combustion zone, reduced flame temperature, and reduced residence time at peak combustion temperatures. The combination of these techniques produces lower NO x emissions during the combustion process. Post-combustion air quality control systems are not anticipated for the natural gas-fired boiler, as natural gas is an inherently clean fuel with minimal SO 2 and PM emissions.Emissions from the natural gas-fired heaters are controlled using combustion controls and properly designed and tuned burners. Gas burners come in a great variety of shapes, sizes, and designs. Typical gas burners found in indirect-fired heaters are the ribbon-port type, which vary in length and in port sizes, and may employ a single ribbon or many ribbons depending on the volume of gas to be burned (Reznor, 2002). The emission calculations assume properly designed and tuned burners, with a proper balance of primary air and secondary air to ensure complete combustion. Post-combustion air quality control systems are not anticipated for the natural gas-fired heaters, as natural gas is an inherently clean fuel with minimal SO 2 and PM emissions.19.4.2.1.2.2.4Dispersion Modeling Assumptions and Results19.4.2.1.2.2.4.1Model AssumptionsSince there are no cooling towers associated with the SHINE facility, there are no estimates of fogging, icing, plume shadowing, and salt deposition from the Seasonal/Annual Cooling Tower Impact (SACTI) model.To estimate the impacts of non-radiological pollutants from the process, boiler, and heaters, the AERMOD Modeling System is used. The AERMOD system is a state-of-the-science dispersion model system that the USEPA promulgated in 2005 to replace the Industrial Source Complex (ISC) model. The AERMOD system is composed of a terrain preprocessor (AERMAP, version 11103), a tool to develop building downwash parameters for AERMOD (BPIPPRM, version 04274), and the dispersion model (AERMOD, version 12345).Although the SHINE facility has a standby diesel generator, the emissions from this source are not included in the dispersion modeling because the generator is considered an intermittent unit. The WDNR issued a policy statement on March 6, 2012, as discussed above, exempting intermittent operating units. Since this modeling demonstration is an assessment of potential impacts and not for the purposes of an air permitting, 5 years of preprocessed meteorological data for Madison, Wisconsin (available from the WDNR web site) wa s used in place of processing 5 years of National Weather Service (NWS) data from Janesville. Comparing the location of the NWS instrumentation at the Madison airport (Dane County Regional Airport) and Janesville airport (Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport), some differences in the processed meteorological input to AERMOD can be expected, but not enough to cause an exceedance of a federal or state ambient air quality standard. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-12Rev. 0The stacks associated with the heaters in all buildings except the production building are designed to have rain caps, which restricts the vertical flow. AERMOD has two ways to model this situation: modify the source characteristics or use the non-default beta option to define the type of source. For this modeling demonstration, the former method is used so the modeling is conducted in accordance with AERMOD's regulatory default options.For this modeling demonstration, an assumption was made, based on information contained on the SHINE facility site layout (Figure 19.2.1-1) that a fence encircles the entire property boundary (fence line), forming a continuous physical barrier restricting public access to the SHINE site. Ambient air is defined as "-that portion of the atmosphere, external to buildings, to which the general public has access" (40CFR50.1(e)). If plant property is accessible to the public (exclusive of the workforce), then impacts from facility emissions are required to be modeled at those locations.AERMOD analyses were performed using a number of bounded conditions. Since the boiler and heater stacks are subject to downwash, the actual stack diameter and exit temperature are used, but the exit velocity is set to a nominally low value, such as 0.001meter per second (m/s). This value is used on modeling the SHINE facility stacks associated with the heaters in all buildings except the production building. The stack associated with heating of the production building is modeled without a rain cap.The modeling results assume full-time operations for the year of the natural gas-fired heating system in each building (8760 hr.). A proposed operating schedule of the heating system, limiting operations of those units to about 5600 hr. per year (with no heating from June through August and a limited schedule in the month prior to and the month after the summer months), was not modeled. Additionally, the emission rate used for the modeling assumed a 25percent design margin on the heating load. These assumptions provide a bounding analysis on the expected impacts from the facility.19.4.2.1.2.2.4.2AERMOD Model ResultsA Significant Impact Level (SIL) establishes the concentration below which a pollutant impact is presumed not to cause or contribute to a violation of a NAAQS or WIAAQS. If pollutant concentrations do not exceed the SIL, then no further modeling (i.e., a compliance demonstration) is required (unless the WDNR would require additional modeling). The estimated highest impacts for each pollutant and averaging time are compared to the individual SILs in Table19.4.2-10. Based on this assessment the impacts for all pollutants and averaging times are less than the SIL except for the 1-hr. and annual NO 2 standard. The 1-hr. and annual NO 2 impacts, which do exceed the respective SILs, are about 53 percent and 26 percent of the
respective NAAQS.To assess potential impacts of the SHINE facility operation relative to the NAAQS, the concentration estimates are added with background concentrations and are compared to the NAAQS standards for each pollutant and averaging time (Table19.4.2-11). Most background concentrations were obtained from a WDNR draft memorandum on regional background concentrations (WDNR,2011a). A background concentration for the 1-hr. NO 2 impacts was obtained from a WDNR technical support document (WDNR, 2 010) and a background Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-13Rev. 0concentration for the 1-hr. SO 2 impacts was obtained from a document that identifies procedures to be followed by Region 5 states in conducting modeling (Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium, 2011).Table19.4.2-11 shows that none of the pollutants exceed the NAAQS for the SHINE facility alone, or in combination with background concentration. Both the 24-hr. and annual PM 2.5 values are approximately 85 percent of the NAAQS, but most of this is due to the background concentration. Additionally, neither PM2.5 averaging period exceeds their respective SIL. Comparing the impacts to the PSD increment shows that the impacts from the SHINE facility alone are orders of magnitude smaller than the PSD increment.In summary, the initial AERMOD analysis with the assumptions described above for emissions from the process, boiler, and heaters shows that none of the pollutants exceed the NAAQS, and do not result in a modeled exceedance of the USEPA SILs for any pollutant and averaging time, except for 1-hr. and annual NO 2 impacts. 19.4.2.1.2.2.4.3 Potential Maximum Concentration Since AERMOD can directly estimate concentrations that are more precise, normalized concentrations are not presented. The SILs establish the concentration below which a pollutant impact is presumed not to cause or contribute to a violation of an ambient air quality standard. The SILs are shown in Table19.4.2-10 along with the highest concentration estimates at points within a reasonable area that could be impacted (a square area 4 km x 4 km [2.5 mi. x 2.5 mi.] in size). Highest impacts range from the fence line to about 325ft. (100m) from the fence line.Pollutant impacts at points of maximum individual exposure will be less than the maximum impacts at the fence line for each averaging time. The nearest residence is about 0.33mi (0.53km) to the north-northwest from the proposed SHINE site. A church is about 0.35mi (0.56km) to the south-southeast. For all pollutants and averaging times except for the 1-hr. and annual NO 2, the maximum concentration anywhere within a reasonable area is less than the SIL. Applying AERMOD without limitations on the operating schedule, the 1-hr. NO 2 impacts at the residence and at the church are 35.4micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m
- 3) and 29.7µg/m 3, respectively. For the annual NO 2 exposure, the impacts are 0.36 µg/m 3 and 0.21 µg/m 3 for the residence and church, respectively. As is demonstrated in Table19.4.2-11, no impacts exceed the primary ambient air quality standards that have been established to protect public health, including the health of sensitive populations such as children, the elderly, and those with respiratory problems. Therefore, pollutant impacts within a reasonable area that could be impacted and at points of the maximum individual exposure are SMALL.19.4.2.1.2.2.5Plume Visibility CharacteristicsThe plume from the production process should not be visible. All process exhaust passes through two stages of tested high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filters in series. The HEPA filters remove all visible particulate from the exhaust air stream. The vapors are removed with Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-14Rev. 0process off-gas treatment systems and all of the exhaust air passes through a single stage activated carbon bed prior to discharge from the stack.Plume visibility from the natural gas-fired boiler and heaters is expected to be minimal. Because natural gas is a gaseous fuel, filterable PM emissions which generally contribute to plume visibility are expected to be very low. PM emissions associated with natural gas combustion are usually larger molecular weight hydrocarbons that are not fully combusted; thus increased PM emissions can result from poor air/fuel mixing or maintenance problems (USEPA, 1995). With proper burner maintenance and tuning, opacity associated with the natural gas-fired boiler and heaters is expected to be minimal.White, blue, and black smoke can be emitted from diesel-fired engines (USEPA, 1995). Liquid particles can appear as white smoke in the exhaust during an engine cold start, idling, or low load operation. These emissions are formed in the quench layer adjacent to the engine's cylinder walls, where the temperature is not high enough to ignite the fuel. Blue smoke can be emitted when lubricating oil leaks into the combustion chamber and is partially burned. Proper maintenance is the most effective method of preventing blue smoke emissions from all types of internal combustion engines. The primary constituent of black smoke is agglomerated carbon particles or soot. Proper engine maintenance and combustion controls will minimize particulate matter emissions and limit opacity from the SDG. Opacity is expected to be less than 5percent at all times excluding, potentially, periods of startup.19.4.2.1.2.3Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Greenhouse gases trap heat in the atmosphere, absorbing and emitting radiation in the thermal infrared range. The most important of these gases are CO 2, methane, nitrous oxide, and fluorinated gases. Greenhouse gases (GHG) are reported as CO 2 equivalent (CO 2e) and refer to the global warming potential of the greenhouse gas or gases being emitted.Activities associated with the proposed SHINE site that are expected to contribute to the greenhouse gases include: *Construction activities at t he SHINE site resulting in principally emissions of CO 2; GHG emissions associated with construction activities include the commuting of the construction workforce and operation of construction equipment at the site. *Plant operation activities associated with the operation of plant equipment and the operations workforce. *Decommissioning activities associated with the decommissioning workforce and decommissioning equipment.*Life cycle activities related to the mining, processing, and transport of materials and waste storage should also be considered as part of the GHG inventory.As noted in Subsection19.3.2.5, SHINE will develop a comprehensive program to avoid and control GHG emissions associated with the SHINE facility. It is expected that this program will include elements such as developing a GHG emission inventory, investigating and implementing methods for avoiding or controlling the GHG emissions identified in the inventory, encouraging car pooling or other measures to minimize GHG emissions due to vehicle traffic during construction and operation of the SHINE facility, and conducting periodic audits of GHG control procedures and implementing corrective actions when necessary.
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-15Rev. 019.4.2.1.2.4Mitigative MeasuresEmission-specific strategies and measures will be developed and implemented to ensure compliance within the applicable regulatory limits defined by the National Primary and Secondary Ambient Air Quality Standards (40CFRPart50) and National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (40CFRPart61). Contractors, vendors, and subcontractors are required to adhere to appropriate federal and state occupational health and safety regulations. These regulations set limits to protect workers from adverse conditions, including air emissions. Implementation of controls and limits at the source of emissions on the construction site result in reduction of impacts off-site. 19.4.2.1.3Impacts of DecommissioningDecommissioning is the removal of a nuclear facility from service and to reduce residual radioactivity to a level that permits release of the property for unrestricted use and termination of the license. During the decommissioning phase, activities, equipment usage and their associated emissions are expected to be similar, but less than that of the construction phase as decommissioning activities are less extensive than construction. Therefore, impacts during the decommissioning phase are SMALL.19.4.2.1.4Required PermitsAs described in Subsection19.1.2, several air quality permits are required to support the construction and operation of the SHINE facility. Table19.1.2-1 indicates that an Air Pollution Control Construction Permit pursuant to the Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapter NR406, and an Air Pollution Control Construction Permit pursuant to the Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapter NR407 are required.After the greenhouse gases are quantified, as noted in Subsection 19.4.2.1.2.3, a determination will be made as to whether the proposed SHINE facility will be subject to regulation. 19.4.2.2NoiseThis subsection provides an assessment of noise impacts from construction, operation and decommissioning of the SHINE facility. 19.4.2.2.1Impacts of Construction Typical noise levels from equipment commonly used during construction are listed on Table19.4.2-12. On-site noise level exposure is controlled through appropriate training, personal protective equipment, periodic health and safety monitoring, and industry best practices. Practices such as maintenance of noise limiting devices on vehicles and equipment, controlling access to high noise areas, duration of emissions, and/or shielding high noise sources near their origin limit the adverse effects of noise on workers. Non-routine activities with potential adverse impacts on noise levels are limited and use best industry practices that further limit adverse effects. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-16Rev. 0The City of Janesville has no published ordinance governing noise emissions from developed land uses. As a point of reference, Rock Township has published noise level limits for properties outside of the M-1 Light Industrial District, the M-2 Heavy Industrial District, and the SP Special Purpose District. The SHINE site falls within the B1 Local Commercial District zoning boundary (TownofRock,2006). The protective level for B1 Local Commercial zoning is 79 decibels (dBA) (TownofRock,2008). No distinction is made between day and night noise level limits.As shown in Table19.4.2-12, noise levels for construction equipment range from 80 to 88dBA at 50ft. (15m) to 50 to 58dBA at 1500ft. (457 m). These data indicate that noise levels attenuate rapidly with distance (30dBA over a distance of 1450ft. [442m]). Based on the natural attenuation of noise levels over distance, the bounding condition construction noise level is below the Rock Township standard between 50 and 500ft. (15 and 457m) from its source. As is evident in Figures 19.3.1-1 and 19.3.1-7, the SHINE site is relatively isolated from potential sensitive noise receptors, the closest residences, churches and recreation areas are between 1700 and 2100ft. (518 and 640m) from the SHINE site. Thus, the impact of noise from construction of the new site on nearby residences, churches and recreational areas is SMALL.Traffic associated with the construction workforce traveling to and from the SHINE site also generates noise. The increase in noise relative to background conditions is most noticeable during the shift changes in the morning and late afternoon. The 451vehicles and 14heavy vehicles are dispersed in shifts, with the largest shift working during the day. Additionally, posted speed limits, traffic control and administrative measures, such as staggered shift hours, are employed that reduce traffic noise during the weekday business hours. Therefore, potential noise impacts to the community are intermittent and limited primarily to shift changes. The impact from noise from construction-related traffic to nearby residences and recreat ional areas is SMALL.Potential indirect impacts may be anticipated to off-site areas associated with the roadway network and adjacent lands beyond the site boundary. Noise related impacts may result from an increased traffic volume and resultant increases in traffic generated noise as discussed above. Noise levels during shift changes in these off-site areas are not notable as these residences are currently located within a roadway network that is characterized by traffic volumes that exhibit traffic noise.In summary, noise control practices at the construction site and the additional attenuation provided by the distance between the public and the site, limits noise effects to the public and workers during construction so that its impact is SMALL and temporary.19.4.2.2.2Impacts of Operation External noise emission from the SHINE facility during operation is primarily limited by the walls and other physical barriers of the facility itself. Noise generated during operations relates primarily to vehicular movements associated with employees and with truck deliveries. Traffic associated with the operation of the SHINE facility also generates noise. The increase in traffic relative to background traffic conditions is most evident during the morning and afternoon drive time when workers are going to and leaving work. Approximately 118work-related vehicles per day are expected to access the site once the site is operational. As discussed in Subsection19.3.7.2.3.1, existing (2010) traffic volume on US51 is 9000vehicles per day. The work-related trips generated by the SHINE facility are insignificant in the existing traffic flow. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-17Rev. 0Therefore, potential noise impacts to the community from noise from operations-related traffic to nearby residences and recreational areas are SMALL.Normal operations also include stationary external equipment (a standby diesel generator, heating, ventilation, and air conditioning [HVAC] equipment) that represent a lesser component of noise emission and are more limited in operation. The standby diesel generator is operated intermittently (i.e., for periodic testing and for asset protection during a loss of offsite power), and is therefore not part of normal operations. HVAC equipment is an expected noise source that is a characteristic of normal summer operations.Potential indirect impacts to off-site areas are associated with the roadway network and adjacent residences and lands beyond the site boundary. Noise related impacts may result from an increased traffic volume and resultant increases in traffic generated noise as discussed above. Noise levels during shift changes in these off-site areas are not notable as these residences are currently located within a roadway network that is characterized by traffic volumes that exhibit traffic noise. The intermittent increase in traffic volume associated with shift changes, and the natural noise attenuation over distance results in noise levels that attenuate to levels below the local standards for continuous noise levels. Therefore, noise impacts resulting from normal operations are SMALL.19.4.2.2.3Impacts of DecommissioningDecommissioning is the removal of a nuclear facility from service and reduction of residual radioactivity to a level that permits release of the property for unrestricted use and termination of the license. During the decommissioning phase, activities, equipment usage and the noise associated with their operation are expected to be similar or less than that of the construction phase. Therefore, impacts during the decommissioning phase are SMALL. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-18Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-1 Isotope Production Process - Gaseous Effluentsa)Based on 50 weeks operationEffluentRate NOX< 6000 pounds per year (lb/yr)
(a)CO, lead, O 3, PMnoneSulfuric acid (H 2SO4)< 50 lb/yr (a)krypton-85 (Kr-85)< 120 Curies per year (Ci/yr)iodine-131 (I-131)
<1.5 Ci/yrxenon-133 (Xe-133)< 17,000 Ci/yr tritium (H-3)< 4400 Ci/yr Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-19Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-2 Standby Diesel Generator - Emissionsa) AP-42 from USEPA, 1995b) Assuming 96 hours operation per yearPollutantEmission Rates(grams/bhp-hr)Source (a)Annual Emissions (T/yr)(b)Hourly Emissions (lb/hr)Equivalent Heat Input Emission Factor(lb/MMBtu)CO0.52CAT C175-20 Diesel Engine Technical Data Sheet0.367.50.17 NOx 5.07CAT C175-20 Diesel Engine Technical Data Sheet3.5273.31.68PM0.04CAT C175-20 Diesel Engine Technical Data Sheet0.0260.550.013Hydrocarbons
(VOC)0.17CAT C175-20 Diesel Engine Technical Data Sheet0.122.510.058 SO20.015Calculated based on maximum fuel sulfur content of 50 ppm0.010.220.005 CO2497AP-42 (10/96) Table 3.4-13457187165 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-20Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-3 Emissions from Production Facility Building - Natural Gas-Fired BoilerPollutantEmission FactorUnitsSource (a)Annual Emissions(b)Hourly Emissions(T/yr)(lb/hr)(lb/MMBtu) CO84lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1 (7/98)10.372.47 0.082 NOx50lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1 (7/98)6.221.480.049 PM10 (filterable) 1.9lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.250.060.0020 PM10 (total)7.6lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.920.220.0073 VOC 5.5lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.670.160.0053 SO2 0.6lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.080.0180.0006 CO2 120,000lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)14,8223529117.6Design Firing Rate: 30.0MMBtu/hrEstimated based on preliminary building sizing and materials of construction plus 25% design marginHeating Value for Natural Gas:1,020Btu/scfAP-42 Table 1.4-1 Maximum Fuel FiringRate:29,412scf/hrCalculated (Firing Rate/Heating Value)a)AP-42 from USEPA, 1995b) Based on 50 weeks per year Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-21Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-4 Emissions from Administration Building - Natural Gas-Fired Heatera)Exhaust characteristics for the indirect-fired heaters were based on information available from equipment vendors for packaged indirect-fired heaters.b)AP-42 from USEPA, 1995c)Based on 50 weeks per year
References:
Hastings, 2011; Reznor, 2002 PollutantEmission FactorUnitsSource (b)Annual Emissions (c)Hourly Emissions(T/yr)(lb/hr)(lb/MMBtu) CO(Residential Furnace)40lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1 (7/98)0.050.0110.038 NOx(Residential Furnace)94lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1 (7/98)0.110.0270.093 PM10 (filterable) 1.9lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.0020.00050.002 PM10 (total) 7.6lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.0090.00220.008 VOC 5.5lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.0070.00160.006 SO2 0.6lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.0010.000170.0006 CO2 120,000lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)143.234.1117.6Estimated Heating Load:233,278Btu/hrEstimated based on preliminary building size and materials of constructionDesign Firing Rate:290,000Btu/hrHeating load plus a design margin of approximately 25% to provide bounding valueHeating Value for NaturalGas:1,020Btu/scfAP-42 Table 1.4-1Firing Rate:284.3scf/hrCalculated (Firing Rate/Heating Value) Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-22Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-5 Emissions from Support Facility Building - Natural Gas-Fired Heatera)Exhaust characteristics for the indirect-fired heaters were based on information available from equipment vendors for packaged indirect-fired heaters.b)AP-42 from USEPA, 1995c)Based on 50 weeks per year
References:
Hastings, 2011; Reznor, 2002PollutantEmission FactorUnitsSource (b)Annual Emissions (c)Hourly Emissions(T/yr)(lb/hr)(lb/MMBtu) CO(Residential Furnace)40lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1 (7/98)0.0670.0160.038 NOx(Residential
Furnace)94lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1 (7/98)0.160.0390.093 PM10 (filterable) 1.9lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.0030.00080.002 PM10 (total) 7.6lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.0130.00310.007VOC 5.5lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.0100.00230.005 SO2 0.6lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.0010.000250.0006 CO2 120,000lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)207.549.4117.6Estimated Heating Load:337,317Btu/hrEstimated based on preliminary building size and materials of constructionDesign Firing Rate:420,000Btu/hrHeating load plus a design margin of approximately 25% to provide bounding valueHeating Value for NaturalGas:1,020Btu/scfAP-42 Table 1.4-1Firing Rate:411.8scf/hrCalculated (Firing Rate/Heating Value) Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-23Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-6 Emissions from Waste Staging & Shipping Building - Natural Gas-Fired Heatera)Exhaust characteristics for the indirect-fired heaters were based on information available from equipment vendors for packaged indirect-fired heaters.b)AP-42 from USEPA, 1995c)Based on 50 weeks per year
References:
Hastings, 2011; Reznor, 2002PollutantEmission FactorUnitsSource(b)Annual Emissions(c)Hourly Emissions(T/yr)(lb/hr)(lb/MMBtu) CO(Residential Furnace)40lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1(7/98)0.0290.0070.039NOx(Residential Furnace)94lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1(7/98)0.0710.0170.094PM10 (filterable) 1.9lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2(7/98)0.0010.00030.002 PM10 (total) 7.6lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2(7/98)0.0050.00130.007 VOC 5.5lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2(7/98)0.0040.00100.006 SO2 0.6lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2(7/98)<0.0010.0000110.0006 CO2 120,000lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2(7/98)89.021.2117.8Estimated Heating Load:141,597Btu/hrEstimated based on preliminary building size and materials of constructionDesign Firing Rate:180,000Btu/hrHeating load plus a design margin of approximately 25% to provide bounding
valueHeating Value for NaturalGas:1,020Btu/scfAP-42 Table 1.4-1Firing Rate:176.5scf/hrCalculated (Firing Rate/Heating Value) Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-24Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-7 Emissions from Diesel Generator Building - Natural Gas-Fired Heatera)Exhaust characteristics for the indirect-fired heaters were based on information available from equipment vendors for packaged indirect-fired heaters.b)AP-42 from USEPA, 1995c)Based on 50 weeks per year
References:
Hastings, 2011; Reznor, 2002PollutantEmission FactorUnitsSource (b)Annual Emissions (c)Hourly Emissions(T/yr)(lb/hr)(lb/MMBtu) CO(Residential Furnace)40lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1 (7/98)0.0130.0030.042 NOx(Residential
Furnace)94lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1 (7/98)0.0290.0070.097 PM10 (filterable) 1.9lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)< 0.0010.00010.001 PM10 (total) 7.6lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.0020.00050.007 VOC 5.5lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.0020.00040.006 SO2 0.6lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)< 0.0010.000040.0006 CO2 120,000lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)35.78.5118.1Estimated Heating Load: 57,987Btu/hrEstimated based on preliminary building size and materials of constructionDesign Firing Rate: 72,000Btu/hrMaximum heat input required plus 25% design marginHeating Value for NaturalGas:1,020Btu/scfAP-42 Table 1.4-1Firing Rate: 70.6scf/hrCalculated (Firing Rate/Heating Value) Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-25Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-8 Total Annual Emissionsa) Includes 3 T/yr (6,000 lb/yr) NO x emissions from process stackPollutantAnnual Emissions (T/yr)CO10.9NOx 13.1 (a)PM (total)0.98HC (VOC)0.81SO20.09CO215,642 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-26Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-9 SHINE Facility Release Point Characteristics(Sheet 1 of 2)Production Facility BuildingStack DataUnitsBoilerProcessExhaust Flowacfm14,45053,251Exhaust Temperature oF585104Heightfeet above grade 6666Diameterfeet1.674.67Exhaust Velocityfeet/sec110.451.9Stack Base Elevationfeet above mean sea level821821Administration Building Stack DataUnitsValueDescriptionHeightfeet above grade21Based on Administration Building height of 16 feet and heater exhaust height of 5 feet above roofExhaust OrientationVerticalAssumed vertical with rain capDiameterinches5.0Typical exhaust vent outlet for 200,000 to 300,000 Btu/hr heaterExhaust Fan Flow acfm180Approximate full load exhaust gas flow rate based on natural gas combustionExhaust Temperature oF160Assumed for indirect-fired natural gas heaterExhaust Velocityft/sec22CalculatedStack Base Elevationfeet AMSL817Support Facility Building Stack DataUnitsValueDescriptionHeightfeet above grade26Based on support facility building height of 21 feet and heater exhaust height of 5 feet above roofExhaust OrientationVerticalAssumed vertical with rain capDiameterinches6.0Typical exhaust vent outlet for >300,000 Btu/hr heaterExhaust Fan Flowacfm260Approximate full load exhaust gas flow rate based on natural gas combustionExhaust Temperature oF160Assumed for indirect-fired natural gas heaterExhaust Velocityft/sec22CalculatedStack Base Elevationfeet AMSL822 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-27Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-9 SHINE Facility Release Point Characteristics(Sheet 2 of 2)Waste Staging and Shipping BuildingStack DataUnitsValueDescription Heightfeet above grade23Based on Administration Building height of 18 feet and heater exhaust height of 5 feet above roofExhaust OrientationVerticalAssumed vertical with rain capDiameterinches4.0Typical exhaust vent outlet for <200,000 Btu/hr heaterExhaust Fan Flowacfm120Approximate full load exhaust gas flow rate based on natural gas combustionExhaust Temperature oF160Assumed for indirect-fired natural gas heaterExhaust Velocityft/sec23CalculatedStack Base Elevationfeet AMSL824Diesel Generator Building Stack DataUnitsValueDescriptionHeightfeet above grade22Based on Diesel Generator Building height of 17 feet and heater exhaust height of 5 feet above roofExhaust OrientationVerticalAssumed vertical with rain capDiameterinches4.0Typical exhaust vent outlet for <200,000 Btu/hr heaterExhaust Fan Flowacfm60Approximate full load exhaust gas flow rate based on natural gas combustionExhaust Temperature oF160Assumed for indirect-fired natural gas heaterExhaust Velocityft/sec11CalculatedStack Base Elevationfeet AMSL823 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-28Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-10 Pollutant Impacts Compared to the SILa)A recent court decision (US Court of Appeals, For the District of Columbia Circuit), January 22, 2013, Sierra Club vs. EPA (No.10-1413) vacated the PM 2.5 SIL and remanded it to EPA. The SILs for other pollutants remain in effect.b)Values represent the highest predicted impacts for each pollutant and averaging time.PollutantAveraging PeriodMaximum Predicted Impact (µg/m 3)(b)YearSIL(µg/m3)CO1-hr.30200920008-hr.152007500NO21-hr.64.65-yr7.5Annual2.320071SO21-hr.0.235-yr7.93-hr.0.1420082524-hr.0.07420085Annual0.008520071PM1024-hr.0.925-yr5Annual0.095-yr1PM2.5 (a)24-hr.0.755-yr1.2Annual0.095-yr0.3 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-29Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-11 Pollutant Impacts Compared to the NAAQSa) 5-yr indicates an average over the 5 modeled yearsb) Primary standards except SO 2 3-hr., which is a secondary standardc) H1H is the high, first high and H2H is the high, second high concentration of ranked concentrations at all receptors d) NOx modeled; assume a 100% conversion rate of NO x to NO2e) 6th highest value over 5 yearsf)Although there is a SIL for the annual PM 10 impacts, there is no NAAQS standardg) 24-hr. and Annual standards revoked June 22, 2010 (75 FR 35520)PollutantAveraging PeriodRankPredicted Impact (µg/m3)Year(a)Bkgd. Conc.(µg/m3)Total Conc. (µg/m3)NAAQS(b)(µg/m3)% of NAAQSPSD Increment (µg/m3)CO1-hr.H2H(c)2820091363139140,0003None8-hr.H2H(c)1320081191120410,00012None NOx(as NO2)(d)1-hr.98th %47.45-yr55102.418854NoneAnnualH1H(c)2.3200724.126.41002625 PM10(f)24-hr.H6H(e)0.75-yr47.047.71503230 PM2.524-hr.98th %0.545-yr28.929.435849AnnualH1H(c)0.095-yr10.210.312864 SO2(g)1-hr.99th %0.195-yr1313.21967None3-hr.H2H0.14200843.243.313003512 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-30Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-12 Typical Noise and Emissions from Construction Equipmenta)Rock Township, Wisconsin, Noise Limits:M-1 Light Industrial, M-2 Heavy Industrial and SP Special Purpose District: 79 dBAAll other districts: 72 dBA
Reference:
California Energy Commission, 2009Equipment TypeNoise Level in dBA (a)At 50 FeetAt 500 FeetAt 1500 FeetEarthmoving Loaders886858 Dozer886858 Tractor806050 Grader856555 Trucks866656 Shovels846454
Materials Handling Concrete pumps/mixers816151 Derrick and mobile cranes836353 Stationary Portable Generator846454Impact Paving breaker806050Light Duty VehiclesNANANA Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewGeologic EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-31Rev. 019.4.3GEOLOGIC ENVIRONMENTPotential impacts to geologic and soil resources during the construction, operation, and decommissioning of the proposed facility include large-scale hazards and local hazards. The large-scale hazards include earthquakes, volcanic activity, landslides, subsidence, and erosional processes. Local hazards are associated with site-specific properties of the soil and bedrock and include soil disturbances due to excavation, exposure of contaminated soil during excavation, blasting of bedrock (if required for construction), volume of material excavated or used during construction, impacts to rare or unique geologic resources, and impacts to rock/mineral/energy rights.19.4.3.1Impacts of Large-Scale HazardsAs noted in Subsection 19.3.3, the probability of large-scale impacts due to geologic factors is low. The seismologic regime (Subsection 19.3.3.5) of the region demonstrates that the site is located in one of the lowest earthquake hazard regions of the country. The lack of earthquakes in the region is associated with a lack of tectonic and volcanic activity, as discussed in Subsections 19.3.3.2 and19.3.3.6.2. The geologic environment features that are associated with landslides, subsidence, and erosional processes are discussed in Subsections 19.3.3.3 and 19.3.3.4. While landslides and subsidence can occur, the risk for subsidence or landslides within Rock County is not considered high. In addition, no sinkholes have been reported in the county in recent years. The primary soils present at the SHINE site are classified as slightly erodible and the secondary soils at the site are classified as moderately erodible. No soils present at or near the site are classified as highly erodible soils. Consequently, impacts relative to the geologic environment are SMALL.19.4.3.2Other Impacts on Soils and Geology The construction of the facility will include the excavation of the Radiologically Controlled Area (RCA) to an approximate depth of approximately 39ft. (11.9m) below a final grade of 826.0 ft. (251.8m). The resulting final elevation of the base of the excavation is 787 ft. (239.9 m). The maximum frost depth is 4ft. (1.2m) below ground surface, and all underground utilities will be designed accordingly, with a preliminary estimation of utility excavation depth of 5ft. (1.5m) below ground surface. No evidence of "recognized environmental conditions" as described in ASTM E 1527-05 were found to exist at the SHINE site, nor were any samples collected during the groundwater monitoring (as described in Subsection 19.3.4.3, Table 19.3.4-9) found to contain contamination indicating the presence of contaminated soil above the groundwater.An analysis of the geology of Rock County indicates that it is similar to the geology of much of southern Wisconsin and northern Illinois in that it comprises glacial sediments and limestone which are not unique or rare geological resources in the region (Olcott, Perry G., 1969). Historic mineral production in Rock County has included the mining of sand, gravel, and crushed and broken limestone, with no precious- or base-metal mineral resources mapped or discovered within Rock County (Olcott, Perry G., 1969). In addition, no extraction of energy resources occurs at the site. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewGeologic EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-32Rev. 0As noted in Subsection 19.3.4.1.2.2, bedrock at the SHINE site is at a depth greater than 220 ft. (67m) below ground surface. The deepest excavation planned is approximately 39 ft. (11.9m) below ground surface which eliminates the need for blasting to support excavations.Figure 19.4.1-2 provides an illustration of the SHINE facility construction grading plan. Excavation depth of the RCA is bounded at approximately 39ft. (11.9 m) below finished grade. For estimation of excavation quantities, a depth of 5 ft. (1.5m) below finished grade was used for the ancillary buildings. Direct impacts associated with excavation and topsoil removal for underground utilities and site grading has also been estimated. The total amount of material to be excavated at the SHINE site is 278,000 cubic yards (212,550 cubic meters). Additional assumptions made in preparing the estimate include:*Twenty-five percent margin for bounding considerations.*Frost depth is 4 ft. (1.2 m), and ancillary building foundations will be at a minimum depth of 5 ft. (1.5 m).*The bearing material at the final depth of excavation is suitable for supporting the design load, eliminating the need for over-excavation.*An allowance for a 12-inch (30.5-centimeter) thick mudmat was included at the bottom of excavations within the RCA, with the total depth of the excavation, including mudmat allowance, not to exceed approximately 39ft. (11.9m) below ground surface*Excavated slopes are stable on a slope of 1.5 horizontal to 1 vertical.*An 8-ft. (2.4m) wide bench is included in the excavation for slope stability concerns.*The excavation is 10 ft. (3.05 m) wider at the base of the excavation around the sides of the RCA to allow for the erection of forms and to provide a working area.*Below 1 ft. (0.3 m) of topsoil, the underlying material is essentially homogenous.Preliminary plans call for materials excavated during site grading and construction to be stockpiled on-site and used as backfill. Topsoil and other materials not suited for use as structural fill will be stockpiled on-site and placed as non-structural fill. A sediment and erosion control plan is required and mitigates the potential indirect impacts associated with the release of sediment or other runoff constituents to off-site areas.Based on the above assumptions, the estimated quantity of geologic material required for the completion of this project, exclusive of concrete acquired from commercial concrete mixing plants for construction of the buildings, is:*Backfill: 74,000 cubic yards (56,580 cubic meters) around structures in main excavation (reuse of suitable material excavated on-site);*Topsoil: 10,000 cubic yards (7645 cubic meters), acquired from on-site sources.*Granular road base: 7600 cubic yards (5810 cubic meters).*Asphaltic pavement: 2200 cubic yards (1682 cubic meters).
- Gravel surfacing: 8500 cubic yards (6499 cubic meters).*Underground utilities: 3500 cubic yards (2676 cubic meters) for backfill (reuse of suitable material excavated on-site).
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewGeologic EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-33Rev. 0*Site grading: 10,000 cubic yards (7645 cubic meters), to be acquired from material excavated on-site.In order to reduce impacts, on-site materials will be utilized as appropriate and no off-site borrow areas are anticipated. Consequently, direct impacts to the geologic environment are SMALL and no indirect (off-site) impacts are identified.No impacts have been identified due to large scale or local hazards which require mitigation measures beyond compliance with local building codes. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-34Rev. 019.4.4WATER RESOURCES19.4.4.1Hydrology19.4.4.1.1Surface Water19.4.4.1.1.1Facility Construction No surface water features such as creeks, streams or ponds are present on or in the immediate area surrounding the SHINE site. As a result, there are no direct effects to surface water
resources. Federal, state and local regulations and permit procedures provide minimum requirements for stormwater management during construction activities to prohibit adverse impacts on surface water, or stormwater. A sediment and erosion control plan is required and mitigates the potential indirect impacts associated with the release of sediment or other runoff constituents to off-site areas. An assessment of stormwater runoff patterns in the vicinity of the SHINE site indicates that the drainage area upstream of the site is approximately 100 ac. (40.4 ha), based on City of Janesville 2-ft. (0.6-m) contour interval mapping. Due to the area being very flat (0 to 1 percent slopes), having high-permeability subsoils, and being continuously tilled for agricultural use, no dendritic flow patterns develop. In addition, because of the flat terrain, it is difficult to accurately identify the exact drainage area, and tilled rows in the fields could direct flow to other basins. Runoff from this area is diverted around the site using appropriate measures as required by state and local authorities. There are no impoundments or significant detention/retention areas on the site currently that provide detention/reduction of storm runoff. Construction-phase dewatering is not required, because the measured groundwater level is well below the deepest excavation. Thus, there is no effect on surface water quantity or flow characteristics due to drawdown of groundwater or discharge of construction phase dewatering effluent. Consequently, indirect impacts of construction of the SHINE facility on surface water are SMALL. 19.4.4.1.1.2Facility OperationsAs is described in Section 19.2, all water used at the SHINE site is obtained from the City of Janesville municipal water supply system and all sanitary waste water is discharged directly to the City of Janesville sanitary sewer system. Additionally, the facility is designed to have zero liquid discharge from the radiologically controlled area (RCA). Consequently, there is no use or release of water from the facility to the adjacent environment that would affect surface water hydrologic systems. Direct impacts to surface water from plant operations are, therefore, SMALL. The SHINE facility site layout is illustrated in Figure 19.2.1-1. The site plan includes a low degree of impervious areas that are associated with rooftops, paved drives, and parking lots, etc. Additionally, the impervious surfaces are not "directly connected," and stormwater instead flows across or through pervious areas as it drains across the site. These pervious areas, including vegetated swales, provide control of stormwater quantity (volume and peak rate) as well as quality. The state requirements (Wisconsin Administrative Natural Resources Code, Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-35Rev. 0ChaptersNR 151 and NR 216); the City of Janesville requirements (Ordinances Chapter 15, Sections 15.05 [construction erosion and sediment control]; and 15.06 [post-construction stormwater management]) for maintenance of on-site infiltration and phosphorous removal by use of best management practices (BMPs) will be met or exceeded.SHINE has coordinated with the City of Janesville stormwater staff regarding requirements for stormwater management. As a result of that coordination, the stormwater plan for the site incorporates the use of vegetated drainage swales for control of both stormwater quantity and quality. No retention or detention "pond" is to be constructed at the site to avoid larger water surface areas (even during temporary periods of storm runoff), thereby avoiding the potential for glare from the surface that might affect aircraft at the adjacent Southwestern Wisconsin Regional Airport. The absence of permanent or occasional water, as well as food sources, also minimizes frequenting of the site by waterfowl, such as Canada geese, which could otherwise be a concern for both the airport (bird aircraft hazard) and for stormwater quality due to the introduction of fecal material, a common concern for urban stormwater management ponds in the region.Most areas of the site that are not impervious are either landscaped with native vegetation, cool-season grasses, or continue agricultural row-crop production. Use of native vegetation rather than turf grass eliminates or greatly reduces irrigation needs and maintains a low surface runoff and natural (i.e., higher than turf grass) evapotranspiration condition. All of these practices result in minimal impact to surface water downstream of the site, or even a reduction in surface runoff, compared to the current row-crop agricultural use which involves annual tillage practices. During operation, dewatering is not required because the measured groundwater level is well below the deepest basement. Thus, there is no effect on surface water quantity or flow characteristics due to drawdown of groundwater or discharge of operation phase dewatering effluent. Indirect impacts of site runoff on surface waters are, therefore, SMALL. 19.4.4.1.1.3Facility DecommissioningAs described above, no surface water features are present on or in the immediate area surrounding the SHINE site. As a result, there are no direct effects from decommissioning to surface water resources. Federal, state and local regulations and permit procedures provide minimum requirements for stormwater management during decommissioning activities to prohibit adverse impacts on surface water, or stormwater. A stormwater pollution prevention plan, including a sediment and erosion control plan, is required and mitigates the potential indirect impacts associated with the release of sediment or other runoff constituents to off-site areas. There are no impoundments or significant detention/retention areas on the site currently, or as a component of the site plan, that provide retention of storm runoff. During decommissioning, dewatering is not required because the measured groundwater level is well below the deepest basement. Thus, there is no effect on surface water quantity or flow characteristics due to drawdown of groundwater or discharge of decommissioning phase dewatering effluent. Consequently, indirect impacts of decommissioning of the SHINE facility on surface water are SMALL. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-36Rev. 019.4.4.1.2Groundwater19.4.4.1.2.1Construction, Operations and DecommissioningThe construction of the facility includes the excavation of the RCA to an approximate depth no greater than approximately 39 ft. (11.9m) below final grade of 827.0 ft. (252.1m) (Section 19.4.3.2). The resulting final elevation of the base of the excavation is 788 ft. (240m), more than 20 ft. (6m) higher than the measured high groundwater elevation of 765.92 ft. (233.45m). All elevations are referenced to North American Vertical Datum 88 (NAVD 88). Consequently, there is no direct impact to groundwater flow. All water used by the SHINE facility is obtained from the City of Janesville municipal water supply system and all sanitary wastes are discharged directly to the City of Janesville sanitary sewer system. No groundwater withdrawals and no groundwater returns are required during the construction, operation, or decommissioning of the facility, with no direct or indirect impacts to groundwater. Consequently, direct and indirect impacts to groundwater are SMALL. 19.4.4.2Water Use19.4.4.2.1Surface WaterAll water used at the SHINE site during construction, operation, and decommissioning is obtained from the City of Janesville municipal water supply system and all waste water discharges go directly to the City of Janesville sanitary sewer system. Additionally, the facility is designed such that there is no liquid discharge from the RCA. Consequently, there is no use or release of water from the facility to the adjacent environment that would affect surface water hydrologic systems. Direct impacts to surface water from plant operations are, therefore, SMALL.19.4.4.2.2GroundwaterConstruction, operation, and decommissioning activities do not involve the use of groundwater. Any water utilized on-site is obtained from the City of Janesville Public Water Utility. Consequently, direct impacts of water use on groundwater are SMALL. The average estimated water usage by the SHINE facility during operations is 6070 gallons (22,977 liters) per day and a consumptive water use of 1560 gallons (5905 liters) per week. As noted in Subsection 19.3.4.2.2, the Janesville Water Utility provides water supply for both public drinking water and for fire protection, utilizing eight wells. The water supply system for the City of Janesville includes two water storage reservoirs and one water tower. According to the City of Janesville, the total pumping capacity of its eight groundwater wells is 29 million gallons per day (Mgd) (109.8million liters per day [Mld]). Average water usage is about 11Mgd (41.6Mld) with a maximum recorded daily demand of 25.8Mgd (97.7 Mld). Accordingly, the excess capacity of the Janesville water supply system is approximately 3.2Mgd (12.1 Mld). Because there is excess capacity within the Janesville water supply system, potential indirect effects from the demand from the SHINE facility are also SMALL. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-37Rev. 019.4.4.3Water QualityPotential surface water and groundwater quality impacts of site construction and operation are discussed in this section.19.4.4.3.1Surface Water19.4.4.3.1.1Facility Construction and DecommissioningNo surface water features are present on or in the immediate area surrounding the SHINE site. As a result, there are no direct effects to water quality. Potential indirect surface water quality impacts from facility construction and decommissioning are similar to those of construction of any typical industrial or commercial facility in the area. Erosion and sediment control for ground disturbing activities will meet or exceed the regulatory requirements, including Clean Water Act National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) regulations and Wisconsin regulations (NR 151.11). In addition to soil erosion and sedimentation, potential release of other potential construction activity pollutants (petroleum products, adhesives , paint, etc.), is minimized by SHINE's waste management and minimization program (Subsection 19.4.8.1.2.3 and 19.2.5.6). 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.Construction- and decommissioning-phase dewatering is not required because the measured groundwater level is well below the deepest excavation. Thus, there is no effect on surface water quality due to drawdown of groundwater or discharge of construction phase and decommissioning phase dewatering effluent. Therefore, indirect impacts to water quality from construction and decommissioning are SMALL.19.4.4.3.1.2Facility Operation As described in Subsection 19.4.1.1, meeting the requirements of state and local stormwater management requirements minimizes potential impacts associated with site development. One of the most significant indicators of urban stormwater quality is imperviousness. The site has a low percentage of imperviousness (Figure 19.2.1-1) and the impervious areas discharge to vegetated pervious areas where treatment of runoff occurs, including infiltration, filtering, and biological uptake of pollutants. According to state permitting requirement at NR151.12, SHINE must complete a detailed simulation of hydrology and pollutant discharges with and without use of stormwater BMPs to show 80 percent removal of total suspended solids by the BMPs to be implemented. As appropriate and as required by permit, the SHINE site design will maintain a minimum site infiltration amount, defined as either: (1)at least 60percent of the pre-development infiltration based on average annual rainfall, or (2)at least 10percent of the 2-year, 24-hour duration storm runoff. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-38Rev. 0Approximately 53.75 ac. (21.75 ha) of the total site may remain in row-crop agricultural use where applications of chemicals in accordance with best agricultural practices would continue. Alternatively, all or a portion of the existing agricultural use area of the site may be converted to native vegetation, reducing chemical applications and other associated existing agricultural practices that have a higher potential for affecting surface water quality.Additionally, extensive use of native landscaping or cool-season grasses at the site minimizes the need for applications of herbicides, pesticides, and fertilizer at the site. Small areas of turf grass are maintained, and applications of any of these chemicals or fertilizers are performed in a manner consistent with product label instructions to minimize potential impacts. The oil stored on-site, which assumes a bounding value of an approximately 30,000-gallon (113,562 L) underground storage tank containing fuel oil for the standby generator, requires a Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan in accordance with 40 CFR Part 112. The SPCC Plan details requirements for oil spill prevention, preparedness, and response to prevent oil discharges to navigable waters and adjoining shorelines. The implementation of the SPCC Plan prevents releases from the aboveground oil storage from impacting surface waters.During operation, dewatering is not required because the measured groundwater level is well below the deepest basement. Thus, there is no effect on surface water quality due to drawdown of groundwater or discharge of operation phase dewatering effluent. Therefore, impacts to water quality from operation of the SHINE facility are SMALL.19.4.4.3.2Groundwater 19.4.4.3.2.1Construction, Operation, and DecommissioningPossible indirect impacts on groundwater quality can occur during construction, operation or decommissioning if spills from vehicles, equipment, or storage areas penetrate hard surfaces (asphalt or concrete) or are accidentally released to pervious surfaces and migrate to groundwater prior to detection and remediation of the release. All equipment and material storage areas are in compliance with appropriate regulations requiring secondary containment of stored liquids and materials. Oil storage associated with the operation of the facility includes an approximately 30,000-gallon (113,562 L) underground storage tank containing fuel oil for the standby diesel generator. Fuel storage associated with the construction/decommissioning is within secondary containment and the implementation of the SPCC Plan prevents releases from migrating through the subsurface and impacting groundwater. Measured groundwater levels are below the deepest excavation during construction and decommissioning, and below the base of the lowest basement, which prevents any direct impacts to groundwater. Because of the depth of groundwater below the SHINE site, and the use of appropriate management and control measures as stated above, direct and indirect impacts to groundwater quality are SMALL. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-39Rev. 019.4.4.4MonitoringThe facility is eligible for a WPDES stormwater discharge permit exclusion under Wisconsin Administrative Code NR 216.21(3). The stormwater discharge permit exclusion does not include any stormwater monitoring requirements. Because of the absence of direct impacts to surface water, the low potential for indirect impacts, and the use of management measures and controls to prevent releases to surface water, no surface water monitoring activities are planned for the site.Because of the absence of direct impacts to groundwater, the low potential for indirect impacts, and the use of management measures and controls to prevent releases to groundwater, no non-radiological groundwater monitoring activities are planned for the site. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-40Rev. 019.4.5ECOLOGICAL RESOURCESThis subsection addresses the impacts of construction and operation on the ecological resources on and within the vicinity of the SHINE site. The impacts discussed below are based on the characterization and description of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems within the SHINE site and near site region from Subsection 19.3.5. The region surrounding the SHINE site is defined in Subsection19.3.1.1.2 as the area within a 5 mi (8-km) radius of the site centerpoint and is located entirely within Rock County, Wisconsin. The ecological resources described in Subsection19.3.5 are based on recorded information provided by resource agencies (WDNR and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [USFWS]) and supplemental quarterly field surveys conducted in 2011 and 2012. Although the region is defined as the area within a 5 mi (8-km) radius of the site centerpoint, protected species information was provided by the USFWS and WDNR within a 6 mi (9.7 km) radius of the site.Impacts include effects from activities associated with construction and operation, including excavation, grading, placement of fill material, temporary staging and construction laydown, construction of permanent features, and potential operational disturbances. This evaluation indicates the magnitude of potential impacts and whether mitigation measures are required.As described in Subsection 19.3.5, the SHINE site consists of a 91.27-ac. (36.94ha) parcel that has been farmed for the past several decades and is routinely disturbed by the disking, plowing, herbicide application and harvesting activities associated with row crop production. Ecological resources at the SHINE site, therefore, are limited by the active agricultural practices on the site and by a complete lack of surface water resources. Because baseline conditions consist solely of agricultural land lacking native terrestrial or aquatic habitat, post construction ecological monitoring and maintenance plans are not deemed necessary. 19.4.5.1Impacts from Construction This subsection describes the potential construction-related ecological impacts to the SHINE site and near off-site areas based on the SHINE facility site layout (see Figure 19.2.1-1). Activities such as earthmoving, excavation, erection, batch plant operation, and construction-related traffic generate potential disturbances to ecological resources during the construction phase of the SHINE project. Direct and indirect impacts associated with construction-related disturbance to the site and near-site areas is limited to the agricultural lands on-site. Figure 19.2.1-1 depicts the proposed buildings for site construction. Given the agricultural nature of the site, land clearing is not necessary. Furthermore, the project does not involve clearing along stream banks, dredging, disposal of dredged material, or waste disposal areas. On the 91.27-ac. (36.94 ha) SHINE site, direct impacts from construction permanently converts 25.67ac. (10.39ha) of agricultural lands to industrial facilities. Although the entire site is in agricultural production, 0.18 ac. (0.07 ha) of permanent impacts are technically mapped as Developed, Open Space (Table 19.4.5-1). Permanent conversion to industrial facilities include the construction of facility buildings, employee parking lot, facility access road/driveway, stormwater detention area, access road drainage ditches, and US 51 drainage ditches. Construction impacts also include the temporary impact of 14.54 ac. (5.88 ha) of agricultural Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-41Rev. 0lands used for the construction parking area, construction material staging or lay down area, and temporary disturbance from water and sewer line installation. Temporary impact areas are either returned to agriculture or restored with either cool season grasses or native prairie. Construction impacts are summarized in Table 19.4.5-1. 19.4.5.1.1Places and Entities of Special InterestThere are no places or entities of special interest on-site, including wetlands. Habitats of special interest off-site include wetlands and endangered resources identified by the WDNR near the SHINE site. As described in Subsection 19.3.5.6, mapped wetland land cover within a 5-mi. (8-km) radius includes just 722 ac. (292 ha) of woody wetlands and 787 ac. (318ha) of emergent herbaceous wetlands (see Table19.3.1-1). None of these wetland resources are impacted by construction at the SHINE site. As part of a WDNR endangered resources review letter, six habitats of special interest were identified near (within 6mi. [9.6km]) the SHINE site (WDNR, 2012b) including dry prairie, dry-mesic prairie, mesic prairie, Southern dry-mesic forest, Southern mesic forest, and wet prairie (see Subsection 19.3.5.4.1). These habitats are not located on the SHINE site and none of these habitats near the site are either directly or indirectly impacted by construction. Happy Hollow County Park (southwest of the site) was also identified by WDNR near the SHINE site but is not impacted by construction. As discussed in Subsection 19.3.5.4.3, Rock County is located along a principal route of the Mississippi Flyway and, therefore, the natural habitats along the Rock River are particularly useful to migrating birds for resting, feeding and foraging. As stated in Subsection19.3.5.5, the Rock River is 1.9 mi. (3.1 km) southwest of the SHINE site. Although the site may be used occasionally for resting or foraging by migratory birds, habitat on-site and in adjacent lands are dominated by agricultural and developed uses that are not considered high value or important ecological systems. Although the project permanently converts 25.67 ac. (10.39 ha) of agricultural lands to industrial facilities, this direct impact is not significant when compared to the vast amount of agricultural land remaining in the region (see Table 19.4.5-1).In summary, impacts to places and entities of special interest from construction are SMALL because such ecological resources are not present on-site and because the identified off-site resources are distant from the site and are not impacted by construction on the SHINE site. Specific mitigation measures and management controls are not needed.19.4.5.1.2Aquatic Communities and Wetlands There are no streams, ponds, wetlands, or other aquatic communities present on the SHINE site. Because the site lacks wetlands and aquatic resources, and because dewatering of groundwater in excavations is not anticipated, any potential construction-related impacts to wetlands and aquatic resources are limited to indirect off-site impacts associated with runoff and siltation. As stated in Subsection 19.3.5.5, the nearest water feature is a small intermittent stream 1.6 mi. (2.6 km) south of the site and the Rock River is 1.9 mi. (3.1 km) southwest of the site. However, this intermittent stream receives drainage from lands east of the SHINE site and does not receive runoff from the site. Runoff from the site flows southwest toward the Rock River. However, because of the high infiltration rate of the soils on the SHINE site, no organized stream channel and associated aquatic habitats are present. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-42Rev. 0BMPs are used in accordance with the SWPPP, as required by the WDNR, to prevent sediment runoff and subsequent siltation in receiving streams during construction. Because of the absence of on-site aquatic communities and wetlands, the distance to off-site streams, the high infiltration rate of the soils near the SHINE site, and the implementation of BMPs on-site, direct and indirect impacts to aquatic communities and wetlands from construction are SMALL. Specific mitigation measures and management controls are not needed.19.4.5.1.3Terrestrial CommunitiesAs summarized in Table 19.4.5-1, direct construction impacts permanently convert 25.67 ac. (10.39 ha) of agricultural lands to industrial facilities including the construction of facility buildings, employee parking lot, facility access road/driveway, vegetated stormwater drainage swales, access road drainage ditches and US 51drainage ditches. Construction impacts also include the direct temporary impact of 14.54ac. (5.88ha) of agricultural lands used for the construction parking area, construction material staging or lay down area, and temporary disturbance from water and sewer line installation. Temporary impact areas are either returned to agriculture or restored with either cool season grasses or native prairie. The terrestrial communities on the SHINE site and near site areas are described in Subsection19.3.5.7. Wildlife potentially affected by construction includes bird, mammal and/or herpetofauna species that occasionally use the site as a travel corridor or for foraging or resting. Given the routine agricultural disturbance and lack of water resources on-site, wildlife occurrence on the SHINE site is relatively infrequent. Mammals were not commonly observed on-site. Their use of the site is sporadic given the lack of cover, shelter, and water supply. Furthermore, there were no amphibians or reptiles observed on the SHINE site. With the dominance of agriculture on the SHINE site and lack of other wildlife habitat, wildlife use on the SHINE site is minimal. The minor loss of agricultural lands to industrial facilities is not significant when compared to the 25,236 ac. (10,213 ha) of agricultural land remaining within a 5-mi. (8-km) radius of the site (seeTable 19.4.5-1). Furthermore, lands on-site not utilized for development of industrial facilities are returned to agriculture or restored using cool season grasses or native prairie species. As such, impacts to wildlife and terrestrial communities from construction are SMALL. Specific mitigation measures and management controls are not needed.White-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus), eastern cottontail (Sylvilagus floridanus), and Canada goose are identified in Subsection 19.3.5 as recreationally valuable game species observed on-site. Their use of the site, however, is infrequent given the lack of cover, shelter, and water supply. As such, impacts to recreationally important species from construction are SMALL and specific mitigation measures and management controls are not necessary. 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. The number of bird collisions with construction equipment, such as cranes, or new structures has not been quantitatively assessed. However, based on the findings of NUREG-1437 which demonstrated that the effects of avian collisions with existing structures at nuclear power plants is SMALL, the impacts of such collisions during the construction phase are considered SMALL and specific mitigation measures and management controls are not needed. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-43Rev. 0Wildlife 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, Ron, 2009). Amphibian and bat species, however, are generally lacking from the SHINE site due to the lack of appropriate habitat. In addition, artificial lighting could create or exacerbate an avian-collision hazard if tall cranes are illuminated for work during nighttime construction. According to Ogden, a large proportion of migrating birds affected by human-built structures are songbirds, apparently because of their propensity to migrate at night, their low flight altitudes, and their tendency to be trapped and disoriented by artificial light, making them vulnerable to collision with obstructions (Ogden, L.J.E., 1996). For any nighttime construction at the SHINE site, BMPs such as light source shielding and appropriate directional lighting are used to mitigate the hazards to wildlife associated with artificial nighttime illumination. Based on the general lack of appropriate habitat at the SHINE site for amphibians, bats, and most bird species, and the BMPs to mitigate effects to wildlife, the direct and indirect impacts of artificial illumination at nighttime during the construction phase are SMALL thus specific mitigation measures and management controls are not needed.19.4.5.1.4Invasive SpeciesAlthough several "restricted" or "prohibited" weedy invasive species were observed in various land cover types off-site, as discussed in Subsection 19.3.5.8, no invasive species listed by the WDNR were observed on the SHINE site. Disturbanc e associated with construction activities such as earthmoving and excavation, however, can create conditions for opportunistic invasive species to become established. Temporary impact areas and other areas not permanently converted to industrial uses are either returned to agriculture or restored with either cool season grasses or native prairie species. Invasive species are controlled in areas restored to agriculture as has been done in agricultural fields on-site for the past several decades. If restored to cool-season lawn or native prairie, invasive species are controlled through mowing or similar maintenance activities. Thus, the invasive species impacts from construction are considered SMALL and monitoring or maintenance plans are not anticipated at this time. 19.4.5.1.5Protected SpeciesConsultation letters from the WDNR and USFWS were acquired to provide information regarding ecological resources near (within 6 mi. [9.6 km]) the SHINE site (WDNR, 2012b; USFWS, 2012). This consultation process was used to obtain agency input regarding threatened and endangered species, sensitive habitats, and other ecological characteristics for the site and near-site areas. A list of threatened/endangered species or species of special concern identified within 6 mi. (9.6km) of the SHINE site is provided in Table 19.3.5-7. Terrestrial and aquatic listed species include five fish species, five mussel species, one turtle species, and 27 plant species as identified in Subsection 19.3.5.11. WDNR identified the Blanding's turtle (Emydoidea blandingii) as state threatened and potentially occurring near the site. Blanding's turtles were not observed during field reconnaissance. Given the absence of wetlands and open water habitat on the site or its immediate near-site environs, Blanding's turtles are not expected to occur on-site. Agency consultation did not identify any state or federally listed species on the SHINE site. Furthermore, no designated critical habitat was identified on-site or within 6 mi. (9.6 km) of the
SHINE site. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-44Rev. 0The listed fish, mussel and turtle species inhabit aquatic areas such as rivers, streams, ponds, and/or wetlands which are absent from the site. BMPs are used in accordance with the SWPPP, as required by the WDNR, to prevent sediment runoff and subsequent siltation in receiving streams during construction. As stated in Subsection 19.3.5.5, potential receiving streams such as the Rock River are distant from the SHINE site. The use of proper BMPs combined with the distance to the nearest receiving waters and the high infiltration rate of the soils near the SHINE site minimizes impacts to protected species during construction. As such, construction-related impacts to the nearest receiving waters would be negligible and essentially would eliminate the potential for impacts to protected aquatic species.The listed plant species inhabit forests or woodlands, riparian areas, and prairies. These habitat types are absent from the agricultural SHINE site and none of the listed plant species were observed during field reconnaissance surveys on-site. In addition, protected plants were not observed in riparian areas of nearby streams. Thus, construction would not impact protected woodland or prairie plants on or near the site. As discussed in Subsection 19.3.5.5, receiving streams and their associated riparian zones are distant from the SHINE site. Because of the absence of on-site aquatic communities and wetlands, the distance to off-site streams, the high infiltration rate of the soils near the SHINE site, and the implementation of BMPs on-site, direct and indirect impacts to any protected plant species associated with riparian areas from construction are SMALL. As such, construction-related impacts to protected species on the SHINE site or in near off-site areas are SMALL. Specific mitigation measures and management controls are not needed.19.4.5.2Impacts from OperationsThis subsection provides a description of the potential impacts of operation of the SHINE facility on terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. 19.4.5.2.1Places and Entities of Special Interest Places and entities of special interest, as described in Subsection 19.3.5.4, include a description of communities and habitats of special interest, other sensitive or susceptible areas, and important ecological systems. Communities and habitats of special interest near the SHINE site (within 6 mi. [9.6km]) include wetlands, six endangered resources (habitats) identified by the WDNR, and state designated natural areas of Rock County. Other sensitive or susceptible areas near the SHINE site include Happy Hollow County Park (southwest of the site). Important ecological systems near the SHINE site include the Mississippi Flyway. Due to the complete conversion of the lands of the SHINE site and its immediate environs to cultivated fields or other developed uses, none of the described places and entities of special interest are present either on-site or in adjacent off-site areas. Habitats of the SHINE site and adjacent lands are dominated by agricultural and developed uses and are not considered to be high value or important ecological systems. Although air emissions from natural gas heating facilities are expected, such emissions are not expected to impact agricultural lands on-site or communities and habitats of special interest off site. Additionally, the SHINE facility does not utilize cooling towers. Consequently, there are no operational impacts associated with drift (i.e., gaseous or particulate emissions to the air from cooling towers). Herbicide application for lawn maintenance is minimal and is only used on the SHINE site, thus operational impacts to off-site areas identified as places and entities of special Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-45Rev. 0interest are minimized. The operation of the SHINE facility results in a localized minor increase in noise but noise levels are similar to that of the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport that is immediately adjacent to the SHINE site. Thus, operation impacts to the off-site areas identified as places and entities of special interest are SMALL. Mitigation measures and management controls are not needed.19.4.5.2.2Aquatic Communities and Wetlands Aquatic resources and wetlands near the SHINE site are described in Subsections 19.3.5.5 and 19.3.5.6, respectively. Aquatic resources near the SHINE site include the Rock River and an unnamed stream which is a tributary of the Rock River. In accordance with Subsection 19.3.5.5, the Rock River is 1.9 mi. (3.1 km) from the SHINE site. There are no aquatic resources or water bodies present on the SHINE site and there are no jurisdictional wetlands identified on the
SHINE site.The SHINE facility does not withdraw water from any surface water body or from groundwater. Rather, water is provided by the Janesville Public Water Supply. Thus, there are no operational impacts associated with impingement or entrainment of aquatic biota. Furthermore, the SHINE facility does not discharge directly into the Rock River or any other nearby water body thus avoiding any pollutant or thermal affects to aquatic resources. In addition, a vegetated on-site detention swale is used to control stormwater runoff which, when combined with the distance to the nearest off-site water bodies minimizes runoff and siltation to off-site receiving streams. Thus, operational impacts on aquatic communities or wetlands are SMALL. Specific mitigation measures and management controls are not needed.19.4.5.2.3Terrestrial Communities Terrestrial plant communities are characterized in Subsection 19.3.5.7.1 for the SHINE site and areas in proximity of the SHINE site. The terrestrial communities of the site and areas in proximity to the site are mainly agricultural areas cultivated for crops, hay, and pasture. No federal or state-listed threatened, endangered or special concern plant species have been observed on or in the proximity of the SHINE site. Herbicide application is occasionally used around buildings and driveways as part of lawn maintenance activities to c ontrol weedy species. Thus, operational impacts to plant communities are SMALL.Wildlife communities for the SHINE site and near site areas are described in Subsection19.3.5.7.2. With the dominance of agriculture on the SHINE site and lack of other wildlife habitat, wildlife use is on the SHINE site is minimal. Additionally, there are no known occurrences of threatened or endangered species on the SHINE site. Thus, operational impacts to wildlife are SMALL.The SHINE facility and associated buildings do not result in significant bird mortality from bird collisions, though infrequent bird collisions with buildings resulting in mortality can occur. As is discussed in Subsection 19.4.1 most buildings on the SHINE site have a relatively low profile. Consequently, effects on bird populations from collisions with build ings are minimized. Therefore, the operational impacts to bird species and populations from collisions are SMALL. Specific mitigation measures and management controls are not needed. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-46Rev. 0The operation of the SHINE facility results in a localized minor increase in noise (Subsection19.4.2). But noise levels are localized to the SHINE site and not elevated above background noise emissions from US 51 immediately adjacent to the SHINE site. Thus, operation impacts to wildlife from noise are SMALL. Specific measures and controls are not needed.19.4.5.2.4Invasive Species There were nine "restricted" or "prohibited" weedy invasive species observed off-site in various land cover types including developed lands, agricultural lands, and riparian corridors. Information on these species can be found in Subsection 19.3.5.8. No invasive species listed by the WDNR (neither restricted nor prohibited) were observed on the SHINE site. Additionally, there are no existing plans to implement invasive species management/control activities at the facility. Thus, operational impacts associated with invasive species are SMALL. Specific measures and controls are not needed.19.4.5.2.5Protected SpeciesA list of threatened/endangered species or species of special concern identified near the SHINE site is provided in Table 19.3.5-7. Terrestrial and aquatic listed species include five fish species, five mussel species, one turtle species, and 27 plant species. WDNR identified the Blanding's turtle (Emydoidea blandingii) as state threatened and potentially occurring near the site. Blanding's turtles were not observed during field reconnaissance. Given the absence of wetlands and open water habitat on the site or its immediate near-site environs, Blanding's turtles are not expected to occur on-site. Agency consultation did not identify any state or federally listed mammal, bird, or insect species within 6 mi. (9.6km) of the SHINE site. Furthermore, no designated critical habitat was identified on-site or within 6 mi. (9.6 km) of the SHINE site.The listed fish, mussel and turtle species inhabit aquatic areas such as rivers, streams, ponds, and/or wetlands. Because these habitats are absent from the site, these species are not expected to occur on the SHINE site. Furthermore, the lack of intake and discharge structures on the Rock River or any other nearby water body avoids operational impacts to the aquatic habitats of protected species. The listed plant species inhabit the three general habitat types of forests/woodlands, riparian areas, and prairies. There is no forested, riparian, or prairie habitat on the SHINE site nor were any of the listed plant species observed during any of the vegetation surveys within the site or near the site. Furthermore, the entire SHINE site is composed of agricultural land and does not include the preferred habitat of the listed species. In accordance with Subsection 19.3.5.5, the nearest receiving stream and associated riparian areas are more than a mile from the SHINE site. Although protected plant species were not observed in nearby riparian areas during field reconnaissance, these are areas where protected plant species could become established. The use of appropriate stormwater controls comlow enrichedbined with the distance to the nearest receiving stream minimizes impacts to any protected plant species that could potentially be associated with near site riparian areas. As such, operational impacts to protected species on the SHINE site or in near off-site areas are SMALL. Specific mitigation measures and management controls are not needed. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-47Rev. 019.4.5.3Impacts from DecommissioningConstruction of the SHINE facility is expected to begin in 2015. Following the cessation of operations the facility will be decommissioned. Decommissioning activities, however, are similar to construction activities, and involve heavy equipment to dismantle buildings and remove roadway and parking facilities. As such, impacts from decommissioning are anticipated to be similar to the impacts associated with construction and SMALL. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-48Rev. 0Table 19.4.5-1 Summary of Impacts to 2006 Land Use/Land Cover (a)a)2006 Land Use/Land Cover is the most recent data availableb)Total may add up to more or less than 100 percent due to rounding. c)
Reference:
Fry et al., 2011NLCD 2006 Land Cover ClassPermanent Site ImpactsTemporary Site ImpactsTotal Land Cover Within the Region (c)ac.haac.haac.haPercentOpen Water7963221.6Developed, Open Space0.180.07304312316.1Developed, Low Intensity5858237111.7Developed, Medium Intensity19687963.9Developed, High Intensity9924012.0Barren43170.1Deciduous Forest329813356.6Evergreen Forest68280.1 Mixed Forest100.0Shrub/Scrub5052041.0Grassland10494252.1 Pasture/Hay5896238611.7Cultivated Crops25.6710.3914.545.8825,23610,21350.2Woody Wetlands7222921.4 Emergent Herbaceous Wetland7873181.6Total(b)28.8510.4614.545.8850,26220,339100.0 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-49Rev. 019.4.6HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES19.4.6.1Impacts to Historic PropertiesAs is described in Subsection 19.3.6.3, no on-site historic properties are associated with the SHINE site. No archaeological sites or evidence of cultural resources were identified within the survey area. The Wisconsin Historical Society (WHS) has also reviewed the findings of the Phase I archaeological survey and has indicated that no further consultation with the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) regarding the SHINE facility is required (WHS, 2012).As discussed in Subsection 19.3.6.4, SHINE initiated consultation with 13 federally recognized tribes regarding the proposed development. A single response letter was received from the Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska who indicated that they have cultural properties of interest in the project area, but had no concerns regarding the project. However, they did indicate the desire to be contacted in the event burial sites or other cultural materials were discovered during construction. Follow-up calls were made to representatives of the remaining 12 tribes; however, no return calls to SHINE were received. Prior to construction, SHINE will develop a Cultural Resource Management Plan that will contain procedures governing notification and management of cultural resources during both construction and operations.The nearest listed National Register of Historic Properties (NRHP) property is the Hugunin House located approximately 1.1 mi. (1.7 km) from the SHINE site (see Figure19.3.6-1). No direct impacts occur to this property by either construction or operational activities. Additionally, given the distance of the listed property and the low profile of the proposed structures on the SHINE site, no visual or other indirect impacts occur. Therefore, potential impacts to historic and archaeological resources are SMALL. Due to the absence of historic cemeteries and prehistoric mounds within the boundaries of the SHINE site, the potential for the presence of human burials or human remains is SMALL. However, if human burials or human remains are identified at any time, work will immediately stop with no further disturbance of the human remains. If human remains are discovered, the construction personnel will contact a representative of SHINE. The representative of SHINE will contact the appropriate local law enforcement and the WHS and communicate that human remains have been discovered. If the human remains are determined to be archaeological in nature, the WHS in conjunction with SHINE will determine what further actions will be taken.Other past, present and reasonably foreseeable Federal and non-Federal projects identified in the immediate area around the SHINE site include the planned development of lands immediately north of the site as part of the Janesville Tax Increment Financing District No. 35 Project Plan (City of Janesville, 2012a). However, because no historic properties are impacted by the SHINE site, no additional cumulative impacts historic and cultural resources would occur. Consequently, potential cumulative impacts of the SHINE project are SMALL. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-50Rev. 019.4.7SOCIOECONOMICSThis subsection describes potential impacts to the socioeconomic environment, including transportation system impacts associated with the construction, operation and decommissioning of the SHINE facility. The evaluation of potential socioeconomics impacts addresses potential changes in the regional population, economy, housing availability, and public services. The evaluation of transportation system impacts addresses routes and modes that are involved with transporting materials, workers, and equipment to the SHINE site. 19.4.7.1Socioeconomics Impacts This subsection evaluates impacts to the population, housing, public services (i.e. water supply), public education, and tax-revenues in the region of influence (ROI), Rock County, that result from constructing, operating, and decommissioning the SHINE facility. Potential impacts of constructing the facility are attributable to the size of the construction workforce, the expenditures needed to support the construction program, and the tax payments made to political jurisdictions. Because direct impacts are those that occur on-site, the only direct impacts are associated with the presence of the workforce at the SHINE site. All other socioeconomic impacts are considered to be indirect, as they occur off-site. The analysis presented in this subsection is based on the bounding parameters for the projected workforces for construction, operation, and decommissioning. As noted in Table 19.4.7-1, the peak on-site construction phase (contractor) workforce is 420workers, and the maximum on-site operational phase workforce is 150 workers. This analysis assumes a 24-month schedule of construction-related activities. Decommissioning is estimated to start in the year 2046, and will involve a peak month on-site workforce of 261
workers.19.4.7.1.1Population ImpactsThe ROI population is 160,331 (USCB, 2010a). Growth projections show that the population in 2015 is 165,354, and the population in 2045 is 191,703 (see Table 19.3.7-4). The analysis of population impacts considers the population growth potential due to the SHINE workforce requirements for construction, operational and decommissioning phases. As shown in Table 19.4.7-1, a large construction trade workforce is available in the ROI for the major labor categories (those for which a peak labor force need of at least 20workers is projected). Therefore, the potential for large numbers of trade workers moving into the ROI is lessened by the extent to which the estimated local labor force meets construction workforce needs. Because the ROI labor force in the construction trades is demonstrated to be abundant relative to construction workforce requirements (except for boilermakers and iron workers for whom data are not available from the Bureau of Labor Statistics [BLS]), it is estimated that approximately 60percent of the required construction workforce for these trades come from within the ROI. It is conservatively assumed that 20 percent of the required boilermakers and iron workers are available from within the ROI. Similarly, based on the large ROI labor force in the major occupation categories, it is expected that approximately 60 percent of the required operations workforce comes from within the ROI. Furthermore, due to the more specialized nature of some trades required for the decommissioning workforce, it is expected that just over 50 percent of that workforce comes from within the ROI (estimates based on current ROI labor force levels). Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-51Rev. 0The estimated numbers of construction workers, operational workers and decommissioning workers that are available locally, and the estimated labor force deficiencies by occupation are shown in Table 19.4.7-1. These estimates show that 248 out of the peak requirement of 420construction workers are present within the ROI labor force. Therefore, 172 construction workers come either from the labor force of the surrounding 50-mi. (80km) radius or relocate from outside the 50-mi. (80-km) radius. The 172 construction workers estimated to be not available within the ROI labor force equates to 41 percent of the peak month construction workforce. Based on analysis of the overall Rock County labor force as shown in Table19.3.7-1, it is estimated that 17 percent of the existing labor force commutes to Rock County from other counties. Consistent with this estimate, it is assumed that 17 percent of the 172 construction workers to be added to the ROI labor force reside in counties outside of Rock County and commute to the ROI. The remainder, 143 construction workers and their families, are assumed to relocate to reside within the ROI. The average household size in the ROI is 2.5persons per household (USCB, 2010a). Therefore, 143 workers relocating to the various communities within the ROI increases the population in the ROI by approximately 358 people. This estimated population increase constitutes 0.22 percent of the ROI's population of 160,331. Therefore, the impact of the construction of the SHINE facility on population is SMALL.Table 19.4.7-1 shows the estimate that 88 out of the required 150 permanent operations workers are available in the ROI. It is assumed that 17 percent of the additional required 62operations workers commute to Rock County from adjacent counties, and that the other 51workers and their families relocate to reside in the ROI. Using the ROI average of 2.5persons per household, the total population increase in the various communities within the ROI due to operational workforce requirements is 128 people. This estimated population increase constitutes 0.08 percent of the projected 2015 population of the ROI. Therefore, the impact of the operation of the SHINE facility on population is SMALL.An estimated 132 of the required 261 decommissioning workers are available in the ROI (see Table19.4.7-1). It is assumed that 17 percent of the additional required 129 decommissioning workers commute to Rock County from adjacent counties, and that the other 107decommissioning workers and their families relocate to the ROI. Based on the ROI average of 2.5persons per household, the ROI population increases by 268 due to the decommissioning workforce. This estimated population increase constitutes 0.14 percent of the projected population of the various communities within the ROI at the end of the 30-year license period. Therefore, the impact of decommissioning of the SHINE facility on population is SMALL.19.4.7.1.2Housing ImpactsSubsection 19.3.7.2.2 and Table 19.3.7-12 provide a summary of the 2010 USCB data concerning availability of housing in the ROI that is used as a basis for estimating the number of housing units that may be available to accommodate housing demands resulting from construction, operation and decommissioni ng. NUREG-1437 presents criteria for the assessment of housing impacts based on the discernible changes in housing availability, prices, and changes in housing construction or conversions. These criteria are:*SMALL: Small and not easily discernible change in housing availability; increases in rental rates or housing values equal or slightly exceed the statewide inflation rate; and no extraordinary construction or conversion of housing. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-52Rev. 0*MODERATE: Discernible but short-lived change in housing availability; rental rates or housing values increase slightly faster than state inflation rate with rates realigning as new housing added; and minor and temporary conversions of non-living space to living space.*LARGE: Very limited housing availability; rental rates or housing values increase well above normal inflation rate for state; and substantial conversions of housing units and overbuilding of new housing units. In 2010, there were 5986 vacant housing units in the ROI (see Table 19.3.7-12). This amount of housing available within the ROI at the time the portion of the construction workforce that is non-resident moves into the area is substantially greater than the total estimated demand for housing due to construction of the SHINE facility. For purposes of analysis, the estimates of 143workers relocating to the ROI for construction phase peak, 51 workers relocating to the ROI to meet operational workforce needs, and 107 workers relocating to the ROI to meet decommissioning workforce needs equates to a total of 301 additional households in the ROI. The 5986 vacant housing units in Rock County in 2010 equal approximately 20 times the total estimated demand for housing. There is clearly an adequate supply of vacant housing to accommodate the requirements of new families for temporary or permanent housing. Further, the decommissioning workforce, which represents approximately one-third of the estimated housing demand, does not relocate to the ROI until the end of the 30-year licensing period.The potential impacts on housing are SMALL due to the large number of available vacant housing units in the ROI and the relatively small requirements for the construction, operations and decommissioning workforce. 19.4.7.1.3Public Services Impacts Public services impacts analys is as directed by Final IS G Augmenting NUREG-1537 concerns water supply facilities. NUREG-1437 presents criteria for the assessment of public services impacts based on the ability to respond to the level of demand and need for additional capacity. These criteria are:*SMALL: Little or no change occurs in ability to respond to level of demand and therefore there is no need to add capital facilities.*MODERATE: There is overtaxing of facilities during peak demand.*LARGE: Existing service levels are substantially degraded and additional capacity is needed.Construction of the SHINE facility requires quantities of potable water to support the needs of the construction work force. During construction and operations, the Janesville Water Utility supplies water to the SHINE site, including potable water uses, fire protection uses, and typical construction uses (e.g. dust suppression and concrete mixing). The average per capita water usage in the United States is 90 gallons per day (gpd) (340.7 liters per day [lpd]) per person including personal use, bathing, laundry and other household uses (USGS, 2012). At a conservatively assumed 30gpd (113.6 lpd) for each construction worker who is on-site for 8 to 12 hours per day, an on-site workforce of 420 needs 12,600 gpd (47,696 lpd) for potable and sanitary use. As discussed in Subsection19.3.7.2.5.1, the Janesville Water Utility has excess Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-53Rev. 0water capacity of 18 Mgd (68.1 Mld). Therefore, impacts on public water supply by the on-site construction workforce are SMALL.The impact to the local water supply systems from SHINE-related population growth can be estimated by multiplying the amount of water that is required per capita by the estimated number of individuals who relocate to the ROI. Subsection 19.3.7.2.5.1 describes the public water supply systems in the area, permitted capacities, and current demands. The average per capita water usage in the United States is 90 gpd (340.7 lpd) per person including personal use, bathing, laundry and other household uses (USGS, 2012). The estimated total construction and operation-related population increase within the ROI of 486 people (construction and operations workforces and their families) increases consumption by 43,740 gpd (165,574 lpd). The excess public water supply capacity in Janesville is 18 Mgd (68.1 Mld). Therefore, impacts to the municipal water supplier due to the estimated population increase are SMALL.Public wastewater treatment facilities are directly related to public water supply facilities. The impact to the local wastewater treatment systems from SHINE-related population increases can be determined by calculating the amount of water that is used and disposed of by these individuals. The average person in the United States uses 90 gpd (340.7 lpd) (USGS, 2012). All wastewater from the SHINE facility is disposed of and treated by the City of Janesville wastewater treatment facilities. The total construction and operation-related population increase of 486 people requires 43,740gpd (165,574 lpd) of additional wastewater treatment demand. The excess treatment capacity in the City of Janesville is 12 Mgd (45.4 Mld). Therefore, based on this excess treatment capacity, impacts to wastewater treatment facilities are SMALL.19.4.7.1.4Public Education ImpactsSchools and student populations are discussed in Subsection 19.3.7.2.5.2. For the ROI, the numbers and types of schools and the numbers of students by district are summarized in Table19.3.7-17. NUREG-1437 presents criteria for the assessment of public education impacts based on changes in student enrollment and the number of teaching staff and classrooms. These criteria are:*SMALL: Project-related enrollment increase is less than or equal to 3 percent, there is no change in the school system's ability to provide educational services, and no additional teaching staff or classroom space is needed.*MODERATE: Student enrollment increases between 4 and 8 percent, and there is an increase in the number of teachers or classrooms.*LARGE: Student enrollment increases by more than 8 percent and current institutions are not adequate to accommodate the influx of students. The Janesville School District (JSD) is the largest school district in the ROI by measure of student enrollment, and the public schools in the ROI that are in closest proximity to the SHINE site are units of the JSD. According to its current Strategic Plan, the JSD is officially seeking to grow its student enrollment. More specifically, it is the JSD Board of Education's goal to increase the net open enrollment gain/loss by 15 percent in the 2011-12 school year (JSD,2011a.). The student to teacher ratio is a common evaluation factor with regards to the capacity of a school, or school district, to accommodate student enrollment growth. In the JSD, the reported ratio is 12.8 students per licensed teacher full time equivalency which compares to the WI Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-54Rev. 0statewide ratio of 13.3 students per teacher full time equivalency (DPI, 2012a). The JSD's school enrollment for the 2011-2012 school year was 10,325 (DPI, 2012b). The district could increase its student enrollment by 412 students without adding any licensed teachers and still not exceed the statewide ratio. A 3percent increase in student enrollment would equate to an additional 310 students.The student age cohort (age 5 to 18) accounts for 20percent of the ROI total population (USCB,2010a and USCB, 2010b). The combination of estimated population increase due to construction workforce and operational workforce requirements results in a net construction and operations related population increase of 486 which contributes 97school-aged children within the ROI. If all students are added in the JSD, enrollment would neither exceed 3percent nor cause the JSD to exceed the statewide student to teacher ratio. No professional staff or classroom additions are needed. Beginning in 2046, an estimated population increase of 268 associated with decommissioning workforce demand contributes 54 school-aged children, assuming the student aged population remains 20percent of the total population. No professional staff or classroom additions would be needed based on that level of increased enrollment. Therefore, the level of impact to the local public education system is SMALL. 19.4.7.1.5Tax Revenue Related ImpactsThe U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) defined the magnitude of license renewal-related tax impacts based on previous case-study analysis as described in NUREG-1437 as:*SMALL if the payments are less than 10percent of revenue of the taxing jurisdiction.*MODERATE if the payments are between 10 and 20percent of revenue of the taxing jurisdiction.*LARGE if the payments are greater than 20percent of revenue of the taxing jurisdiction.Additionally, the NRC determined that if a facility's tax payments are projected to be a dominant source of the community's total revenue, new tax-driven land-use changes are LARGE. This is especially true where the community has no pre-established pattern of development or has not provided adequate public services to support and guide development in the past.Tax revenues associated with the construction, operation and decommissioning of the SHINE facility include payroll taxes on wages and salaries of the construction and operations work forces, sales and use taxes on purchases made by SHINE and the construction, operations and decommissioning workforces, and property taxes on owned real property and improvements. Increased tax collections are a benefit to the state, county and municipal-level jurisdictions as well as school districts.19.4.7.1.6Personal and Corporate Income TaxesWorkforce payroll taxes (federal and state) are generated by construction, operations and decommissioning activities and purchases as well as taxes generated by workforce expenditures. State tax payments are distributed throughout the ROI and extend beyond the ROI, based on the expectation that some construction, operations and decommissioning employees reside outside of Rock County. The relocation of workers to Rock County and Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-55Rev. 0surrounding counties, including some expected to relocate to Wisconsin from other states, results in an increase in payroll taxes paid to Wisconsin.19.4.7.1.7Sales Taxes Workers commuting to the SHINE site from within and outside of the ROI contribute sales tax revenues to the State of Wisconsin and to Rock County and any other counties where they live. The vast majority of sales tax revenues from the ROI are collected by the State, as Rock County's sales tax rate is very low. But the ROI does experience an increase in the amount of sales taxes collected, reflecting the concentration of re-located workers. Sales tax revenues also result from direct purchases by SHINE for materials, equipment and services supporting the construction project, long term operations, and decommissioning. The distribution of these tax revenues is determined by the business locations of the material and service providers and likely reflects a broad area including the ROI and beyond to multiple states. The amount of sales taxes collected over a potential 30-year operating period that are attributable to the SHINE facility is significant, but is relatively minor when compared to the total amount of taxes collected in the ROI.19.4.7.1.8Property TaxesThe SHINE facility is located in the City of Janesville in Rock County. As such, property taxes are paid to Janesville and Rock County as well as the JSD. These jurisdictions all provide public services that benefit SHINE's business and employees. It is SHINE's intent to enter into a Tax Increment Financing (TIF) agreement with the City of Janesville. The TIF agreement allows SHINE to make payments in lieu of taxes to Janesville for a period of 10years at the outset of the license period. These payments, estimated to total $600,000 per year, will be directed to offset infrastructure expenses associated with the SHINE development. During the ten year TIF time period, SHINE pays property taxes based on the assessed value of the property prior to improvements, estimated to be $35,000 per year. Following the 10-year TIF time period, property taxes paid by SHINE are based on the assessed value of real property and improvements, using the property tax rates in place at that time. Comparison of the estimated annual SHINE property tax payment (after expiration of the 10-year TIF time period) with the individual property tax revenues of Janesville and Rock County (using 2010 data available from Wisconsin Department of Revenue [DOR]) and the Janesville School District Board of Education shows that the annual portion of total property tax revenues paid by SHINE equates to approximately 0.30percent of total Rock County general property tax revenues, 0.66 percent of total Janesville general property tax revenues, and 0.99 percent of total Janesville School District general property tax revenues (DOR, 2012 and JSD, 2011b). The effect of property taxes paid by the construction, operations and decommissioning workforces is dispersed across the ROI and beyond. Construction workers commuting to the SHINE site from their homes continue to pay existing property taxes. Workers relocating to the ROI also contribute to increased property tax revenues.19.4.7.1.9Summary of Tax ImpactsOverall tax revenues generated by construction, operation and decommissioning of SHINE will be significant in absolute dollars across the lifetime of the facility, even with consideration of the TIF agreement that allows payment in lieu of taxes for 10years. However, the overall tax revenues are relatively small in comparison to the established tax base of Janesville and Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-56Rev. 0RockCounty. The maximum increase in property tax revenues after expiration of the TIF agreement is expected to be substantially less than 10 percent of the total tax revenue at the city and county levels. Therefore, total tax revenues from SHINE result in SMALL positive impacts at the community level. 19.4.7.1.10Other Socioeconomics Related ImpactsSocioeconomics related impacts in addition to those specifically described above include the potential for supportive business expansion and associated land use changes in the Janesville community as a result of the investments from SHINE. Land use changes due to housing needs are not expected due to the large number of existing vacant housing units. Potential land use changes include those to provide for expansion of existing small businesses or locations for new small businesses that might support SHINE and SHINE employees. If realized, such business expansions and/or new business developments are likely to occur in the southern area of the City of Janesville near the SHINE site in locations where conditions are appropriate for business development, including within the TIF district to the north of the SHINE site. Any such land use changes are subject to local zoning regulations and associated impacts on socioeconomic conditions are expected to be SMALL. 19.4.7.1.11Mitigation Measures to Minimize Socioeconomic ImpactsAs described in the subsections above, the socioeconomic impacts on the ROI resulting from construction, operation, and decommissioning of the SHINE facility are SMALL and no mitigation measures are required to minimize socioeconomic impacts.19.4.7.2TransportationConstruction-related and operations-related effects on the transportation network are provided in this subsection. The effects on the local transportation infrastructure as a result of construction and operations are measured against the existing traffic conditions and the future no-build traffic conditions in Table 19.4.7-2. All goods and services to support the SHINE facility will reach the site using existing roadway networks. 19.4.7.2.1Construction/Modification of Transportation InfrastructureA traffic analysis was performed to assess the construction-period traffic conditions and the post-development operations-related traffic conditions at the SHINE site. The construction entrance to the site is located along US 51. The peak construction traffic volume is estimated to be 14heavy vehicles (dump truck/deliveries) and 451 vehicles (pick-up trucks and cars) per day in 2015. A summary of the effect of construction traffic volumes on the transportation infrastructure is provided in Table 19.4.7-2. The level of construction-related traffic does not affect the level of service anywhere in the transportation infrastructure and no modifications to the infrastructure are necessary. Based on this projected level of construction traffic to and from the site, the level of impact to the transportation infrastructure is SMALL. The traffic analysis also assesses the traffic associated with the operations of the SHINE facility after construction is complete, which is assumed to be in 2016. The entrance to the site is located along US 51 with 75 percent of site-related traffic assumed to be coming from and going to the north and 25percent to/from the south. The traffic volume generated by employees working at the facility is estimated to be 118 vehicles per day. A summary of the effect of these Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-57Rev. 0operations volumes on the transportation infrastructure is provided in Table19.4.7-2. The operation of the facility results in a slight degradation in the level of service (from a level of service [LOS] C to an LOS D) at the intersection of US51 and State Highway11 (SH11) during the morning peak hour resulting in an increased delay at the intersection. This can be easily mitigated by optimizing the signal timing at the intersection to accommodate a greater turning movement from westbound SH11 to southbound US 51 as demonstrated in Table 19.4.7-3. Additionally, the nearby Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport does not need to modify current infrastructure in order to accommodate additional air traffic caused by shipments to and from the SHINE facility. Consequently, there are no impacts to airport facilities. Because traffic conditions during construction are not degraded, and the minor reduction in LOS at SH 11, the transportation impacts are considered to be SMALL and mitigable. 19.4.7.2.2Transportation Routes for Conveying Materials and Personnel to the Site The construction and operation of the SHINE facility does not alter any existing transportation routes for conveying materials and/or personnel to the site. Therefore, the impacts to transportation routes are considered to be SMALL.19.4.7.2.3Traffic Patterns ImpactsThe construction and operation of the SHINE facility does not alter any existing traffic patterns to and from the site. Therefore, the impacts to traffic patterns are considered to be SMALL.19.4.7.2.4Mitigation Measures to Minimize Transportation ImpactsAs mentioned above, the operation of the SHINE facility results in a slight degradation in the LOS at the signalized intersection of US 51 and SH 11. Specifically, the westbound SH 11 to southbound US 51 left-turning movement is affected during the morning peak hour. This condition can be easily mitigated by optimizing the signal timing for this turning movement. A summary of the effect of this mitigated condition is provided in Table 19.4.7-3. By optimizing signal timing for this movement at the intersection, the level of service for the intersection can be improved to its existing level. There are no other transportation infrastructure mitigation requirements in the vicinity of the SHINE site. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-58Rev. 0Table 19.4.7-1 Projected ROI Labor Availability and On-site Labor Requirements at Peak Month of Construction, Operations and Decommissioning SchedulesOccupation SHINE Peak Need(a)Estimate of Labor Force by Occupation in Rock County (b)Available Labor Force in Rock County(c)Rock County Labor Force Deficiency(d)Estimated AvailableNeeded for SHINEConstruction PhaseBoilermaker24ND5519 Carpenter4536072450Electrician55190383817Ironworker50ND101040 Laborer7034068682Equipment Operator/Eng.2613026260Plumber/Pipefitter7070141456Sheet Metal Worker3080(e)161614Construction Supervisor 2016032200Other30ND6624TOTAL420248172TOTAL, Percent 5941Operational PhaseOperation Support 4034034346Productions/Operations37110111126Tech Support 402590(f)259400Other33ND3330TOTAL1508862TOTAL, Percent 5941Decommissioning Phase Carpenter2036072200Ironworker 20ND4416Laborer100340686832Equipment Operator/Eng.2013026200Plumber/Pipefitter3070141416Radiation Technicians30ND6624Other41ND0NA41Total261132129Total, Percent 5149a)Peak month estimated need of labor categories where need is greater than or equal to 20b)Rock County labor force estimate from BLS, 2011 unless otherwise notedc)Left column: Estimated available construction and decommissioning labor force based on 20 percent of BLS estimated labor force; Available operational labor force based on 10percent of BLS estimated labor force. Right column: Total reflects the total estimated labor force available to meet the SHINE Peak Need.d)Rock County labor force deficiency determined by subtracting estimated Available Labor Force from SHINE Peak Neede)Labor force estimates from BLS, 2009; no data available for 2011 f)Tech support subcategories include: maintenance (machinery maintenance workers and general maintenance and repair workers), engineers (industrial engineers and mechanical drafters), and craftspeople (janitors and cleaners, landscaping and groundskeepers, electricians, plumbers and pipefitters, industrial machinery mechanics, and machinists)ND = No data, NA = Not available
References:
BLS, 2009; BLS, 2011. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-59Rev. 0Table 19.4.7-2 Summary of Traffic Impacts during Construction and Operationsa) LOS degraded during operations only due to greater volume during peak hour. Total construction traffic volumne higher, but not at peak hourExisting Level of Service Summary - Weekday Peak-HourIntersections ExistingConditions - AM ExistingConditions - PMLOSDelayLOSDelaySH 11 at County Highway GC23.3 sec.C22.4 sec.US 51 at Highway 11C27.6 sec.C25.6 sec. US 51 at Town Line RdB10.2 sec.B10.4 sec.Future (2015) No-Build Level of Service Summary - Weekday Peak-HourIntersectionsFuture No-Build - AM Future No-Build - PMLOSDelayLOSDelaySH 11 at County Highway GC24.1 sec.C22.8 sec. US 51 at Highway 11C29.3 sec.C26.3 sec. US 51 at Town Line RdB10.5 sec.B10.6 sec.Future (2015) Construction Level of Service Summary - Weekday Peak-HourIntersections Future Construction Phase - AMFuture ConstructionPhase - PMLOSDelayLOSDelaySH 11 at County Highway GC24.0 sec.C22.9 sec. US 51 at Highway 11C31.7 sec.C26.3 sec.US 51 at Town Line RdB10.5 sec.B10.6 sec.US 51 at SHINE siteA0.4 sec.A0.9 sec.Future (2016) Operations Level of Service Summary - Weekday Peak-HourIntersectionsFuture OperationsPhase - AMFuture OperationsPhase - PMLOSDelayLOSDelaySH 11 at County Highway GC24.3 sec.C23.3 sec. US 51 at Highway 11 D(a)42.9 sec.C26.5 sec.US 51 at Town Line RdB10.5 sec.B10.7 sec. US 51 at SHINE siteA1.1 sec.A1.5 sec. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-60Rev. 0Table 19.4.7-3 Summary of the Effects of Mitigative Measures on Traffic ConditionsduringOperationsFuture (2016) Build-Out Mitigated Level of Service Summary - Weekday Peak-HourIntersectionFuture OperationsPhase (Mitigated) - AM Future Operations Phase(Mitigated) - PMLOSDelayLOSDelaySH 11 at County Highway GC20.5 sec.C23.3 sec.US 51 at Highway 11 (a)C27.9 sec.C26.5 sec.US 51 at Town Line RdB10.5 sec.B10.7 sec.US 51 at Project SiteA1.1 sec.A1.5 sec.a) Mitigation consists of signal improvements only Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-61Rev. 019.4.8HUMAN HEALTH19.4.8.1Nonradiological ImpactsThe following subsections discuss the potential nonradiological public and occupational hazards as they pertain to the operation of the SHINE facility. Regulations for generating, managing, handling, storing, treating, protecting, and disposing of wastes during construction, operation, and decommissioning are contained in federal regulations issued and overseen by the NRC and USEPA, and in WDNR. These regulations include comp liance with provisions of the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Atomic Energy Act, and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), among others. Specific ally for Wisconsin, the potentially applic able Environmental Management Regulations are provided in statutes (including Chapters 166, 254, 280, 281, 283, 285, 287, 291, 292 and 299) and the Wisconsin Administrative Code (NR series).Nonradiological hazards are associated with emissions, discharges, and waste from processes within the facility as well as accidental spills/releases. Nonradioactive wastes generated by construction, operation, and decommissioning of the new plant, including solid wastes, liquid wastes, discharges and air emissions, are managed in accordance with applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations, and applicable permit requirements. 19.4.8.1.1Nonradioactive Chemical SourcesDuring construction nonradioactive chemical sources are expected to be on-site in liquid, gaseous and solid forms including fuels, oils, solvents, and other materials necessary for site preparation and construction. During operation, in addition to radioactive chemical sources, production processes include nonradioactive chemical sources in liquid, gaseous and solid forms. For a given industrial facility, pollutants may be present in wastewater and air emissions associated with the production facility. Solid wastes are also generated. The great majority of chemicals in the SHINE facility are either reused or shipped off-site as radioactive waste. Consequently, the focus of the following subsections are impacts of air emissions and solid waste.The bounding inventory of major chemicals (i.e., those in excess of 1000 pounds [454kilograms]) used during operations at the SHINE facility are provided in Table 19.4.8-1. Additionally, Table19.4.8-2 provides information regarding the characteristics of storage of these chemicals by chemical group and maximum inventory.19.4.8.1.2Nonradioactive Liquid, Gaseous, and Solid Waste Management and Control Systems19.4.8.1.2.1Liquid Wastes The great majority of chemical processes at the SHINE facility are conducted inside of the RCA. Any wastes created by these processes are disposed of as radioactive waste and shipped off-site. Some lab-scale chemical use occurs outside the RCA. Liquid wastes produced as a result of these activities are treated to ensure they meet the requirements of the Janesville wastewater treatment facility before being discharged to the municipal sewer. Facility sanitary wastewater is also sent to the Janesville wastewater treatment facility. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-62Rev. 019.4.8.1.2.2Gaseous WastesThe SHINE facility generates gaseous effluents resulting from process operations and the ventilation of operating areas. The non-radiological contaminants associated with this discharge are described and assessed in Subsection 19.4.2. The gaseous effluent from ventilation of operating areas includes the following control systems: *The Zone 1 exhaust airstream passes through two stages of HEPA filtration and a single stage activated carbon bed prior to discharge from the stack*The Zone 2 and Zone 3 exhaust airstreams pass through two stages of HEPA filtration prior to discharge from the stack*Additional controls may be implemented as required by local permit conditions. All the gaseous effluents from the main facility building are vented to the atmosphere through the main stack. 19.4.8.1.2.3Solid WastesThe following is a representative list of nonradioactive solid wastes that are anticipated to be generated by the project during construction, operation, and decommissioning: *Wood from crates*Packaging from receiving activities*Spent personal protective equipment (PPE)*Broken mechanical parts
- Metal shavings*Piping*Wires
- Batteries (alkaline, lithium)*Air filters*Expired lights and fixtures
- Paper*Hoses*Empty plastic containers
- Expired ink cartridgesOther nonradioactive solid wastes are anticipated to be generated in conjunction with routine operations (e.g, office and cleaning supplies, etc.). Solid waste management and control measures for the SHINE facility include waste reduction, recycling and waste minimization practices that are employed during all project phases (construction, operation, decommissioning). Management practices that are used by SHINE include the following:a)Nonradioactive solid wastes (e.g., office waste, recyclables) are collected and stored temporarily on the SHINE site and disposed of or recycled locally.b)Scrap metal, universal wastes (federally designated as universal waste including batteries, pesticides, mercury-containing equipment and bulbs [lamps]), used oil and antifreeze are collected and stored, and recycled or recovered at an off-site permitted recycling or recovery facility, as appropriate.
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-63Rev. 019.4.8.1.3Nonradioactive Effluents ReleasedA list of chemicals released as air emissions during operation to the on-site and off-site environment are provided in Subsection 19.4.2. This subsection provides information regarding the sources, composition and quantity of the air emissions from the SHINE facility.The SHINE facility releases small amounts of maintenance and lab chemicals to the city sewer from outside the RCA. Administrative controls ensure that these effluents meet the requirements of the Janesville wastewater treatment facility before they are released. Additionally, the facility sanitary wastewater is treated by the Janesville wastewater treatment facility.19.4.8.1.4Chemical Exposure to the Public19.4.8.1.4.1Air EmissionsCalculated chemical exposure to the public is described and discussed in Subsection 19.4.2.1 regarding air emissions from the SHINE facility. Potential air emissions effects to the public are limited to indirect impacts as they are off-site. Consequently, there are no direct impacts to the public from air emissions. To estimate the impacts of non-radiological pollutants from the boiler and heaters, the AERMOD Modeling System is used. The AERMOD system is a state-of-the-science dispersion model system that the USEPA promulgated in 2005 to replace the ISC model. Table 19.4.2-10 shows that the total concentration, with background included, is no more than 32percent of the NAAQS for CO, NO 2, PM10, and SO2. The total concentration for PM2.5 is 68percent and 83percent of the NAAQS for the 24-hr. and annual average, respectively. However, most of that is consumed by the background concentration.No impacts exceed the primary ambient air quality standards that have been established to protect public health, including the health of sensitive populations such as children, the elderly, and those with respiratory problems. Therefore, pollutant impacts within a reasonable area that could be impacted and at points of the maximum individual exposure are SMALL.19.4.8.1.4.2Liquid EffluentsAs described in Subsection 19.4.8.1.3 the SHINE facility does not result in point source releases to the environment, as wastewater discharges are sent to the City of Janesville for treatment. The RCA, which contains the majority of SHINE processes, is zero discharge. There are no direct or indirect impacts of liquid effluents from the SHINE facility. Therefore, the impact on human health from liquid discharges is SMALL. 19.4.8.1.5Physical Occupational Hazards The exposure characteristics of the workforce for non-radiological hazards will be defined when the operating strategies are finalized. Because occupational hazards occur on-site and during construction, operation and decommissioning of the SHINE facility they are considered direct impacts. No indirect impacts (off-site) are identified. Table 19.4.8.1-3 lists the general types of occupational physical hazards that may be present at the SHINE facility. Occupational physical hazards are addressed and managed to be reduced or eliminated through implementation of safety practices, training and control measures. In summary, occupational hazards are managed Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-64Rev. 0and minimized by compliance with Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations and therefore impacts from physical occupational hazards are SMALL.19.4.8.1.6Chemical Exposure to the WorkforceAs planned, the SHINE facility will not store or use highly hazardous chemicals in quantities above the Threshold Quantities in Appendix A to 29 CFR 1910.119 during construction. During operation, quantities of nitric acid above the Threshold Quantity will be present on-site and therefore, the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.119 Process Safety Management of Highly Hazardous Chemicals apply to the facility. The majority of process chemicals are used in liquid form and contained in tanks, pipes and hot cells, limiting workforce exposure. Because potential chemical exposure to the workforce during operation of the SHINE facility occurs on-site, they are considered direct impacts. No indirect impacts (off-site) are identified. The facility is designed and practices are applied to keep air contaminants below the limits in 29CFR 1910.1000. In summary, occupational hazards are managed and minimized by compliance with OSHA regulations and therefore impacts from chemical occupational hazards are SMALL.19.4.8.1.7Environmental Monitoring ProgramsApplicable regulations and attending administrative codes that prescribe monitoring requirements may include those associated with emergency management, environmental health, drinking water, water and sewage, pollution discharge, air pollution, hazardous waste management and remedial action. The following statutes are included in Wisconsin's Environmental Management Regulations: *Chapter 166Emergency Management - Emergency planning and Community Right-to-Know Act planning, notification and reporting*Chapter 254Environmental Health - Lead, asbestos, radiation protection, recreational sanitation, animal-borne and vector-borne disease control*Chapter 280Pure Drinking Water - Groundwater and water wells*Chapter 281Water and Sewage - General water resource statute
- Chapter 283Pollution Discharge Elimination - Water pollutant discharge systems *Chapter 285Air Pollution - Air pollution statute*Chapter 291Hazardous Waste Management - Hazardous waste statute
- Chapter 292Remedial Action - Includes hazardous substance releases and reportingSpecifically, regulations cited Chapters 283, 285, and 291 and attending administrative codes will be operative and SHINE is committed to complying with all applicable regulations and monitoring requirements as determined by permitting process. The SHINE facility generates gaseous effluents resulting from process operations, the ventilation of operating areas and boiler emissions from facility buildings. Specific monitoring requirements in support of required air permits will be determined through the permitting process.19.4.8.1.8Mitigation MeasuresMitigative measures are used to ensure protection of human health including workplace and environmental regulations. SHINE is committed to best management practices during construction, operation, and decommissioning to minimize pollutant releases to on-site and Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-65Rev. 0off-site areas, delivery of all facility wastewater to the Janesville wastewater treatment facility, and air emission controls, as appropriate. The facility is designed such that there is no liquid discharge from the RCA. Required permits will be obtained for effluents and emissions. Furthermore, waste reduction practices are employed including recycling and waste minimization.19.4.8.2Radiological Impacts This subsection describes the public and occupational heath impacts from radioactive material due to normal operational activities at the SHINE facility.
19.4.8.2.1Layout and Location of Radioactive MaterialFigure19.2.1-1 depicts the physical layout of the site with labeled buildings, site features, and designated areas. Radioactive material is expected within the following buildings:*Production facility building-Receiving area-Rejected material-Receipt inspection -Target solution preparation-Target solution cleanup area-Noble gas storage -Hot cells-Gloveboxes-Irradiation Unit cells -Health physics (hot)-Hot lab-Radioactive waste packaging*Waste staging and shipping building19.4.8.2.2Characteristics of Radiation Sources and Expected Radioactive EffluentsThe three common sources of radiation for operating nuclear facilities and the expected effluents
released from the SHINE facility are discussed in this subsection.19.4.8.2.2.1Gaseous Sources of RadiationThe radioactive gaseous effluent exhaust from the vent stack is expected to contain measurable quantities of the noble gases krypton and xenon, in addition to iodine. Some particulate activity (other than iodine) and tritium could also be released in airborne effluents; however, most of the off-site exposure due to airborne effluent releases is expected to be associated with noble gas and radioactive iodine releases. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-66Rev. 0Radioactive gaseous effluents produced in the SHINE facility due to normal operations consist of off-gas from the irradiated target solution. In addition, maintenance operations on the accelerator are expected to result in the release of some tritium gas, which is used as the accelerator target. All gaseous effluents rel eased from the SHINE facility are combined and released through a single vent stack. 19.4.8.2.2.2Liquid Sources of Radiation As stated in Subsection 19.2.5.3.4, the radioactive liquid waste produced due to normal operations at the SHINE facility is solidified and shipped off-site. No radioactive liquid waste is discharged from the SHINE facility. Therefore, there are no liquid sources of radiation released to the environment due to normal operations at the SHINE facility. 19.4.8.2.2.3Fixed Sources of RadiationThere are two buildings that contain fixed sources of radiation that contribute to direct dose: the production facility building, which contains sources created during production operations within the RCA (e.g., TSV irradiation, molybdenum-99 [Mo-99] separation), and the waste staging and shipping building, which contains sources associated with staging of solidified radioactive waste prior to shipment off-site.19.4.8.2.3Baseline Radiation LevelsBaseline radiation levels on-site and in the vicinity of the SHINE site are discussed in Subsection 19.3.8. There are no identified abnormal sources of radiation on-site or within the vicinity of the SHINE site that would cause radiation levels to be any higher than the expected natural background radiation level. Therefore, the annual background dose at the site due to terrestrial and cosmic radiation is approximately 279 millirem per year (mrem/yr) (2.79 millisievert per year [mSv/yr]) (Subsection 19.3.8.2).19.4.8.2.4Calculated Annual Total Effective Dose Equivalent, Annual Average Airborne Radioactivity Concentration, and Annual Average Waterborne Radioactivity ConcentrationThis subsection discusses the calculated annual total effective dose equivalent (TEDE), annual average airborne radioactivity concentration, and annual average waterborne radioactivity concentration at the dose receptor corresponding to the maximally exposed individual (MEI). The MEI is located at the site boundary where the doses due to normal operations are expected to be maximized. Additionally, TEDE, annual average airborne radioactivity concentration, and annual average waterborne radioactivity concentration to the nearest full-time resident is discussed. The doses to the public calculated in the following subsections are considered direct effects of operation of the SHINE facility. The radiation dose to the public due to transportation of radioactive waste is discussed in Subsection 19.4.10. The dose to the public due to the transportation of radioactive waste is considered an indirect effect of SHINE facility operation. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-67Rev. 119.4.8.2.4.1Gaseous EffluentsSources of radioactive gaseous effluents are discussed in Subsection 19.4.8.2.2.1. The effluents, which consist of the noble gases krypton and xenon, in addition to iodine and tritium, are released to the environment through the production facility building vent stack. Prior to release to the environment, gaseous effluents are held up to allow for decay.The methodologies used to calculate the annual TEDE to a maximally exposed member of the public and the nearest full-time resident are discussed here.Annual off-site doses due to the normal operation of the SHINE facility have been calculated using the computer code GENII2 (PNNL, 2012). The GENII2 computer code was developed for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), and is distributed by the Radiation Safety Information Computational Center (RSICC). Annual average relative atmospheric concentration (/Q) values were determined using the methodology in Regulatory Guide 1.111 (NRC, 1977) with the meteorological data in Section 2.3. The limit on calculated dose is the annual limit of 0.1 rem in a year to an individual member of the public as specified in 10 CFR 20.1301. Also, a dose constraint of 10 mrem TEDE per year due to air emissions is specified in 10 CFR 20.1101(d). The calculated dose is compared to the acceptance criteria of the 10 CFR 20.1301 dose limit and the 10 CFR 20.1101(d) dose constraint.The dose analysis using the GENII2 code considered the release of airborne radionuclides and exposure to off-site individuals through direct exposure and potential environmental pathways, such as leafy vegetable ingestion, meat ingestion, and milk ingestion. The analysis considered variations in consumption and other parameters by age group, and considered potential doses in each of the 16 meteorological sectors. The doses from each pathway were summed and compared to the acceptance criteria.Dose due to the deposition and ingestion pathways are less than the dose due to airborne sources of radiation. Annual TEDE due to gaseous effluents released from the SHINE facility at the location of the MEI and nearest full-time resident are listed in Table 19.4.8-5.As discussed in the following Subsections 19.4.8.2.4.2 and 19.4.8.2.4.3, the doses due to liquid effluents and direct dose from fixed radiation sources are negligible compared to the airborne sources of radiation. The results contained in Table 19.4.8-5 represent the annual TEDE to the MEI and nearest full-time resident for the sources of radiation due to normal operations at the SHINE facility.Because the results in Table 19.4.8-5 are within the dose constraints explained earlier in this subsection, the radiological impacts to members of the public due to operation of the SHINE facility are SMALL. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-68Rev. 019.4.8.2.4.2Liquid EffluentsAs described in Subsection 19.4.8.2.2.2, the SHINE facility does not generate radioactive liquid waste as candidate material for effluent release. As a result, there are no liquid effluent pathways that contribute to waterborne radioactivity concentrations. Because there are no discharges of radioactive liquid effluent at the SHINE site, the annual averaged waterborne radioactivity concentration is not expected to be greater than the baseline concentration.19.4.8.2.4.3Direct DoseFrom Subsection 19.4.8.2.2.3, fixed sources of radiation inside the production facility building are due to the radioactive materials used for solution preparation, Mo-99 production operations (e.g.,TSV irradiation, holding tanks), and the staging of radioactive waste. The source of radiation inside the waste staging and shipping building is solidified radioactive waste. Both the production facility and the waste staging and shipping building are designed with appropriate shielding to meet the 10 percent of 10 CFR 20.1301 limits on the outer wall of the RCA in the production facility and at the outer wall of the waste staging and shipping building.The direct dose to a member of the public at the boundary of the unrestricted area (the site boundary) is due to gamma radiation penetrating the walls of the production facility and the waste staging and shipping facility. The direct dose is small outside of the buildings, due to site shielding design, and the dose will decrease with increasing distance. Because the nearest site boundary is located at an appreciable distance from both fixed sources, the dose is negligible at the site boundary.19.4.8.2.5Annual Dose to Maximally Exposed Worker Administrative dose limits are occupational radiation exposure limits that radiation workers at SHINE shall not exceed without prior management approval. Table 19.4.8-7 gives SHINE administrative dose limits. 10 CFR Part 20 limits are also provided for reference. 19.4.8.2.6Radiation Exposure Mitigation Measures Occupational and public exposures due to operations at the SHINE site are ALARA. This exposure minimization goal is met through both engineered and administrative controls. The following subsections discuss each individually.19.4.8.2.6.1Engineered ControlsThe SHINE facility utilizes the following engineered controls to minimize radiation exposure to the public and workers:*Radiation source identification*Shielding around radiation sources
- Ventilation control*Access control to radiation areas*Contamination control Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-69Rev. 0*Remote operation*Waste minimization19.4.8.2.6.2Administrative ControlsTo minimize radiation exposure to the public and workers, the SHINE facility utilizes administrative controls, which 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 activities19.4.8.3Radiological MonitoringRadiological monitoring includes effluent monitoring and environmental monitoring.19.4.8.3.1Radiological Effluent MonitoringThe radiological effluent monitoring program is established to identify and quantify principal radionuclides in effluents (Regulatory Position C.1 of Regulatory Guide 1.21). This can be used to verify that the SHINE facility is performing as expected and within its design parameters so that doses to individual members of the public remain within 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. All effluent pathways that could be a significant release pathway for radioactive material from the SHINE facility include radiological effluent monitoring. 19.4.8.3.1.1Gaseous Effluent MonitoringAll gaseous effluents released from the SHINE facility (i.e., TSV off-gas, PVVS exhaust, and ventilation exhaust) are combined and released through a single vent stack. The airborne effluent exhaust from the vent stack is expected to contain measurable quantities of noble gas radioactivity (i.e., xenon and krypton). There could also be radioactive iodine, radioactive particulates, and tritium in the airborne effluent exhaust. Due to the expectation of having measurable quantities of radioactivity in the airborne effluent and since malfunction of the exhaust carbon filtration system could result in a change in iodine radioactivity releases, the combined exhaust in the vent stack is continuously monitored for gross gamma radioactivity using an off-line gas monitor. There are also grab sampling provisions to routinely collect and analyze gas, particulate, iodine, and tritium samples from the combined exhaust in the vent stack in order to identify radionuclides, identify relati ve concentrations of radionuclides in the airborne effluent, and quantify radionuclide releases.
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-70Rev. 019.4.8.3.1.2Liquid Effluent MonitoringThe SHINE facility releases no radioactive liquid effluent due to extensive reuse of process liquids. As such, there are no defined liquid effluent release pathways from the RCA and no requirement for radiation monitoring of liquid effluent release pathways.19.4.8.3.2Radiological Environmental Monitoring The requirement to have a radiological environmental monitoring program is documented in 10CFR 20.1302. The radiological environmental monitoring program 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. Methods for establishing and conducting environmental monitoring are provided in Regulatory Guide 4.1. Regulatory Guide 4.1 refers to NUREG-1301 for detailed guidance for conducting effluent and environmental monitoring. Although Regulatory Guide 4.1 and NUREG-1301 are written for nuclear power plants, due to the similarities between airborne releases of radioactivity from nuclear power plants and those released from the SHINE facility, guidance provided in Regulatory Guide 4.1 and NUREG-1301 was considered when developing radiological environmental monitoring for the SHINE facility. Specifically, guidance provided in Figure 1 of Regulatory Guide 4.1 and Table 3.12-1 of NUREG-1301 was considered when determining which exposure pathways to sample, sample locations, types of samples, and sample frequencies for the SHINE facility. The following radiation exposure pathways are considered for monitoring under the radiological environmental monitoring program: *Waterborne exposure pathway.
- Direct radiation exposure pathway monitored using thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs). *Airborne exposure pathway monitore d using continuous air samples. *Ingestion exposure pathway (monitored only if triggered).19.4.8.3.2.1Waterborne Exposure Pathway (Groundwater Sampling)There is no liquid effluent release pathway from the RCA associated with the SHINE facility and thus surface waters of the rivers in the vicinity of the plant (e.g.,the Rock River and its tributaries) are not expected to accumulate detectable levels of radioactivity. As such, surface water sampling is not included in the radiological environmental monitoring plan. Similarly marine life in the rivers is not expected to accumulate detectable levels of radioactivity and thus sampling of fish or other marine creatures for the ingestion pathway is not included in the radiological environmental monitoring plan. Measured local water table elevations for the site identify the groundwater gradient and indicate that the groundwater flow is to the west and to the south. The nearest drinking water source is a well which is located approximately a third of a mile (0.54 km) to the northwest of the facility. There are four test wells within the property boundary (see Figure 19.3.4-4) for the SHINE facility that were used for monitoring groundwater in support of a hydrological assessment of the site. One test well is located north, one south, one east, and one west of the SHINE facility building.
Although there are no defined liquid effluent release pathways and the groundwater is not Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-71Rev. 0expected to be contaminated due to operation of the SHINE facility, in accordance with NUREG-1301 recommendations, the test wells to the west and the south are sampled for the presence of radionuclide contaminants. Sampling is in accordance with the recommendations in Table 3.12-1 of NUREG-1301, i.e., quarterly with gamma isotopic and tritium analysis. The rationale for sampling the test wells to the west and south of the SHINE facility is provided in Table19.4.8-6. 19.4.8.3.2.2Direct Exposure Pathway (Thermoluminescent Dosimeters)TLDs provide indication of direct radiation from contained radiation sources within the SHINE facility building, from radiation sources contained within the waste storage and shipping facility, from radioactivity in the airborne effluent, and from deposition of airborne radioactivity onto the ground. A description of TLD locations and the rationale for TLD locations are provided in Table19.4.8-6. TLD locations are shown on Figure19.4.8-1. Table 3.12-1 of NUREG-1301 recommends 40 TLD locations, i.e., an inner ring and an outer ring of TLDs with one TLD in each ring at each of the 16 meteorological sectors and the balance of TLDs to be located at special interest areas. At least one TLD is to serve as a control, i.e., located a significant distance from the facility such that it represents a background dose. Considering the size of the SHINE facility and the low power level of the SHINE subcritical irradiation units (IUs), a minimum number of TLD locations (i.e., nine) are specified. These are located in order to provide annual direct dose information at on-site locations which are expected to have significant occupancy and at property line locations in the north, south, east, and west directions (to ensure all directions are monitored). These property line locations include the direction of the theoretical MEI and the direction of the nearest occupied structure. In addition, at least one location includes a paired TLD so that data quality can be determined.19.4.8.3.2.3Airborne Exposure Pathway (Airborne Sampling)Airborne effluent releases from the SHINE facility contribute to off-site doses. Effluent streams from the SHINE facility that have the potential to include radioactive iodine are treated (e.g.,using silver-impregnated zeolite and/or carbon filters) to remove the iodine. Some particulate activity (other than iodine) and tritium could also be released in airborne effluents; however, most of the off-site exposure due to airborne effluent releases is associated with noble gas and radioactive iodine releases. Environmental airborne sampling is performed to identify and quantify particulates and radioiodine in airborne effluents. Regulatory Position C.3.b of Regulatory Guide 4.1 indicates that airborne sampling should always be included in the environmental monitoring programs for nuclear power plants since the airborne effluent pathway exists at all sites. Since the SHINE facility includes airborne effluent releases and radioactivity in the airborne effluent can result in measurable off-site doses and since there is a potential for a portion of the dose to be attributable to radioactive iodine and possibly airborne particulate radioactivity releases, the radiological environmental monitoring program includes airborne sampling. The guidance provided in Table 3.12-1 of NUREG-1301 is used to establish locations for airborne sample acquisition, sampling frequency, and type of sample analysis. Continuous air sample locations are specified in accordance with guidance provided in Table 3.12-1 of NUREG-1301. The continuous air monitors (CAM) that are used to obtain continuous air samples include a radioiodine canister for weekly I-131 analysis and a particulate sampler which is analyzed for gross beta radioactivity and for quarterly isotopic analysis. Four CAM locations Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-72Rev. 1are near the facility property line in the north, south, east, and west direction sectors to ensure all directions are monitored. The north and east direction sectors (from the SHINE facility vent stack) have some of the highest calculated annual ground level deposition factor (D/Q) values. There is also a CAM located a sufficient distance from the SHINE facility to provide background information for airborne activity. Table 3.12-1 of NUREG-1301 suggests an additional CAM location in the vicinity of a community having the highest calculated annual average ground-level D/Q. This CAM requirement is combined with the CAM located at the site boundary in the north direction (refer to Table19.4.8-6). A description of air sample locations and the rationale for air sample locations are provided in Table19.4.8-6. CAM locations are shown on Figure19.4.8-1.19.4.8.3.2.4Ingestion Exposure PathwayNUREG-1301 suggests sampling of various biological media (biota monitoring) as a means to indirectly assess doses due to particulate and iodine ingestion. This type of monitoring may include sampling of soils, broad-leafed plants, fish, meat, or milk. Nuclear power plants have long monitored this pathway and have seen neither appreciable dose nor upward tending. Considering the size of the SHINE facility and the low power level of the SHINE irradiation units, in comparison to nuclear power plants, and that particulate and iodine radionuclides are not normally expected to be present in significant quantities within airborne effluent releases from the SHINE facility, biota monitoring is normally limited to monitoring of the milk pathway, as this pathway is most sensitive for detection of iodine releases. In the event that the results of environmental airborne samples, effluent monitor sample results, or milk sampling results indicate iodine or particulates in quantities large enough to result in a calculated dose greater than that predicted for normal releases (e.g., from GENII models used to show compliance with the 10 CFR 20.1101(d) dose constraint), then a more comprehensive sampling campaign is undertaken.Milk is one of the most important foods contributing to the radiation dose to people if milk animals are pastured in an area near a facility that releases radioactive material. Dairy production takes place approximately one-half mile (0.8 km) to the east of the SHINE facility and goat production takes place at approximately 0.69mi. (1.1km) northeast of the facility. Milk sampling will be performed following guidance (i.e., sampling frequency and type of sample analysis) provided in Table 3.12-1 of NUREG-1301. Cow and goat milk samples would be obtained from the dairy production site and the goat production site, respectively, on a semi-monthly basis (when animals are pastured) and on a monthly basis (at other times). An I-131 analysis and a gamma isotopic analysis would be performed on the samples. Since milk samples are considered a better indicator of radioiodine in the environment than vegetation, as long as milk samples are obtained, it is expected that vegetation sampling (e.g., broad leaf vegetables) would not be included in the exposure pathway sampling (in accordance with guidance provided in Table3.12-1 of NUREG-1301). Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-73Rev. 0[Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]Table 19.4.8-1 Summary of Major (a) Chemical Inventory and Quantitya) In excess of 1000 poundsChemicalApproximate Bounding Inventory, lb.Chemical Grouping[Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information] Nitric Acid 17,600Group 4 - Acids -Organic/Mineral Sulfuric Acid 8100Group 4 - Acids -Organic/Mineral Calcium Hydroxide4800Group 5 - Bases Caustic (NaOH)1500Group 5 - Basesn-dodecane1600Group 2 - Flammable LiquidsNitrogen20,000 - -Ordinary Portland Cement20,000 - - Uranyl Sulfate3100 - - Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-74Rev. 0[Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]Table 19.4.8-2 Chemical Storage Area CharacteristicsChemical GroupChemicalApproximate Bounding Inventory of Chemical Reagents, lbs.Storage AreaGroup 2 Flammable Liquids(Large Quantity)n-dodecane1600Stored in accordance with NFPA 30 Requirements.[Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information] [Proprietary Information]Group 4 Acids - Organic and Mineral (Large Quantity) Nitric Acid Sulfuric Acid Total 11,600370015,300Stored in mini-bulk plastic tanks Group 5 Bases (Large Quantity)Calcium Hydroxide
Caustic (NaOH) Total4800 1500 6300Stored in dedicated corrosive chemicals cabinet that is coated with corrosion resistant material. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-75Rev. 0Table 19.4.8-3 Potential Occupational HazardsElectricalBattery banks (type unknown) Cable runs Diesel generator Electrical equipment (various) Heaters High voltage
Motors Power tools Pumps Service outlets, fittings Switchgear Transformers Distribution lines\wiring underground wiring Hazardous MaterialsAsphyxiants (inert gas) Carcinogens (lead shielding) Decontamination materialsFluoridesHydrides LeadOxidizersPoisons (herbicides, insecticides)Thermal Boilers (modular) Bunsen burner/hot plates Electrical wiring Possible exhaust (forklifts) Welding surfaces Welding torch Internal Flooding Sources Domestic water Fire suppression piping/process waterLight water poolIonizing Radiation SourcesContamination Neutron beams Radioactive materialRadioactive sources Assay equipmentCriticality eventsSpontaneous CombustionCleaning/decontamination solventsDiesel fuel Grease Nitric acid Paint solvents Open FlameBunsen burnersWelding cutting torches Flammables Cleaning decontamination solvents Hydrogen gasesFlammable liquids Natural gas Paint/paint solvent Propane (forklift) PhysicalSharp edges or pointsPinch points Confined spaceTrippingCombustiblesPaper products (filters) Wood products (crate/packaging)Plastics (pallets)Chemical ReactionsConcentrationDisassociation
ExothermicIncompatible chemical mixingUncontrolled chemical reactionsPyrophoric Material UraniumExplosive Materials Dust (without housekeeping)Explosive gas (hydrogen)Hydrogen (batteries)
NitratesPeroxidesPropaneKinetic (Linear and Rotational)Acceleration/deceleration (lifted loads)Bearings (UREX)Belts (fan units) Carts/dolliesCentrifugal (UREX 3-4000 RPM)Drills (trade shops) FansFork liftsGrinders MotorsPower toolsRail cars (depends on movement option)SawsPotential (Pressure)Autoclaves
BoilersCoiled springs (overhead doors)Gas bottles Gas receivers Pressure vessels Pressurized airPotential (Height/Mass)Cranes/hoists Elevated doorsElevated work surfacesElevators LiftLoading dockMezzanines Floor pitsScaffolds and ladders Stacked material
Stairs Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-76Rev. 1Table 19.4.8-4 This table number not used Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-77Rev. 1Table 19.4.8-5 Annual Total Effective Dose Equivalent to the Public at Bounding Dose Receptors (b)Dose ReceptorAnnual TEDE Annual TEDEDose Constraint (a)MEI9.0 mrem(9.0 x 10 -2 mSv)10 mrem(1.0 x 10 -1 mSv)Nearest Full-Time Resident6.3 x 10-1 mrem(6.3 x 10 -3 mSv)a) Dose constraint based on 10 CFR 20.1101(d)b) Values do not include contributions from tritium Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-78Rev. 0Table 19.4.8-6 Environmental Monitoring Locations(Sheet 1 of 2)Monitoring TypeLocationRationaleGroundwater Sampling Locations Test Well SM-GW4A SamplingTest well located directly west of the SHINE facility.The groundwater gradient is to the west and the south and thus any groundwater contamination is likely to flow to the west and to the south. Test Well SM-GW2A SamplingTest well located directly south of the SHINE facility.The groundwater gradient is to the west and the south and thus any groundwater contamination is likely to flow to the west and to the south. TLD Locations(a) TLD #1Control TLD at Off-site Location Distance is sufficiently large such that it represents a background dose, i.e., there is no significant dose rate associated with SHINE facility activities or associated with airborne effluents.TLD #2Southeast Corner of Administration BuildingAdministrative Building is expected to be an on-site area with regular occupancy outside the SHINE facility. The southeast corner of the building is closest to the SHINE facility.TLD #3North Side of the support facility buildingThe support facility building is expected to be an on-site area with regular occupancy outside the SHINE facility. The north side of the support facility building is closest to the SHINE facility.TLD #4Operating Area Boundary Fence Directly East of the Waste Staging and Shipping
BuildingTLD is positioned to detect direct radiation from the Waste Staging and Shipping Building.TLD #5Security StationThe Security Station is expected to be normally occupied.TLD #6Property Line to the East of the SHINE facility Vent StackThis location is in the direction of dairy production and the horse pasture. Also the prevailing wind is from the west as indicated by the annual wind rose so this is the location of the MEI. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-79Rev. 0Table 19.4.8-6 Environmental Monitoring Locations(Sheet 2 of 2)a)At least one TLD location includes a paired TLD for data quality determinationMonitoring TypeLocationRationaleTLD #7Property Line to the West of the SHINE facilityThis location ensures all directions are monitored.TLD #8Property Line to the North of the SHINE facility Vent StackThis location is in the direction of Janesville.TLD #9Property Line to the South of the SHINE facility Vent StackThis location is in the direction of the nearest occupied structure. Air Sampler (CAM) Locations Air Sampler (CAM #1)Off-site LocationControl air sampler located a sufficient distance from the SHINE facility such that airborne samples are unaffected by airborne effluent releases from the facility. Air Sampler (CAM #2)Close to Property Line, Directly North of the SHINE facility Vent StackThis direction has high D/Q and is in the direction of Janesville. Since the community of Janesville is relatively close to the site boundary, this air sampler location is credited with satisfying two of the conditions for air sample location recommendations in Table 3.12-1 of NUREG-1301. Air Sampler (CAM #3)Close to Property Line, East of the SHINE facility Vent
StackThis direction has high D/Q and is in the direction of dairy production and the horse pasture. Air Sampler (CAM #4)Close to Property Line, West of the SHINE facility Vent
StackThis location ensures all directions are monitored. Air Sampler (CAM #5)Close to Property Line, South of the SHINE facility Vent
StackThis location is in the direction of the nearest occupied structure. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-80Rev. 0Table 19.4.8-7 Administrative Dose LimitsType of Dose10 CFR Part 20 Limit (rem/year) SHINE Annual Administrative Limit (rem/year)Adult Radiological WorkerThe more limiting of: Total effective dose equivalent to whole body, or Sum of deep-dose equivalent and committed dose equivalent to any organ or tissue other than lens of eye 5500.55Eye dose equivalent to lens of eye 151.5Shallow-dose equivalent to skin of the whole body or any extremity 505Declared Pregnant WorkerDose to embryo/fetus during the entire pregnancy: taken as the sum of the deep-dose equivalent to the woman and the dose to the embryo/fetus from radionuclides in the embryo/fetus and the woman0.5 rem per gestation period0.5 rem per gestation periodIndividual Members of the PublicTotal effective dose equivalent0.10.1 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewWaste ManagementSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-81Rev. 0[Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]19.4.9WASTE MANAGEMENT19.4.9.1Sources and Types of Waste CreatedThe following subsections discuss hazardous, radioactive and mixed wastes associated with the SHINE facility. Nonradioactive wastes are discussed in Subsection 19.4.8.1. 19.4.9.1.1Sources of Hazardous, Radioactive and Mixed WastesThe sources of radioactive liquid, solid, and gaseous waste generated by the operation of the SHINE facility are found in Subsection 19.2.5.1.The only hazardous (or potentially hazardous) materials are [Proprietary Information] and the zeolite beds. Although small quantities of [Proprietary Information] will be used in the sulfate to nitrate conversion process, the [Proprietary Information] sludge is expected to pass TCLP, and is not considered hazardous waste. Waste streams with a hazardous component are mixed low-level waste such as the zeolite beds and are handled as described in Subsection 19.2.5.3.1.19.4.9.1.2Type and Quantity of Hazardous, Radioactive, and Mixed WastesThe type and quantity of radioactive and mixed wastes are provided in Table19.2.5-1. Discussion of nonradiological waste is provided in Subsection 19.4.8.1.19.4.9.2Description of Waste Management SystemsWaste systems designed to collect, store, and process the waste from the SHINE facility are discussed in Subsection 19.2.5.3.19.4.9.3Waste Disposal PlansWaste streams with a hazardous component are mixed low-level waste and are handled as described in Subsection 19.2.5.3.1.The radiological wastes listed in Table 19.2.5-1 are stored on-site for a period of time before they are shipped off-site. The frequency of shipment of each type of waste is provided in Table19.2.5-1. Enough storage capacity is provided on-site to accommodate the amount of waste between shipments to the off-site repositories. How solid and liquid radwaste is handled is discussed in Subsections 19.2.5.3.1 and 19.2.5.3.2. Radioactive waste gases are discussed in Subsections 19.4.8.2.2.1 and 19.4.8.2.4.1.The radioactive wastes will be transported to the destinations listed on Table 19.2.5-1.19.4.9.4Waste-Minimization PlanThe waste minimization plan to reduce the generation of waste from the SHINE facility is discussed in Subsection 19.2.5.6. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewWaste ManagementSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-82Rev. 019.4.9.5Environmental ImpactsSHINE facility wastes are managed as described in the previous subsections 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. Cumulative impacts are discussed in Subsection 19.4.13.8.2. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-83Rev. 019.4.10TRANSPORTATION19.4.10.1Nuclear Materials TransportedNuclear materials are transported to and from the SHINE facility located in Janesville, Wisconsin. The nuclear material transported to the SHINE facility consists of low enriched uranium (LEU) metal and tritium. The nuclear materials transported from the SHINE facility consist of generated medical isotopes Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133, and the radioactive wastes generated during the production of the medical isotopes. 19.4.10.1.1Transportation Mode and Projected DestinationsThe LEU metal is transported by truck to the SHINE facility from the Y-12 facility located in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. The Y-12 facility is approximately 650 mi. (1046.1 km) by road from Janesville, Wisconsin.The radioactive wastes are transported by truck to various disposal facilities. The highway distances from Janesville, Wisconsin, to the disposal facilities are as follows:*Approximately 1450 mi. (2333.6 km) to the EnergySolutions facility in Clive, Utah.*Approximately 1305 mi. (2100.2 km) to the Waste Control Specialists (WCS) facility in Andrews, Texas.*Approximately 660 mi. (1062.2 km) to the Diversified Scientific Services, Inc. (DSSI) facility in Kingston, Tennessee.The medical isotopes produced at the SHINE facility are transported by air to the various facilities for final processing and distribution to medical facilities. Transportation by truck is used as a back-up in cases where inclement weather does not permit air delivery. The highway distances from Janesville, Wisconsin, to these facilities are as follows:*Approximately 330 mi. (531.1 km) to the Covidien facility in Hazelwood, Missouri.*Approximately 1100 mi. (1770.3 km) to the Lantheus Medical Imaging facility in North Billerica, Massachusetts. *Approximately 975 mi. (1569.1 km) to the Nordion facility in Kanata, Ontario, Canada.19.4.10.1.2Treatment and PackagingThe radioactive wastes generated at the SHINE facility are treated and packaged as discussed in Subsection 19.2.5.3. Solid waste includes used components and equipment. This material is collected, stored in the facility to allow for radioactive decay, and then size-reduced and consolidated for shipment as low specific activity (LSA) material. Higher activity waste is processed and solidified prior to shipment. Liquid waste that cannot be reused is held for radioactive decay and then solidified before shipment.The medical isotopes are extracted from the LEU target solution at the end of each irradiation cycle. The target solution is removed from the TSV and transferred to a hot cell where isotopes are selectively extracted. Purified Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133 are tested by quality control before being packaged for shipment to the various processing facilities. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-84Rev. 0Prior to shipment, all radioactive material is packaged to meet the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) and NRC requirements for the transportation of radioactive materials.19.4.10.1.3Incident-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 medical isotopes and the radioactive wastes (transportation workers and handling workers).The calculation of the incident-free radiological doses is performed using RADCAT/RADTRAN and TRAGIS computer codes. The RADCAT/RADTRAN computer code is used to calculate the doses to the workers and the members of the public using the routes defined by TRAGIS and population data from the USCB. Most of the medical isotopes will be shipped by air, and the doses associated with this transport mode are smaller than the transportation via land routes due to shorter exposure time to the workers and the smaller number of exposed members of the public during air transportation. As described below, transportation scenarios based on land routes are used to conservatively estimate the radiological doses due to medical isotope transport.The TRAGIS computer code is used to determine the highway route distance traveled for a shipment from the SHINE facility to a destination facility. TRAGIS also provides the population density along the route, which is required for calculating the dose to members of the public. However, the version of the TRAGIS computer code used in this analysis (WebTRAGIS 5.0 Beta) did not have the capability to provide population density data. Therefore, the population density data is estimated using the following approach. The state-level mileage distributions for rural, suburban, and urban population density zones are conservatively estimated by superimposing the routes from TRAGIS on the population profile maps (year 2010) from the USCB. The maps that show the routes from TRAGIS and the associated population densities from the USCB are shown in Figures 19.4.10-1 through 19.4.10-4. The summary of the population densities along the transportation routes analyzed are provided in Tables 19.4.10-1 through 19.4.10-4. Using the TRAGIS output, the regions that contain segments of each transportation route are classified as rural, suburban, or urban population zones. In TRAGIS, a population density less than 139 people per square mile is considered a rural population. A population density between 139 and 3326 people per square mile is considered a suburban population. A population density greater than 3326 people per square mile is considered an urban population. The ranges provided on the maps obtained from the USCB do not match these ranges. Therefore, in cases where there are multiple population zones in a region of the transportation route, the population zone with the highest population density is identified and assumed for the region. The TRAGIS Beta release provides a population count of the total exposed population within 800m (243.8ft.) of the route. Adjustment factors are calculated based on the exposed population using the population count from TRAGIS and the exposed population based on the population densities from Figures 19.4.10-1 through 19.4.10-4. Tables 19.4.10-1 through 19.4.10-4 provide the exposed populations along the transportation routes and the associated adjustment factors. The analysis for determining the exposed populations along the transportation routes is performed in a conservative method to ensure the calculated dose values will bound the TRAGIS values once the computer code is updated to internally include the population density data. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-85Rev. 0The doses due to transportation of the radioactive wastes are calculated for shipments to the WCS facility in Andrews, Texas (bounded at 12 shipments/year) and the EnergySolutions facility in Clive, Utah (bounded at 22 shipments/year). The doses due to transportation of radioactive wastes to other disposal facilities, such as the DSSI facility in Kingston, Tennessee, are not calculated because they are bounded by the doses associated with transportation of radioactive wastes to the WCS and EnergySolutions facilities, primarily due to the smaller travel distance which reduces the exposure time to the workers and the members of the public. The doses due to the transportation of the medical isotopes are calculated using scenarios based on truck shipments to the Covidien facility in Hazelwood, Missouri and the Lantheus Medical Imaging facility in North Billerica, Massachusetts. The estimated total number of shipments per year is 468, or nine shipments per week. Most of these shipments will be by air, but to estimate the effect of a combination of shipments by air and ground transportation it is assumed that approximately one quarter of the shipments (two per week) are shipped by truck. This is more truck shipments than is expected, but the use of this larger number of truck shipments conservatively accounts for the dose due to air shipments. Most of the truck shipments would be sent to the closest facility, which is Covidien, because of the short half-life of the medical isotopes. However, shipment by truck of the longer lived isotopes to other facilities may occur. Therefore it is assumed that half of the truck shipments (52 shipments/year) are to Covidien and an equal number of shipments (52 shipments/year) are to the Lantheus Medical Imaging facility. The doses due to the transportation of medical isotopes to other processing facilities, such as the Nordion facility in Kanata, Ontario, Canada, are not calculated because they are bounded by the doses associated with the transportation of medical isotopes to the Lantheus facility, primarily because the transportation route is longer and its path is through areas with a higher population density. The use of these scenarios will bound the shipment by air because the exposed population is smaller and the exposure time for the crew is shorter for each shipment. The dose due to package handling will increase for air shipments, so a conservatively large dose is calculated for the handlers in order to conservatively estimate the dose component for air shipments.The doses associated with the transportation of the LEU metal and tritium gas are much smaller than the doses associated with the transportation of other radioactive materials and are not calculated. The doses associated with the transportation of the LEU metal are much smaller because of the infrequent shipments (less than one per year) and the low activity in each shipment. The doses associated with the transportation of the tritium gas are negligible because, as a beta emitter, the dose rate outside a container of tritium is practically zero, independent of the quantity of tritium.The annual incident-free radiological doses due to transportation of radioactive materials from the SHINE facility are summarized in Table 19.4.10-5. These doses are calculated assuming the dose rates due to the shipping containers are equal to typical dose rates based on reported dose rates from historical shipments of medical isotopes and low-level waste. The dose to the workers due to the transportation of radioactive material from the SHINE facility is 9.63 person-rem/year. The dose to the members of the public due to the transportation of radioactive material from the SHINE facility is 0.350 person-rem/year. As indicated in Subsection 19.4.3.7, the population in the region around the facility is 160,331, and the background dose rate identified in Subsection 19.4.3.8.2 is 620 mrem/yr (6.2 mSv/yr). Therefore, the population dose in the vicinity of the SHINE facility due to background radiation is approximately 1E+05 person-rem/year. Compared to the background dose in the vicinity of the SHINE facility, the effect of incident-free transportation is SMALL. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-86Rev. 019.4.10.2Non-Nuclear Materials TransportedGeneral office supplies and industrial supplies supporting the maintenance and day-to-day operations of the SHINE facility are transported to the site. Office waste is generated at the site and transported from the site by City of Janesville without being treated or packaged. These activities are typical for a general commercial facility within City of Janesville. The associated incident-free transportation activities do not have an adverse impact on the environment, workers, or the members of the public. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-87Rev. 0Table 19.4.10-1 Population Density, Exposed Population, and the Adjustment Factor for Transportation Route to Andrews, Texas StateZoneDistance Traveled (mi.)Distance Traveled (km)PopulationDensity(persons/km 2)Population Along Route SegmentWIRural0.00.06.60E+010.00E+00Suburban3.2 5.11.67E+031.36E+04Urban12.019.33.86E+031.19E+05ILRural94.3151.76.60E+011.60E+04Suburban127.0204.31.67E+035.46E+05Urban86.8139.73.86E+038.63E+05MORural39.263.16.60E+016.66E+03Suburban170.8274.81.67E+037.34E+05Urban80.5129.53.86E+038.00E+05OKRural184.6297.06.60E+013.14E+04Suburban126.8204.01.67E+035.45E+05Urban32.852.83.86E+033.26E+05TXRural238.6383.96.60E+014.05E+04Suburban97.6157.01.67E+034.20E+05Urban10.817.43.86E+031.07E+05Total1305.02099.64.57E+06Population from TRAGIS128,667Adjustment Factor2.82E-02 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-88Rev. 0Table 19.4.10-2 Population Density, Exposed Population, and the Adjustment Factor for Transportation Route to Clive, UtahStateZoneDistance Traveled (mi.)Distance Traveled (km)PopulationDensity(persons/km 2)Population Along Route SegmentWIRural0.00.06.60E+010.00E+00Suburban3.25.11.67E+031.36E+04Urban12.019.33.86E+031.19E+05ILRural36.158.16.60E+016.14E+03Suburban51.783.21.67E+032.22E+05Urban38.361.63.86E+033.80E+05IARural142.8229.86.60E+012.43E+04Suburban44.671.81.67E+031.92E+05Urban117.5189.13.86E+031.17E+06NERural249.6401.66.60E+014.24E+04Suburban165.7266.61.67E+037.12E+05Urban27.844.73.86E+032.76E+05WYRural259.1416.96.60E+014.40E+04Suburban52.183.81.67E+032.24E+05Urban90.4145.53.86E+038.99E+05UTRural59.094.96.60E+011.00E+04Suburban12.119.51.67E+035.21E+04Urban87.9141.43.86E+038.73E+05 Total1449.92332.95.26E+06Population from TRAGIS68,655Adjustment Factor1.31E-02 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-89Rev. 0Table 19.4.10-3 Population Density, Exposed Population, and the Adjustment Factor for Transportation Route to Hazelwood, MissouriStateZoneDistance Traveled (mi.)Distance Traveled (km)Population Density(persons/km 2)Population Along Route SegmentWIRural0.00.06.60E+010.00E+00Suburban3.2 5.11.67E+031.36E+04Urban12.019.33.86E+031.19E+05ILRural94.3151.76.60E+011.60E+04Suburban122.0196.31.67E+035.25E+05Urban85.9138.23.86E+038.54E+05MORural0.00.06.60E+010.00E+00Suburban0.0 0.01.67E+030.00E+00Urban11.518.53.86E+031.14E+05Total328.9529.1 1.64E+06Population from TRAGIS24,272Adjustment Factor 1.48E-02 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-90Rev. 0Table 19.4.10-4 Population Density, Exposed Population, and the Adjustment Factor for Transportation Route to North Billerica, MassachusettsStateZoneDistance Traveled (mi.)Distance Traveled (km)Population Density(persons/km 2)Population Along Route SegmentWIRural0.00.06.60E+010.00E+00Suburban3.25.11.67E+031.36E+04Urban12.019.33.86E+031.19E+05ILRural0.00.06.60E+010.00E+00Suburban30.549.11.67E+031.31E+05Urban87.8141.33.86E+038.73E+05INRural13.321.46.60E+012.26E+03Suburban62.8101.01.67E+032.70E+05Urban70.3113.13.86E+036.99E+05OHRural20.432.86.60E+013.46E+03Suburban139.2224.01.67E+035.99E+05Urban88.3142.13.86E+038.78E+05PARural0.00.06.60E+010.00E+00Suburban13.321.41.67E+035.72E+04Urban33.453.73.86E+033.32E+05NYRural13.321.46.60E+012.26E+03Suburban245.0394.21.67E+031.05E+06Urban119.4192.13.86E+031.19E+06MARural8.914.36.60E+011.51E+03Suburban63.8102.71.67E+032.74E+05Urban76.1122.43.86E+037.56E+05 Total1101.01771.47.25E+06Population from TRAGIS215,374Adjustment Factor2.97E-02 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-91Rev. 0Table 19.4.10-5 Incident-Free Radiological Dose Summary (Person-Rem/Year)Destination FacilityReceptorWCSEnergySolutionsCovidienLantheusTotalWorkers(Transportation)1.44E-012.93E-016.92E-012.31E+003.44E+00Workers(Handling)1.51E-012.77E-012.88E+002.88E+006.19E+00Members of the Public1.48E-021.22E-023.61E-022.87E-013.5E-01 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-92Rev. 019.4.11POSTULATED ACCIDENTSThis subsection identifies the postulated initiating events (IEs) and credible accidents for the SHINE facility that were selected to drive the design of the facility; designated herein as design basis accidents (DBAs). This subsection also describes the maximum hypothetical accident (MHA).The major hazards associated with the SHINE facility are: *Fissile material as either feed or in target solution. *Irradiated fissile solution and corresponding fission products present not only within the TSV but throughout the SHINE facility.*Neutrons produced by the accelerator.
- Radioactive waste.*Production of hydrogen by radiolytic decomposition of irradiated fissile solution.*Failure of tanks and/or vessels with significant quantities of hazardous chemicals.*Exothermic reactions between chemicals leading to damage to tanks or vessels containing significant quantities of hazardous materials.*Mishap during handling of chemicals leads to breach or spill of chemicals from tanks or vessels.*Mishap during handling of chemicals leads to spill of chemicals outside tanks or vessels within the facility.*Mishap during delivery of hazardous chemicals leads to spill of chemicals outside the facility.19.4.11.1Methodology for Identification of Design Basis AccidentsThe methodology for identifying DBAs is described in Chapter 13.The SHINE facility has been divided into two major areas: the Irradiation Facility (IF) and the Radioisotope Production Facility (RPF). The IF consists of the Irradiation Units (IUs) and supporting structures, systems, and components dedicated to the irradiation of target solution.
This includes the primary cooling systems and the tritium purification system. The RPF includes the isotope extraction and purification, target solution preparation and clean-up, radioactive waste handling and chemical storage systems and areas.According to the Final ISG Augmenting NUREG-1537, the following accident categories, as modified for the SHINE facility, are to be addressed for the IF and RPF:*MHA.
- Insertion of excess reactivity.
- Reduction in cooling.*Mishandling or malfunction of target solution (including inadvertent criticality in the RPF).*Loss of normal electrical power.
- External events.*Mishandling or malfunction of equipment.*Large undamped power oscillations (fuel temperature/void-reactivity feedback).
- Detonation and deflagration.*Unintended exothermic chemical reactions other than detonation.*Facility system interaction events.
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-93Rev. 0*Hazardous chemical releases.*Facility fire (RPF).*Unique facility IEs/DBAs.All IEs and scenarios applicable to the IF are evaluated in Section 13a2. Those applicable to the RPF areas are covered in Section 13b.Representative accident scenarios with bounding consequences for each of the above IEs/scenario categories are to be evaluated quantitatively in Sections 13a2.2, 13b.2, and 13b.3, per the guidance in NUREG-1537 and the Final ISG Augmenting NURE G-1537. The most bounding DBAs with respect to consequences for both the IF and the RPF are analytically evaluated in Subsection19.4.11.3 below. 19.4.11.2Identified Initiating Events and Design Basis AccidentsThis subsection gives a quantitative discussion of the consequences of the MHA. This subsection also briefly discusses IEs and DBAs as well as some of the controls that are being designed to prevent or mitigate the potential consequences to levels that are acceptable (i.e.,within regulatory criteria). These IEs and DBAs are designed to bound the potential accident scenarios in each of the accident categories of interest. Potential radiological consequences of DBAs are discussed qualitatively as a function of the source terms released during the postulated scenarios, and controls that mitigate the consequences. The consequences of the DBAs are bounded by the quantitative analysis performed for the MHA.19.4.11.2.1Maximum Hypothetical AccidentThe MHA is defined to be an event that results in radiological consequences that exceed those of any accident considered to be credible. The MHA therefore bounds the radiological consequences of postulated DBA scenarios at the SHINE facility. The MHA need not be a credible scenario but a failure assumed to establish an outer limit consequence.For the SHINE facility, the MHA is based on events unique to the facility that hypothetically could result in a release of radioactive materials. The SHINE facility is subdivided into two major process areas: the IF and the RPF. Processes in both areas of the facility are generally of low energy (i.e., subcritical, low heat generation). In addition, the facility is being designed to withstand credible external events. Therefore, an internal accident releasing the largest possible quantity of radioactive material is considered to be the initiating event that would result in the maximum bounding radiological consequence. The IF and RPF are designed to function as two independent areas within the facility. Though the IF and RPF have processes and systems that interact with each other, they are physically separated by concrete walls. Design features such as irradiation cell shielding, redundant isolation valves, ventilation dampers, and penetration seals in both areas, ensure that an accident in one area is highly unlikely to affect the other area. In addition, both areas are separated to ensure that a radiological release in one area does not have a significant effect on the other area. Because of this physical separation, it is necessary to analyze both the IF and RPF to determine the MHA. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-94Rev. 0The MHA is used to demonstrate that the maximum consequences of an accident at the SHINE facility are within the acceptable regulatory limits of 10 CFR 20.1301. The MHA assumes a failure that results in a radioactive release with radiological consequences that bound all credible DBAs.Because the SHINE facility is being designed to withstand external events such as tornadoes, seismic events, and man-made external events, scenarios that involve multiple irradiation units are not considered to be credible, and are not analyzed further. In addition, several internal events were eliminated as possible MHAs due to the design of facility. For example, a pipe break containing fissile inventory being transferred from a TSV dump tank to a supercell in the RPF was considered. Because all production piping is located in covered, concrete trenches that are designed to contain any rupture of inventory and drain to sumps that are geometrically designed to prevent an inadvertent criticality, this event was eliminated as a possible MHA. There is no credible internal event that will result in releases from multiple TSVs.A potential MHA considered was a rupture or leakage of the TSV or TSV dump tank resulting in a complete release of the target solution and fission product inventory into one IU cell. This potential MHA assumes zero hours of decay time. This event occurs within the confinement of the IU cell and is assumed to release the entire inventory of one TSV into the IU cell. The calculated radionuclide inventory released from the TSV to the IU cell represents the bounding source term for any other postulated accident in the IF. Any potential loss of TSV inventory within the IU is mitigated by several controls, namely: confinement provided by the IU cell and the RCA ventilation system zone (RVZ)1 (including the presence of bubble-tight dampers to isolate the cells upon detection of above-threshold radiation levels), radiation monitoring (to be interlocked with bubble-tight dampers), shielded pipe penetrations, and TSV off-gas system. Another potential MHA considered was a release of the inventory stored in the noble gas removal system (NGRS) storage tanks. This event occurs within the confinement of the noble gas storage tank room, located in the RPF. The calculated radionuclide inventory released from the NGRS storage tanks represents the bounding source term for any other postulated accident in the RPF.Controls to mitigate the consequences of the MHA in the RPF include: the NGRS room, radiation monitors, RCA ventilation system Zone 1 (RVZ1) (including the presence of bubble-tight dampers to isolate the cells upon detection of above-threshold radiation levels), radiation monitoring (to be interlocked with bubble-tight dampers), and RCA ventilation system Zone 2 (RVZ2).The evaluation of the inventory for the considered MHAs is based on a set of limiting initial conditions that were designed to maximize the potential source terms and to bound credible scenarios. This includes assumptions regarding the total time for irradiation, failure to decay target solution prior to processing, process faults that result in additional target solution cycles, and failure of fission product removal. The amount of radioactive material released to the environment (i.e., source term) was calculated for both MHAs based on the five factor formula:ST = MAR x DR x ARF x RF x LPF. (Equation 19.4.11-1) Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-95Rev. 0Where:ST refers to the source termMAR refers to the inventory of material-at-risk from the postulated scenarios. DR represents the fraction of the inventory impacted by the scenario (in the evaluated cases assumed to be 1.0).ARF/RF refer to the airborne release fractions and respirable fractions for the radionuclides assumed to be present in the inventory (based on published ARF/RF in NUREG-6410).LPF refers to the leak-path factor or fraction of the material that is airborne that is assumed to be released to the environment.For the postulated scenarios, the entire inventory of the TSV and the NGRS holding tanks are released to the IU cell and the noble gas storage cell, respectively. ARF x RF for solution spills for particulates from NUREG-6410 were selected. For halogens an ARF x RF of 0.25 was assumed, while an ARF x RF of 1.0 was assumed for noble gases. In-plant transport of the radionuclides was based on the assumptions concerning the functioning of available plant systems. Mitigated consequences are based on the assumption that the radioactive material will be released into the IU cell and that no more than 1 percent of the airborne radioactive material will be released by the IF before the cell is isolated by the RVZ1 isolation bubble-tight dampers. Any radioactive material that is released from the noble gas storage room before it is isolated is assumed to be filtered by the HEPA and charcoal filters. For dose calculations, all releases are assumed to be at ground level. These calculations are based on the 50 th percentile /Q. Doses are calculated using ICRP-30 dose conversion factors, and receptor locations are the closest point on the site boundary and the nearest permanent resident.The total effective dose equivalent (TEDE) and the thyroid doses for the postulated scenarios are:*Rupture or leakage of the TSV or TSV dump tank scenario: TEDE of 1.65E-02 rem at the site boundary and 2.30E-03 rem for the nearest residence.*Release of the inventory stored in the NGRS storage tanks scenario: TEDE of 7.98E-02 rem at the site boundary and 1.12E-02 rem for the nearest residence.Based on the calculated doses, the MHA for the SHINE facility is the release of the inventory stored in the NGRS storage tanks. The dose for the MHA is less than the dose criteria in 10 CFR 20.1301. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-96Rev. 019.4.11.2.2Insertion of Excess ReactivityExcess reactivity insertion in the subcritical assembly system (SCAS) is identified as a potential DBA that needs to be evaluated. This DBA covers events that can lead to an insertion of positive reactivity in the SCAS. Examples include:*Pressurization of target solution fluid.
- Excessive cool down.
- Target solution injection.*Geometry changes.*Reactivity insertion due to moderator lumping effects.
- Inadvertent introduction of other materials into the target solution.*Loss of water from the target solution during irradiation.This event is not applicable to the RPF.The SCAS has a TSV reactivity protection system (TRPS). Anticipated protective signals of the TRPS for TSV shutdown and dump valve actuation include a combination of high neutron flux levels, high flux rate, high TSV fill rate, high TSV level, or indication of a loss of cooling to the TSV. Shutdown of the TSV will limit the amount of power and pressure increase allowed in the TSV preventing PSB breach. Any potential releases from such events are further mitigated by the off-gas system, the facility ventilation system, and the passive nature of the confinement provided by the IU cells and facility itself. As such, release of the entire contents of one TSV bounds any radiological release from such a reactivity insertion event and is therefore bounded
by the MHA.19.4.11.2.3Reduction or Loss of CoolingThe reduction or loss of cooling event is identified as a potential DBA. This scenario, however, is bounded and covered by the MHA event, since there is little or no consequence from loss of cooling in the IF or RPF.The design of the IF, including the intrinsic properties of the irradiated solution, are such that the reduction or loss of cooling (even without engineering features) will lead to a reduction in the neutron multiplication factor (keff), thus leading to a reduction in the amount of energy (or power) generated under this condition. Furthermore, just like for insertion of excess reactivity, the SCAS has a TRPS trip that serves as a defense-in-depth control to mitigate any potential consequences from this postulated scenario. Indication of a loss of cooling to the TSV results in TRPS shutdown of the TSV. This limits the amount of power and pressure increase allowed in the TSV, preventing PSB breach. Any potential re leases from such events are further mitigated by the off-gas system, the facility ventilation system, and the passive nature of the confinement provided by the IU cells and facility itself. Finally, given the low decay heat production, the light water pool serves as a passive heat sink that prevents the temperature of the target solution from rising to any significant degree. As such, release of the entire contents of one TSV bounds any radiological release from a reduction or loss of cooling event and is therefore bounded by the MHA. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-97Rev. 019.4.11.2.4Mishandling or Malfunction of Target SolutionThe following events are identified as potential DBAs representing the mishandling or malfunction of target solution:*Loss of PSB in the IF.-Covers target solution spills and leaks (bounded by release of entire TSV contents).-Vessel/line failures in the RPF (to be covered under mishandling or malfunction of equipment).*Inadvertent criticality in the IF.-Covers IEs associated with failure to control pH in the target solution.-Failure to control target solution temperature and pressure is covered under the reactivity insertion DBA.*Inadvertent criticality in the RPF.-Covers IEs associated with failure to control pH or temperature in the target solution.Loss of PSB and an inadvertent nuclear criticality are prevented and/or mitigated by the design of robust and criticality safe geometry tanks, piping, and valves, along with the design of spill pits or berms around tanks containing significant quantities of fissile material. The TSV where irradiation operations take place is designed with features and safety controls such as dump valves to limit the duration of an inadvertent criticality. Furthermore, administrative controls on the concentration of fissile material in the TSV or tanks are implemented to prevent the occurrence of an inadvertent criticality within the facility. Tanks containing significant quantities of fissile material are seismically qualified to survive site-specific design basis seismic events. Any potential releases of radioac tive material, from either a loss of PSB or an inadvertent criticality, are mitigated by the off-gas system, the facility ventilation system, and the passive nature of the confinement provided by the IU cells and the facility itself. An inadvertent criticality is likely to generate source terms and doses that are equivalent to an insertion of excess reactivity. This is because these events would be limited to a single or small number of pulses. Thus, this event would be bounded by the MHA. 19.4.11.2.5Loss of Normal Electrical Power The loss of normal electrical power affects both the IF and RPF, and has been identified as a potential DBA. A loss of normal electric power causes a shutdown of the TSV and thus reduces significantly the power and heat that could be generated. After shutdown of the TSV, decay heat levels are low enough to allow cooling to ambient, thus a loss of electric power does not cause a breach of the PSB. The loss of power also could lead to an initiating event that could result in various potential accident conditions, including the loss of ventilation and off-gas system, which in turn could lead to a deflagration event from the build-up of hydrogen on the top of the TSV cavity or in the off-gas Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-98Rev. 0system itself. This scenario is covered separately under detonation or deflagration due to the generation of hydrogen. 19.4.11.2.6External Events The following potential external events have been identified as DBAs for the SHINE facility: *Seismic event affecting the IF and RPF.*Tornado or high-winds affecting the IF and RPF.*Small aircraft crash into the IF or RPF.The facility structure, including the SCAS and critical process equipment (including tanks containing potentially significant quantities of fissile material) in the IF and RPF, are designed to survive the above external events. 19.4.11.2.7Mishandling or Malfunction of Equipment The potential DBAs that could be initiated by the mishandling or malfunction of equipment include:*Failure of the off-gas system leading to release of noble gases and halogens.*Loss of pressure boundary in PSB (covered under mishandling target solution).*Vessel/line failures in the RPF (e.g., Mo-99 extraction feed or raffinate tanks).The SHINE facility is designed with multiple engineering features and controls to prevent or mitigate the potential consequences from such mishandling or malfunction of equipment. Critical equipment are designed robustly with significant redundancy or fail safe features to prevent or mitigate the consequences from these events.The consequences from these scenarios are bounded by the release of the entire contents of one TSV and are therefore bounded by the MHA. For this DBA, the worst case condition is the loss of the PSB or a spill of radioactive material from tanks in the RPF.19.4.11.2.8Large Undamped Power OscillationsLarge undamped power oscillations are identified as potential DBAs to be considered. The TSV is designed for subcritical operation, low power density, and large negative temperature and void coefficients, resulting in a stable TSV with only self-limiting power oscillations. The low power density and subcritical operating conditions of the TSV will prevent the occurrence of any large undamped power oscillation. The source term and potential consequences from this type of event would be, however, bounded by the excess reactivity insertion scenario (see Subsection 19.4.11.2.2). 19.4.11.2.9Detonation and Deflagration Events (Due to Hydrogen Generation) The potential for detonation and deflagration due to hydrogen accumulation in the PSB (including in the cavity of the TSV or off-gas system) is identified as a potential DBA. Hydrogen accumulation in the RPF is not expected to exceed the lower explosive limit (LEL) or lower flammability limit (LFL). Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-99Rev. 0During operation and post TSV shutdown, the TSV solution generates hydrogen and oxygen. Analysis has shown that buildup of gas to a level that could cause a detonation or deflagration is possible. The off-gas system is engineered to prevent such an event. However, the failure of the off-gas system, combined with a buildup of hydrogen and oxygen in the TSV and an ignition
source, could lead to a breach of the PSB. Many design fe atures and controls are designed to prevent or mitigate such events, including the design of a reliable and robust off-gas system that is interlocked upon failure of the TSV off-gas blower to immediately shutdown the irradiation operations and thus limit the amount of hydrogen being produced. The off-gas system is also designed to structurally survive a wide range of deflagration events (pressure pulses). Upon a deflagration, any releases of radioactive material are confined within the IU cell and are further mitigated by the confinement capability of the IU cell and by the facility ventilation systems. The consequences from this DBA are bounded by the release of the entire contents of one TSV and are therefore bounded by the MHA. 19.4.11.2.10Unintended Exothermic Chemical Reactions Other than DetonationA few potential exothermic chemical reactions were identified that, under very unlikely or incredible conditions, might challenge the PSB integrity. Exothermic reactions are more likely to result in fires. Detonations, deflagrations, or fires due to exothermic reactions other than hydrogen-related in the IF are not considered to be possible given the design of the process. There is the possibility under uncontrolled conditions that during solvent extraction a runaway tributyl phosphate (TBP)/nitric acid reaction could occur due to a number of unexpected events, such as the inadvertent heating of a tank. The design of the solvent extraction process, including the control of the fissile material concentration (protected through administrative controls), the minimization of dissolved solids, and the concentration of nitric acid is such that the maximum temperature achieved during this operation is significantly lower than that of the minimum initiation temperature for a runaway reaction (on the order of 130 oC [266 oF]). The most likely and bounding scenarios resulting from potential exothermic reactions are fires which could impact the RPF. RPF fires, bounding all exothermic chemical reactions that may take place in the area, are covered under facility fire events (see Subsection 19.4.11.2.12). 19.4.11.2.11Facility System Interaction EventsFacility system interaction events have been identified as DBAs that could result in radiological releases from various parts of the facility or multiple areas. The IF and the RPF include the following systems: target solution preparation, TSV, TSV dump tank, TSV off-gas system, molybdenum extraction, and UREX processing systems. System interactions have the potential to cause damage that may lead to the release of these radioactive materials. NUREG/CR-3922 defines a system interaction as "-an event in one system, train, component or structure propagates through unanticipated or inconspicuous dependencies to cause an action or inaction in other systems, trains, components or structures." Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-100Rev. 0There are three categories of system interactions between systems located within the IF and the RPF that are considered in this analysis. The three types of interactions include: 1) functional interactions, 2) spatial interactions, and 3) human-intervention interactions.At the SHINE facility, there are a number of shared system interactions that need to be considered in the context of functional system interactions. The shared systems that are considered:*Electrical power including the uninterruptable power supply system.
- Radioisotope process facility cooling system (RPCS).
- The fire protection system.*RCA ventilation.*NGRS.
- PVVS.Scenarios that are considered for system interactions include:*Loss of off-site power (LOOP) scenarios (see Subsection 19.4.11.2.5).
- Loss of RPCS scenarios (see Subsection 19.4.11.2.3).
- Loss of RVZ1, RVZ2, and RCA ventilation system Zone 3 (RVZ3) ventilation scenarios.*Noble gas release scenarios (see Subsection 19.4.11.2.1).*Fire scenarios (see Subsections 19.4.11.2.9, 19.4.11.2.10, and 19.4.11.2.12).
- External events including seismic events, high wind and tornadoes and aircraft impact events (see Subsection 19.4.11.2.6).*Chemical reaction scenarios (see Subsection 19.4.11.2.10).
- Internal flooding scenarios.
- Pipe break scenarios (see Subsection 19.4.11.2.4).For each of the scenarios listed above, except for loss of ventilation and internal flooding, the consequences are discussed in the referenced subsections. The MHA bounds all of these scenarios as discussed in each subsection. Loss of ventilation does not initiate an accident that could result in a release of radioactive material or hazardous chemicals nor are the ventilation systems used to mitigate the consequences of an accident. Upon release of radioactive materials within the facility, the ventilation system is shut down and bubble-tight dampers are closed to isolate the impacted areas of the facility. Internal flooding as a result of the rupture of water lines in the facility or the inadvertent actuation of a fire suppression system would not result in the release of radioactive material to the environment. All water is collected and sampled for radioactive contamination. If radioactive material contamination is found, the water is treated as radioactive waste.19.4.11.2.12Facility Fire (RPF)
A fire in the RPF is identified as a possible DBA. Events that could lead to a fire in the RPF may be precipitated by failure of electrical or mechanical equipment or human error involving a loss of control of combustible materials or ignition sources or both. Facility fires are not expected to directly release significant amounts of radioactive material; however fires can lead to the release of radioactive material where fire damage to process equipment results in a loss of confinement through damage to system integrity, spurious equipment operation, or loss of equipment control. Fire damage to equipment typically results from direct exposure of equipment to the fire or exposure of equipment to elevated temperatures caused by the fire. Widespread fire damage to Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-101Rev. 1process equipment that could lead to a radiological release is most likely inside a confined enclosure such as a hot cell, glove box, or tank enclosure. Small spaces such as these provide the confinement of the products of combustion, which can lead to development of a damaging fire environment. Development of damaging fire environment in the general area of the RPF is much less likely due to the large volume of the area. Direct fire damage to important equipment which could lead to a significant radiological release is not likely because redundant control or power circuits are separated by distance to prevent such damage from a single fire, accordingly the DBA is considered to be a fire in an enclosure that may lead to the development of a damaging fire environment. The design basis fire accident is postulated to occur in an RPF supercell where it contributes to the release of the contents of the Mo extraction feed tank. Fire damage to the tank, associated valves, or process piping could lead to a release of Mo-99 eluate into the supercell enclosure. Release of this material into the enclosure could lead to an airborne release of radiological material into the cell enclosure and ultimately migration into the RCA ventilation system. The potential release would be mitigated by closure of the bubble-tight dampers in the RCA ventilation system in response to a smoke alarm signal or detection of the radioactive material by the radiation monitoring system. Isolation of the ventilation system would prevent significant release to the environment. Radiological release of this DBA is bounded by the MHA and contained by the facility and RCA ventilation system. Postulated fire strengths are insufficient to breach the credited facility barrier walls or components. The effects of this DBA and any associated radiological release will be contained by the facility construction and RCA ventilation system components.19.4.11.2.13Hazardous Chemical Releases The consequence of chemical releases are evaluated using dispersion models and/or computer codes that conform to NUREG/CR-6410 methodologies.Typical computer codes to model chemical releases and determine the chemical dose (orconcentration) are the ALOHA and EPICode; both computer codes are widely used for supporting accident analysis and emergency response evaluations. Both codes have been used and accepted by government agencies such as DOE. Verification and validation for both codes have been performed for modeling chemical hazards for the SHINE facility. Because ALOHA can readily model only about half of these chemicals, the EPICode was selected to perform chemical dose calculations in this subsection. Both computer codes give comparable results for the hazardous chemicals that they have in common and both codes implement release and dispersion models that are consist ent with the guidance in NUREG/CR-6410.In running EPICode, no credit is taken for depletion or plate out of chemicals within the facility or during transport to the site boundary or nearest population location. All dispersion calculations performed are done assuming neutral meteorological conditions (i.e., Stability Class D) and 4.1m/s wind speed. These represent 50 th percentile meteorological conditions at the site. Ambient temperature was assumed to be 75 oF, no deposition of airborne material was assumed, and a receptor height of 1.5 m was used to simulate the height of an individual. Concentrations are plume centerline values. Releases were conservatively modeled as ground non-buoyant. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-102Rev. 1Chemical dose or concentrations were determined for the 11 chemicals at the site boundary and the nearest residence (249 and 788m, respectively). Table 19.4.11-1 summarizes the results of the source term and concentration calculations for the 11 chemicals. The material-at-risk (MAR) represents the inventory of hazardous material that is at risk from the postulated scenario. The MAR for most of the chemicals represents the amount of material in storage. In some cases, the MAR represents the total facility inventory. For other chemicals, the quantity assumed to be released is reduced to account for separate storage locations, or to account for normal industrial chemicals not interacting with licensed materials or affecting the safety of licensed materials. The 11 chemicals were selected for evaluation based on the combination of anticipated bounding facility inventory amounts and high toxicity characteristics (lowest PAC values). The acceptance limits were those identified in NUREG/CR-6410 and correspond to Protective Action Criteria (PAC) values corresponding to Acute Exposure Guideline Levels (AEGLs), Emergency Response Planning Guideline (ERPG), or Temporary Emergency Exposure Limits (TEEL) values for such chemicals.The results from the analysis indicate that the chemical dose or concentration for the MEI and the nearest residence is below the PAC-1, PAC-2, and PAC-3 levels (equivalent to ERPG-1, ERPG-2, and ERPG-3). These concentrations are conservatively calculated, and are based on the assumption that the entire inventory of liquid hazardous chemicals evaporates from a 100ft 2 pool, over a duration calculated by EPICode. Solid powder material release durations were assumed to be onehour to correspond with ERPG exposure times. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-103Rev. 1[Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]Table 19.4.11-1 SHINE Hazardous (Toxic) Chemical Source Terms and ConcentrationsHazardous Chemical/Release Mechanism MAR(lb)ARF/RFSource Term*(lb)PAC-1PAC-2PAC-3 SiteBoundaryConcentration(249 m)Nearest Residence Concentration (788 m)Nitric Acid, 12M, associated with licensed materials (Evaporating Liquid)7211.07210.53 ppm24 ppm92 ppm0.090 ppm0.012 ppmSulfuric Acid (Evaporating Liquid)7,7701.07,7700.20 mg/m 38.7mg/m3160 mg/m34.7E-07 mg/m 36.3E-08 mg/m 3Calcium Hydroxide (Dispersed Solid)3,1820.0013.182 15 mg/m3240 mg/m31,500 mg/m 30.16 mg/m 30.020 mg/m 3Caustic Soda (Dispersed Solid)1,4880.0011.4880.5 mg/m35 mg/m350 mg/m30.073 mg/m 30.010 mg/m 3[Proprietary Information] (Dispersed Solid)4,1040.0014.104[ProprietaryInformation][Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information]0.20 mg/m 30.026 mg/m 3Ammonium Hydroxide(Dispersed Solid)590.0010.05961 ppm330 ppm2300 ppm2.0E-03 ppm2.6E-04 ppm[Proprietary Information] (Dispersed Solid)6060.0010.606[ProprietaryInformation][Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information]0.03 mg/m 33.9E-03 mg/m 3Dodecane associated with licensed materials (Evaporating Liquid)3041.03040.0028 ppm0.031 ppm7.9 ppm4.4E-04 ppm5.9E-05 ppmPotassium Permanganate (Dispersed Solid)660.0010.0668.6 mg/m314 mg/m378 mg/m33.3E-03 mg/m 34.2E-04 mg/m 3Tributyl Phosphate (Dispersed Solid)3330.0010.3330.6 mg/m33.5 mg/m3125 mg/m31.5E-03 ppm2.0E-04 ppmUranyl Nitrate (Dispersed Solid) (Likely in solution at SHINE)4800.0010.4800.99 mg/m 35.5 mg/m333 mg/m30.024 mg/m 33.1E-03 mg/m 3 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewEnvironmental JusticeSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-104Rev. 019.4.12ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICEOn February 11, 1994, President Clinton signed Executive Order 12898 Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations. Executive Order 12898 directs federal executive agencies to consider environmental justice under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). This Executive Order ensures that minority and/or low-income populations do not bear a disproportionate share of adverse health or environmental consequences of the building of the SHINE production facility.19.4.12.1Methodology Guidance for addressing environmental justice (EJ) is provided by the Council on Environmental Quality's Environmental Justice Guidance under the National Environmental Policy Act; NRC Policy Statement on the Treatment of Environmental Justice Matters in NRC Licensing Actions; and NRC Office Instruction No. LIC 203, Revision 2, Procedural Guidance for Preparing Environmental Assessments and Considering Environmental Issues. The NRC defines a "minority" by race and ethnicity, as classified by the USCB (NRC, 2009). Specifically, a minority is an individual whose race is: Black or African American; American Indian or Alaska Native; Asian; Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander; Some Other Race (not mentioned above); Two or More Races (i.e., multiracial); or whose ethnicity is Hispanic or Latino of any race. Determination of low-income populations is based on poverty thresholds as defined by the USCB.The geographic area of analysis is the 5-mi. (8-km) area around the SHINE site. The method to identify the locations of minority and low-income populations of the geographic area of analysis is the "block group" method recommended by the NRC. The block group is the smallest geographical unit for which the USCB tabulates data required for EJ analysis (NRC, 2004). The 2010 census data, along with geographic information system (GIS) software, are used to determine the minority characteristics of resident populations by block group. If any part of a block group is located within 5 mi. (8km) of the SHINE site, the entire block group is included in the analysis. A total of 48block groups meet this criteria and are evaluated as part of this analysis (Table 19.4.12-1).The following methodology is used to identify populations that may be the subject of EJ considerations.19.4.12.1.1Minority Populations NRC guidance requires analysis of individual race and ethnicity classifications as well as the aggregate of all minority populations (NRC, 2009). Based on NRC guidance, a minority population exists if either of the following two conditions exist:*The minority population of the block group of the impacted area (block group) exceeds 50percent of the total population of the block group.*The minority population percentage of the block group significantly (20 percentage points) exceeds the geographic area chosen for comparative analysis (NRC, 2004).For the 48 block groups within the geographic area of analysis (5-mi. [8-km] radius), the percentage of each block group's minority population in all of the minority classifications is calculated. If any block group has a minority percentage that exceeds 50 percent, then the block group is identified as containing a minority population. If any block group has a minority Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewEnvironmental JusticeSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-105Rev. 0percentage exceeding the corresponding minority percentage for Rock County and the State of Wisconsin by more than 20 percentage points, then a minority population is determined to exist in that block group.19.4.12.1.2Low-Income Populations NRC guidance defines low-income households as th ose with incomes that are less than the poverty level (NRC, 2004). A block group is considered low-income if either of the following two conditions is met:*The low-income population of the block group of the impacted area (block group) exceeds 50percent of the total number of households in the block group*The low-income population percentage of the block group significantly (20percentage points) exceeds the geographic area chosen for comparative analysisThe number of low-income households in each census block group is divided by the total households for that block group to obtain the percentage of low-income households per block group. If any block group has a low-income percentage exceeding 50 percent, then the block group is identified as containing a low-income population. If any block group has a minority percentage exceeding the corresponding percentage for Rock County and the State of Wisconsin by more than 20 percentage points, then a low-income population is determined to exist.19.4.12.2Assessment of Disproportionate Impacts19.4.12.2.1Minority Populations Table 19.4.12-1 presents the results of the analysis for minority populations. The table displays the percentage of minority populations in each block group and the totals for the complete 5-mi. (8-km) radius. The percentages of each minority category within the county and state are also presented as the basis for determining which block groups meet the criteria. None of the 48 census block groups within the 5-mi. (8-km) radius meet the NRC quantitative method for identifying a minority population. Generally, Hispanic or Latino, Black or African American, and Two or More Races (i.e. multiracial) classifications represent the predominant minority populations in the block groups within 5mi. (8-km) of the SHINE site; however, no block group contains a minority population (individual or aggregate) that either exceeds 50percent or significantly exceeds the comparative geographic areas. Overall, the percentage of minority groups in the 5-mi. (8-km) area of analysis is less than comparative figures for Rock County and Wisconsin. The aggregate minority population in the 5-mi. (8-km) study area is 11.1percent, compared to 15.5 percent in the county and 16.7 in the state. The aggregate minority population includes all minority populations, as defined by NRC (NRC, 2009) (seeSubsection19.4.12.1).Only a small percentage of the study area population is American Indian and Alaska native (0.3percent) in the study area, and there is no American Indian reservation within 5mi. (8km) of the SHINE site (Bureau of Indian Affairs, 2012). Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewEnvironmental JusticeSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-106Rev. 0There is one property in the immediate vicinity of the SHINE site that appears to be a location for regular congregation of minorities. A relatively small Hispanic church congregation uses a building located on US 51 to the south of the SHINE site. The church, called Iglesia Hispania Pentecostale, is not located within a minority block group.Within the 5-mi. (8-km) radius of the SHINE facility, there is an absence of populations indentified as minority that qualify as EJ populations. Therefore, the potential for a disproportionately high impact to these populations is SMALL.19.4.12.2.2Low-Income Populations Table 19.4.12-1 presents the results of the analysis for low-income populations. The table displays the percentage of low-income households in each block group, the total for the 5-mi. (8-km) radius, and the percentage of low-income households within the county and state. The table also highlights the block groups that meet the NRC criteria for low-income populations. Figure19.4.12-1 identifies these populations as occurring in the central area of Janesville.As a whole, the percentage of low-income households in the 5-mi. (8-km) radius (12.7percent) is slightly higher than that for the county (11.4percent) and the state (11.2percent). Eighteen of the 48 block groups in the 5-mi. (8-km) area have low-income populations that exceed county and state rates; however, only three of the 18 meet the NRC criteria for low-income population. The table illustrates that two of the three block groups have a higher percentage of low-income population than comparable percentages for the county and state. The three block groups are contiguous to one another and are located considerably north of the SHINE site in downtown Janesville (see Figure 19.4.12-1).In addition to the identification of EJ populations based on census block analysis, SHINE also considered the potential for isolated low-income/minority groups near the SHINE site. A manufactured housing complex called Janesville Terrace Mobile Home Park is located to the north of the SHINE site on US south of SH11. It is visible from the proposed construction area. There are approximately 25 manufactured housing units in the complex. It is not known whether one or more of the households are classified as low-income, though it is known that Janesville Terrace Mobile Home Park is not located within a low-income Census block group.Potential impacts of plant construction, operations and decommissioning on low-income populations may include small increases in local traffic and associated noise due to construction and operational workforce traffic. Given the distance between low-income population block groups and the SHINE site, and that transportation routes likely to be utilized for construction and operation workforces do not adversely impact these block groups, impacts to low-income population block groups are SMALL and not disproportionate.As is described in Subsection 19.4.7, construction and operation of the SHINE facility may also result in a small demand for housing. The potential that low-income populations may be disadvantaged in their ability to find or keep housing in competition with a non-resident workforce was considered. Factors affecting the degree of disadvantage include the amount of vacant housing available and the size of the work force relocating into the area. A potential impact mechanism to EJ populations may arise from competition from non-resident workers for a limited supply of housing. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewEnvironmental JusticeSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-107Rev. 0Based on the analysis discussed in Subsection 19.4.7.1, a maximum of 420 workers is needed for the facility's construction, and 150 workers are needed permanently for its operation (seeTable 19.3.7-2). As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7.1 it is estimated that approximately 60percent of the required construction and operational workforce is drawn from the labor force that currently resides in the Region of Influence, therefore only a portion of the required construction workers and operations workers will relocate to Rock County. According to 2010 Census, there are 5986 vacant housing units in Rock County (see Table 19.3.7-12). This quantity of vacant housing far exceeds the quantity required to meet estimated non-resident worker demand without creating a competitive shortage of housing. Therefore, with regards to housing the potential impacts to low-income populations are SMALL.19.4.12.2.3Migrant PopulationsThe State of Wisconsin's Bureau of Migrant Labor Services releases an annual Migrant Population Report that documents the number of workers eligible for protection under Wisconsin Statute 103.90-103.97. The state statute provides protections for migrant workers who temporarily leave their principal, out-of-state residence and live in Wisconsin for not more than 10months in a year to work in agriculture, horticulture or food processing. The 2011 Migrant Population Report reflects the number of workers whose presence was verified by Migrant Law Enforcement staff, though it is not intended to provide comprehensive statistics about migrant seasonal farm workers in Wisconsin. The report does not indicate any migrant workers in Rock County (State of Wisconsin Bureau of Migrant Labor Services, 2011); therefore the potential impacts to migrant populations are SMALL.19.4.12.3Assessment of Human Health and Environmental Impacts19.4.12.3.1Minority PopulationsTable 19.4.12-1 shows that there are no block groups that meet the NRC criteria for a minority population. As described in Subsection19.4.12.2, there is a Hispanic church located near to the south of the SHINE site. Plant construction may result in construction related noise; exposure to fugitive dust, exhaust emissions, and vibrations; and generation of construction-related wastes. However, it is not anticipated that construction activity will be heavy on Sundays when the most Hispanic minority persons would be expected to visit the church. Additionally, because dust control measures are used and because noise attenuates to acceptable levels near the site boundary (see Subsection 19.4.2), the potential impacts to minority populations are SMALL.19.4.12.3.2Low-Income Populations As described in Subsection19.4.12.2.2, the Janesville Terrace Mobile Home Park is located to the north of the SHINE site and may include low-income households. Plant construction may result in construction related noise, exposure to fugitive dust, exhaust emissions, vibrations, and generation of construction-related wastes. These are potential impacts that would impact the general population, but have no disproportionate impact on low-income populations. Mitigation measures include implementing best management practices for controlling fugitive dust and proper maintenance of construction equipment for controlling emissions; recycling of construction waste, to the extent possible; and, minimizing land disturbance, removing construction debris in a timely manner, and adding landscape enhancements. Additionally, noise levels attenuate to acceptable levels near the site boundary (see Subsection19.4.2). Therefore, human health and environmental impacts on low-income populations are SMALL. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewEnvironmental JusticeSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-108Rev. 019.4.12.4Mitigation MeasuresMitigation measures to reduce or minimize adverse impacts on EJ populations are not required; any measures as described in Subsections 19.4.12.2 and 19.4.12.3 are used to minimize potentially adverse impacts of construction affecting the general population, which are expected to be SMALL. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewEnvironmental JusticeSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-109Rev. 0Table 19.4.12-1 Minority and Low-Income Population Statistics for Block Groups within a 5-Mi. Radius of the SHINESite(Sheet 1 of 2)Block GroupCensus TractLow-Income Population (%)Minority Population (%) (a)Black or
African American American Indian and Alaska Native Asian Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander Some Other Race Two or More RacesHispanic or LatinoAggregate1129.05.10.10.30.00.02.18.816.5124.80.60.30.50.00.01.52.15.0 223.10.90.61.50.00.00.91.55.5
3235.02.60.41.10.00.12.26.112.5 1356.67.50.31.60.00.02.711.623.8 2348.17.60.65.00.00.23.313.630.43316.14.20.47.20.00.72.05.920.3 1427.85.10.13.30.00.03.69.521.7 2417.82.30.02.00.00.14.37.015.7 3418.20.80.30.30.00.00.72.95.0 4431.01.80.42.90.00.51.914.421.9 154.51.00.41.00.40.00.63.16.4 2510.10.90.70.30.00.03.62.78.1 350.02.30.02.20.20.02.87.014.5 4521.01.30.91.00.10.02.03.89.2 558.01.30.40.70.00.10.910.113.5 167.02.40.20.30.40.22.03.69.2 2619.82.80.30.40.00.03.96.013.4 285.90.20.20.40.00.00.33.64.8 383.71.60.20.50.00.30.95.28.7 483.13.70.50.30.10.02.57.314.4 191.40.80.00.40.00.00.84.36.3 299.01.30.20.50.10.00.52.55.2 1107.42.70.71.00.00.11.76.512.7 21016.91.60.30.60.00.21.111.215.1 1117.01.70.11.10.00.11.23.07.3 2119.91.30.11.50.10.02.23.99.1 31122.66.90.10.80.00.02.79.519.9 4117.30.90.30.60.00.01.82.96.5 51126.32.80.21.20.00.01.111.516.7 112.0110.83.30.20.80.00.02.13.49.9 212.012.71.10.10.30.00.00.72.64.8 312.014.30.40.40.80.00.01.51.84.9 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewEnvironmental JusticeSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-110Rev. 0Table 19.4.12-1 Minority and Low-Income Population Statistics for Block Groups within a 5-Mi. Radius of the SHINESite(Sheet 2 of 2)Block GroupCensus TractLow-Income Population (%)Minority Population (%) (a)Black or African American American Indian and Alaska Native Asian Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander Some Other Race Two or More RacesHispanic or LatinoAggregate113.020.02.30.11.00.10.10.72.16.4213.029.51.50.10.70.00.00.62.85.6 313.026.33.40.00.90.00.00.72.77.7 413.028.60.50.00.00.00.31.01.13.0 513.023.71.20.10.50.00.01.02.04.7 1144.11.00.51.20.00.20.91.04.9 21419.03.80.20.10.00.20.910.615.8 31413.23.10.31.60.20.01.410.917.6 4145.51.50.20.60.00.01.04.17.4 2220.01.10.60.40.00.32.02.06.5 1249.03.70.11.80.00.01.33.210.0 22411.83.30.20.90.00.00.85.110.1 32420.72.60.40.30.10.02.23.39.0 126.0121.814.10.11.20.00.21.911.028.3 126.0214.73.90.11.70.00.10.84.511.2Total, 5-Mi. Radius12.72.70.31.10.00.11.65.411.1Comparative PopulationsRockCountyState ofWisconsin11.44.80.21.00.00.11.77.615.511.26.20.92.30.00.11.45.916.7a) Shaded block groups meet the NRC qualitative method for identifying low-income populations.
References:
USCB, 2010c; USCB, 2006-2010. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-111Rev. 019.4.13CUMULATIVE EFFECTSThis subsection discusses the cumulative impacts to the region's environment that could result from construction and operation of the SHINE facility. A cumulative impac t is defined in Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations (40 CFR 1508.7) as an "impact on the environment which results from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency (federal or non-federal) or person undertakes such other actions." To guide its assessment of the environmental impacts of a proposed action, the NRC has established a standard of significance for impacts based on guidance developed by the CEQ (40CFR1508.27). To address cumulative impacts, the existing environment in the region surrounding the SHINE site was considered in conjunction with the environmental impacts as presented in Section19.4 for constructing and operating a new facility at the SHINE site. These combined impacts are defined by the CEQ as "cumulative" in 40CFR1508.7 and may include individually minor but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time.Cumulative effects analysis encompasses a consideration of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future (Federal, non-Federal, and private) actions that could have meaningful cumulative impacts together with the proposed action. Past construction and operational impacts of existing industrial uses and developments are part of the existing baseline conditions in the region and are therefore, intrinsically integrated as part of the cumulative effects analysis. The cumulative effects analysis therefore, focuses on the additive impacts from the existing baseline conditions, the effects of a new facility, and other identified present and reasonably foreseeable future actions. Table 19.4.13-1 provides a listing of all projects identified as potentially contributing to cumulative impacts. To identify other actions SHINE considered:*Information about current or planned local economic development programs or projects (e.g., commercial, industrial, and/or residential); and *Information about current or planned infrastructure improvements (e.g., transportation, electric and water utility).As described in NRC Memo ML100621017, actions that are not reasonably foreseeable are those that are based on mere speculation or conjecture, or those that have only been discussed on a conceptual basis. These can include projects that have not yet been approved by the proper authorities or have not yet submitted license/permit applications. Present and future projects that were considered for cumulative effects analysis but did not meet the criteria established for reasonable foreseeability were not retained. Projects and other actions retained for the cumulative effects analysis are identified in Table 19.4.13-2 and Figure 19.4.13-1.Cumulative impacts of the new facility and other identified present and reasonably foreseeable future actions are assessed for the following resources: land use and visual resources; air quality and noise; geologic environment; water resources (hydrology, water use, water quality); ecological resources (terrestrial and aquatic communities); historic and cultural resources; the socioeconomic environment; human health; and environmental justice. According to the CEQ's Considering Cumulative Effects Under the National Environmental Policy Act (CEQ, 1997), the Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-112Rev. 0establishment of an appropriate geographic area of analysis is an important step in performing the cumulative effects analysis. The geographic areas for analysis were selected based on the environmental effects that may occur to each of the affected resources under consideration and are the same as those used for each resource category in Section 19.4. The sensitivity of cumulative effects is resource-based, and an appropriate context of analysis was selected for each of the resources described below.19.4.13.1Land Use and Visual ResourcesThe description of the affected environment in Subsection 19.3.1 serves as a baseline for the land use and visual resources cu mulative impact assessment. The geographic area of analysis for evaluation of cumulative effects on land use and visual resources is the same as that used in Subsection 19.4.1 and includes the 91.27 ac. (36.94 ha) within the site boundary and the 5mi. (8km) region surrounding the site. As discussed in Subsection 19.4.1.1, construction and operation impacts from the SHINE facility on la nd use are SMALL. Impacts from construction and operation to visual resources are SMALL, as discussed in Subsection 19.4.1.2.Table 19.4.13-2 identifies recent past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the geographic extent of analysis that can be assessed to determine cumulative effects on land use and visual resources. Relevant "other actions" that are considered in this cumulative effects analysis are limited to the utility line extensions, proposed facility, TIF District No. 35 Project Plan, an agricultural storage facility immediately south of the SHINE site, the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, and an Alliant Energy power generation facility. The storage facility is a recent past disturbance; however it has on-going affects to land use and visual resources. The utility line extensions, proposed facility, and TIF No. 35 Project Plan are all future actions. The airport, Glen Erin Golf Course and power generation facilities are existing facilities ("present actions") and on-going actions.19.4.13.1.1Land Use Resources The City of Janesville plans to install a water main and sanitary sewer main along the northern boundary of the SHINE site as part of the overall TIF District No. 35 development activities. Based on the SHINE facility site layout, the expected route of the water main and sewer main connects directly to the facility (Figure 19.2.1-1). Installation of the City's water and sewer mains disturbs a 50-ft. (15-m) wide corridor (one corridor for both water and sewer) with the pipelines centered in the middle of the co rridor. Similarly, installation of the water and sewer connections from the City's mains to the SHINE facility disturbs a 50-ft. (15-m) wide corridor (one corridor for both water and sewer) with the pipelines centered in the middle of the corridor. The corridors temporarily disturb 0.62ac. (0.25ha) immediately adjacent to the northern boundary of the site. Lands disturbed by this corridor include undeveloped cultivated crop lands and prime farmland, which comprise the majority of the land cover within the site and region. In 2004, the City of Janesville purchased 224 ac. (91ha) of land located south of SH11 and west of County Truck Highway G with the intention of creating a TIF district. The parcel is vacant industrial land in agricultural use in an industrially-zoned area on the City's southeast side. The parcel is unimproved and has been used for agricultural crop production for decades. The land has since been zoned for light industrial use and is "shovel ready" certified. Land cover in this parcel consists entirely of cultivated crops and includes prime farmland. The region surrounding the SHINE site includes over 25,000 ac. (10,000 ha) of cultivated crop land and approximately 42,000 ac. (17,000 ha) of prime farmland or farmland of statewide importance Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-113Rev. 0(seeSubsection19.3.1.1). Consequently, the utilization of the 224 ac. (91ha) included in the TIF District No. 35 Project Plan would have a minimal change in the availability of these resources in the region. Immediately adjacent to the southern border of the SHINE site are two large warehouses that support local agriculture operations and provide storage for large farming equipment. The warehouse facility has resulted in the conversion of prime farmland and the land surrounding the site. This development represents a recent ground disturbance that has impacted the overall land use and potential crop production for the region. As described in Subsection 19.3.1.1.4, the potential relative value of the farmland for the 91.27ac. (36.94 ha) comprising the SHINE site is 13,771 Bu. of grain corn or 3947Bu. of soybeans, while the 10-year production estimate average for Rock County, Wisconsin, is 22,075,540Bu. of grain corn and 3,786,415Bu. of soybeans. The minor loss of on-site agricultural lands, including prime farmland and farmland of state wide importance, and the subsequent loss of potential crop production to industrial facilities is a minor impact when compared to the amount of agricultural land, land designated as prime farmland or farmland of state wide importance, and potential crop production remaining within the region (see Table19.4.1-1 and Subsection 19.3.1.1.4). Therefore, cumulative impacts to land use resources, including agricultural resources, are SMALL.19.4.13.1.2Visual ResourcesThe immediate location of the SHINE site and TIF District No. 35 is composed entirely of land used for agricultural purposes and has no existing architectural features, established structures, or natural-built barriers, screens, or buffers. Consequently, the SHINE facility and any light industrial structure built at the TIF District No. 35 location alters the on-site condition and partially obstructs views of the existing landscape. However, the visual setting of the site is generally flat and uniform in landform with low vegetation diversity and a low visual quality rating (see Subsection19.3.1.3).The viewshed to the west of the site across US51 is a light industrial development landscape that consists of the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport and its associated facilities, which includes the airport control tower and several large warehouses and hangers. The viewshed to the south of the site includes the two large warehouses immediately adjacent to the southern border of the site that support local agricultural operations and provide storage for large farming equipment. Additionally, the viewshed to the south includes several stacks associated with an Alliant Energy coal-fired power generation facility. While a portion of the plant is non-operational, the stacks are still visible as part of the viewshed. Together with the buildings and structures to the south and west, the facilities located at the SHINE and TIF District No. 35 sites do not significantly alter the visual setting. Therefore, cumulative impacts to visual resources are SMALL.19.4.13.2Air Quality and Noise 19.4.13.2.1Air QualityThe description of the affected environment in Subsection 19.3.2 serves as a baseline for the air quality cumulative impact assessment. Table 19.4.13-2 identifies recent past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the geographic extent of analysis that can be Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-114Rev. 0assessed to determine cumulative effects on air quality. Relevant "other actions" that are considered in this cumulative effects analysis include the TIF District No. 35 Project Plan (Rock County), the Alliant Energy - WP&L Turtle Generating Facility, NorthStar Medical Isotopes facility (Rock County), United Ethanol (Rock County), Generac Power Systems (Jefferson County), Kraft Foods Global (Dane County), and University of Wisconsin Madison (Dane County). With the exception of the TIF District No. 35 Project Plan and NorthStar Medical facility, which are future actions, all of the projects are present and on-going actions. The geographic area of analysis for evaluation of cumulative effects on air quality is the same as that used in Subsection 19.4.2 and includes Rock County and the four surrounding counties in Wisconsin: Green, Dane, Jefferson, and Walworth. As described in Subsection19.4.2.1.1, air emission impacts from construction are SMALL as emissions are controlled at the source where practicable; maintained within established regulatory limits designed to minimize impacts; and located a significant distance from the public. Operations of the facility have a SMALL impact on air quality, as discussed in Subsection19.4.2.1.2. Criteria PollutantsAir emission impacts as a result of concurrent construction activities are expected at both the SHINE and NorthStar Medical facilities. In addition, construction at the TIF District No. 35 site could overlap with construction activities at either of these facilities. Construction activity at NorthStar is expected to begin in 2013, with completion slated for mid-2014 (NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, 2012). Depending on the actual completion date for NorthStar, this construction schedule may overlap with the proposed construction schedule for SHINE, which is scheduled to begin in 2015. Implementation of mitigation measures described in Subsection19.4.2.1.1 minimizes impacts to local ambient air quality and the nuisance impacts to the public in proximity to the project. Impacts to air quality from construction activities are expected to be minor, localized, and short-term; therefore, overlapping construction schedules are not expected to contribute significantly to cumulative effects.The proposed NorthStar facility will produce small air emissions from operation of the building's heating system and from the use of chemicals to dissolve Mo-99 targets (DOE, 2012). Gaseous effluents at the SHINE facility are a result of isotope production and fuel combustion, as discussed in Subsection19.4.2.1.2. The SHINE facility does not result in exceedances of federal or state criteria air quality criteria. Operations emissions from both facilities are subject to permitting by the WDNR and controlled at the source using appropriate emissions control systems. In addition, the electricity demand of the SHINE and NorthStar facilities may result in an increase in regional electricity demand. However, this increase is not expected to exceed supply or the ability to deliver it and would not substantially increase air emissions for the region.Existing permitted emissions facilities are considered part of the baseline air quality. Given its proximity to the SHINE site, it is notable that the Alliant Energy - WP&L Turtle Generating Facility recently received an Air Pollution Control Operation Permit (WDNR,2011b). New construction-related emissions permits identified through the WDNR permit application website are all small-scaled and are not expected to have a significant impact on air quality in the region. United Ethanol, an ethanol production facility in Rock County, has one active Construction Permit that was issued in May, 2012 for upgrades to the existing facility. In Jefferson County, Generac Power Systems has an active operating permit renewed to 2015 and is planning modifications to one of their venting stacks, which was issued a Construction Permit exemption in April, 2012. In Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-115Rev. 0Dane County, Kraft Foods Global was issued a Construction Permit in June, 2012 to construct and operate three natural gas or distillate fuel fired boilers. The University of Wisconsin (West Campus) cogeneration facility is planning to add a four-cell cooling tower associated with the chiller plant expansion (exempted from obtaining a Construction Permit in August, 2012). The University of Wisconsin (Charter Street) was issued a Construction Permit in February, 2012 to construct boilers and emergency equipment. The University of Wisconsin is also planning to replace a coal-fired boiler with a natural gas boiler, which will reduce overall emissions (University of Wisconsin, 2009). It is expected that each of these projects will operate in such a manner as to not violate the established permit levels or federal and state criteria. Additionally, permitting reviews performed by the WDNR are conducted to ensure that new permits do not result in regional air quality degradation. Therefore, the cumulative impacts of criteria pollutants to air quality are SMALL.Greenhouse Gas EmissionsThe cumulative impacts of a single or combination of GHG emission sources must be placed in geographic context, considering the following factors:*The environmental impact should be assessed on a global rather than local or regional basis.*The effect is not sensitive to the location of the emission release point.*The magnitudes of individual GHG sources related to human activity, no matter how large compared to other sources, are small when compared to the total mass of GHGs in the
atmosphere.*The total number and variety of GHG sources is extremely large and the sources are ubiquitous.GHG emissions associated with building, operating, and decommissioning the new facility are discussed in Subsection 19.4.2.1.2.3. As noted in Subsection 19.4.3.2.5, SHINE will develop a comprehensive program to avoid and control GHG emissions associated with the facility.Evaluation of cumulative impacts of GHG emissions requires the use of a global climate model. A synthesis of the results of numerous climate modeling studies are presented in the report from Karl, et al. (Karl, et al., 2009). The cumulative impacts of global GHG emissions as presented in the report are the appropriate basis for evaluation of cumulative impacts with regards to the SHINE facility. The report concludes that climate changes are underway in the United States as part of the global climate and that these changes are projected to grow. While noticeable, none of the changes will result in a destabilization of the global climate. In 2010 the EPA issued the CO2 Tailoring Rule (75 Federal Register [FR] 31514), which stated that GHG emissions will be factors in PSD and TitleV permitting and reporting. This revised permitting criterion indicates the need to regulate CO 2 and other GHGs from major emission sources. GHG emissions from individual stationary sources and, cumulatively, from multiple sources can contribute to national and global climate change. Given the relative ly low emissions from the SHINE facility in comparison to total global emissions, cumulative impacts of the proposed facility are SMALL. Furthermore, the cumulative impacts of GHG emissions would still be the same at the national and global scale without the GHG emissions of the proposed SHINE facility. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-116Rev. 019.4.13.2.2NoiseThe description of the affected environment in Subsection 19.3.2 serves as a baseline for the noise cumulative impact assessment. The geographic area of analysis for evaluation of cumulative effects from noise emissions includes the 91.27 ac. (36.94 ha) within the site boundary and the 1 mi. (1.6 km) area surrounding the site. This area was selected as it encompasses the nearest noise receptors to the SHINE site identified in Subsection19.4.3.6.1 and is a distance over which noise generated at the SHINE site would attenuate to negligible levels. Noise impacts resulting from construction and operation of the SHINE facility are discussed in Subsections19.4.2.2.1 and 19.4.2.2.2 and are SMALL.Table 19.4.13-2 identifies recent past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the geographic extent of analysis that can be assessed to determine cumulative effects on noise. Relevant "other actions" that are considered in this cumulative effects analysis are limited to the proposed facility, TIF District No. 35 Project Plan, and the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport. The proposed facility and TIF District No. 35 Project Plan are future actions and the airport is a current and on-going action.During the construction periods for the SHINE (including the off-site utility extension) and TIF District No. 35 facilities, additional impacts to noise are expected in the immediate area around each site. Noise levels from construction equipment are expected to attenuate rapidly with distance, and therefore, do not significantly impact nearby sensitive noise receptors. Noise levels are also impacted by increases in traffic volume during both construction and operation; however they are not expected to be significantly higher than current traffic levels. External noise emission from the SHINE facility during operation is primarily limited by the walls and other physical barriers of the facility itself. Noise generated at the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport contributes to the existing baseline noise levels of the region. The airport currently operates approximately 140 flights per day. Additional flight operations may increase due to the demand to transport materials to and from the SHINE and NorthStar facilities; however these increases are not anticipated to cause an appreciable increase in noise above the current operations. Therefore, cumulative impacts to noise in the region are SMALL.19.4.13.3Geologic Environment The description of the affected environment in Subsection19.3.3 serves as a baseline for the geologic environment cumulative impact assessment. The geographic area of analysis for evaluation of cumulative effects on geologic resources is the same as that used in Subsection19.4.3 and includes the 91.27ac. (36.94ha) within the site boundary and the 5mi. (8km) region surrounding the site. As discussed in Subsection19.4.3, construction and operation impacts from the SHINE site on the geologic environment are SMALL.Table 19.4.13-2 identifies recent past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the geographic extent of analysis that can be assessed to determine cumulative effects on the geologic environment. Relevant "other actions" that are considered in this cumulative effects analysis are limited to the utility line extensions, the proposed facility, and the TIF District No.35 Project Plan, all of which are future actions. No present or on-going actions were identified that are relevant to this analysis. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-117Rev. 0Impacts to the geologic environment from other actions are minor. The proximity of the utility line extensions and TIF District No.35 project to the SHINE site results in impacts to the same geologic resources as those affected by the SHINE facility. However, there are no sensitive geologic resources in the region surrounding the SHINE site. Impacts from these identified projects are expected to be localized and minor. Therefore, cumulative impacts are SMALL.19.4.13.4Water Resources The description of the affected environment in Subsection19.3.4 serves as a baseline for the water resources cumulative impact assessment. The geographic area of analysis for evaluation of cumulative effects on water resources is the same as that used in Subsection19.4.4 and includes the 91.27ac. (36.94ha) within the site boundary and the 5mi. (8km) region surrounding the site. As discussed in Subsection19.4.4.1, construction impacts to water resources are SMALL. Impacts from operation of the facility are discussed in Subsection19.4.4.2 and are SMALL.Table19.4.13-2 identifies recent past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the geographic extent of analysis that can be assessed to determine cumulative effects on water resources. Relevant "other actions" that are considered in this cumulative effects analysis are limited to the utility line extensions planned in support of the SHINE facilit y, proposed facility, TIF District No. 35 Project Plan, Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, and Glen Erin Golf Course. The utility lines, proposed facility, and TIF development are all future actions. Present and on-going actions include the airport and golf course.19.4.13.4.1HydrologyThere are no surface water resources located on either the SHINE or TIF District No. 35 sites; therefore there are no direct impacts as a result of alteration of streams or water bodies. The nearest water bodies are the nearby unnamed tributary to Rock River, located 1.6mi (2.6km) south of the SHINE site, and the Rock River, located 1.9 mi. (3.1 km) southwest of the SHINE site. Construction of the SHINE facility and at the TIF District No. 35 location represents potential sources of pollution associated with runoff from construction sites. It is anticipated that at both sites BMP are used in accordance with the SWPPP, as required by the WDNR, to prevent sediment runoff and subsequent siltation in receiving streams during construction.During operations, potential impacts associated with hydrology are related to stormwater management as agricultural lands at the site are converted to urban development. Currently, sheet flow runoff at the SHINE site location follows natural drainage patterns and discharges to a ditch along US51. The planned SHINE facility collects runoff from the developed parts to be directed through a vegetated on-site detention swale before being discharged through an outfall control structure to the ditch along US51 (Subsection19.4.5). Future facilities at the TIF District No. 35 may include a storm sewer collection system that includes underground piping, surface detention area, and safety fencing (City of Janesville, 2012b). Additionally, when combined with the distance to the nearest off-site water bodies, runoff and siltation to the receiving streams is minimized. Cumulative hydrologic impacts are therefore, SMALL.19.4.13.4.2Water Use All public water supplies in Rock County, including the City of Janesville are derived from groundwater. No public water supplies are provided by surface water within the region. In Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-118Rev. 0addition to the SHINE facility, the only other future demand on the groundwater supply in Janesville is the potential TIF District No. 35 development. Approval of the TIF District No. 35 Project Plan indicates that the City of Janesville has the capacity to serve the future development with both public water supply and wastewater treatment. According to the City of Janesville, the water main and sewer main infrastructure will have more than enough capacity to support the SHINE facility; therefore no upgrades to the City water supply system and sanitary sewer system are anticipated (Subsection 19.4.7). Therefore, cumulative impacts from water use are SMALL.19.4.13.4.3Water QualityExisting stormwater pollutant sources within the region around the SHINE site include urban developments, which are associated with pollutants such as phosphorous and chloride. Phosphorous has been identified as a general pollutant of concern across Wisconsin due to the impacts associated with nutrient build up in lakes. Phosphorous is also a potential pollutant associated with fertilizer application on agricultural lands. Fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides also are generally applied on golf courses. Chloride is another typical pollutant associated with development, particularly resulting from winter applications of salt on roadways and sidewalks for de-icing. Chloride is not readily adsorbed on soil particles or taken up by vegetation.The TIF District No. 35 Project Plan is the only other potential future project within the region of the SHINE site that has the potential to contribute to cumulative impacts on water quality as it is in the same subwatershed as the SHINE site. Other notable developed uses within the same subwatershed that may be the source of pollutant loading include the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport and the Glen Erin Golf Club. However, runoff from the SHINE site is detained in grassed detention areas and because of the high infiltration rates of the soil, is not conveyed to downstream areas within any organized stream channel. Similarly, no organized stream channel is evident near the SHINE site on either the airport or the golf course. Designs for development of the TIF District No. 35 site are expected to incorporate similar detention basins and best management practices as required by Wisconsin DNR and local regulations. Therefore, in consideration of the SHINE site design, future designs for detention associated with the TIF development site, high infiltration rates, and the absence of an organized stream channel near the SHINE site, cumulative impacts on surface water resources are SMALL.The SHINE facility is 91.27ac. (36.94ha) in size, and 53.75ac. (21.75ha) are expected to remain in use for the production of agricultural row crops or be returned to pre-settlement conditions. The removal of 38.52ac. (15.58ha) from row crop production results in a proportional reduction in the amount of agricultural chemicals (fertilizers, etc.) applied on the site, and less potential impact to groundwater quality from pollutant loading. If the remaining 53.75 ac (21.75 ha) were returned to pre-settlement conditions it would result in an even greater reduction in the use of agriculture chemicals. Similarly, the TIF development reduces the area of active agricultural lands and reduces the amount of agricultural chemical application. Consequently, less pollutant loading to groundwater would occur from agricultural practices. No other cumulative impacts to groundwater quality are expected. Therefore, cumulative impacts to groundwater resources are SMALL.19.4.13.5Ecological ResourcesThe description of the affected environment in Subsection19.3.5 serves as a baseline for the ecological resources cumulative impact assessment. The geographic area of analysis for evaluation of cumulative effects on ecological resources is the same as that used in Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-119Rev. 0Subsection19.4.5 and includes the 91.27 ac. (36.94 ha) within the site boundary and the 5mi. (8km) region surrounding the site. As discussed in Subsection19.4.5.1, impacts from construction on terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems, including protected species, are SMALL. Subsection 19.4.5.2 demonstrates that the potential impacts from operation of the SHINE facility on terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems, including protected species, are SMALL.Table19.4.13-2 identifies recent past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the geographic extent of analysis that can be assessed to determine cumulative effects on ecological resources. Relevant "other actions" that are considered in this cumulative effects analysis are limited to the utility line extensions, the proposed facility, and the TIF District No. 35 Project Plan, all of which are future actions. No present or on-going actions were identified that are relevant to this analysis.Terrestrial community resources could be affected by the planned utility line extensions by the City of Janesville and the TIF District No. 35 Project Plan. The proximity of the utility line extensions and TIF District No. 35 project to the SHINE site indicates that the ecological resources at these locations are likely similar. All projects include disturbance of cultivated crop lands and prime farmland. As described in Subsection19.4.5.1.3, plant communities in the region include cultivated crops (corn, soybean, winter wheat) and opportunistic weedy species. There are no federal or state-listed threatened, endangered, or special concern plant species observed or in the proximity of the site. Faunal resources in this area are limited due to the agricultural nature of the land. Field investigations identified bird and mammal species occurring in the region, however there were no state or federally listed species. Therefore, cumulative impacts to terrestrial ecological resources are SMALL.Aquatic community resources that could be affected by the proposed facility and TIF District No.35 Project Plan include the unnamed tributary to Rock River and the Rock River. The unnamed tributary, a small intermittent stream, is 1.6mi. (2.6km) south of the SHINE site and the Rock River is 1.9mi. (3.1km) southwest of the site. There are no wetlands within the SHINE site and dewatering of groundwater in excavations is not anticipated. BMPs will be used in
accordance with the SWPPP, as required by the WDNR, to prevent sediment runoff and subsequent siltation in receiving streams during construction. Because of the distance to the off-site streams and the implementation of BMPs on-site during construction, cumulative impacts to aquatic resources are SMALL.19.4.13.6Historical and Cultural ResourcesThe description of the affected environment in Subsection19.3.6 serves as a baseline for the historical and cultural resources cumulative impact assessment. The geographic area of analysis for evaluation of cumulative effects on historical and cultural resources is the same as that used in Section 19.4.6 and includes the 91.27 ac. (36.94ha) within the site boundary and the 10mi. (16km) region surrounding the site. As discussed in Subsection19.4.6.1, impacts from construction and operation of the SHINE facility are SMALL.Table19.4.13-2 identifies recent past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the geographic extent of analysis that can be assessed to determine cumulative effects on historical and cultural resources. Relevant "other actions" that are considered in this cumulative effects analysis are limited to the utility line extensions, the proposed facility, the TIF District No.35 Project Plan, and NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, all of which are future actions. No present or on-going actions were identified that are relevant to this analysis. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-120Rev. 0The utility line extensions and TIF District No. 35 are in the same cultural context as the SHINE site. Based on the absence of archaeological sites found on the SHINE site and the immediate project area (Subsection19.3.6) it is expected that the potential for undiscovered historic properties (archaeology or historic architecture) occurring on the TIF District No. 35 project area is also low. Furthermore, there have been no Native American traditional properties identified within the region of the SHINE site. It is expected that site development practices at the TIF District No. 35 project include appropriate reviews by the WHS such that potential impacts to historic resources are either avoided or mitigated. Impacts to cultural resources were evaluated in the Environmental Assessment for NorthStar and it was determined that no cultural resources will be impacted by the project (DOE, 2012). Therefore, cumulative impacts to historic and cultural resources are SMALL.19.4.13.7Socioeconomic Environment The description of the affected environment in Subsection19.3.7 serves as a baseline for the socioeconomic cumulative impact assessment. The geographic area of analysis for evaluation of cumulative effects on socioeconomic resources is the same as that used in Subsection19.4.7 and includes the 91.27 ac. (36.94 ha) within the site boundary and the surrounding Rock County. As discussed in Subsection19.4.7.1, impacts from construction and operation of the SHINE facility have a SMALL impact on socioeconomic conditions. Impacts to transportation in Rock County associated with the development of the SHINE site are discussed in Subsection19.4.7.2 and are SMALL.Table 19.4.13-2 identifies recent past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the geographic extent of analysis that can be assessed to determine cumulative effects on the socioeconomic environment. Relevant "other actions" that are considered in this cumulative effects analysis are limited to the associated ut ility line extensions, the proposed SHINE facility, the TIF District No. 35 Project Plan, and NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, all of which are future actions. No present or on-going actions were identified that are relevant to this analysis.The TIF District No. 35 Project Plan approved in August, 2011, established TIF District No. 35 adjacent to the northern boundary of the SHINE site. In February, 2012, the Project Plan was amended to expand the district boundary to include the SHINE site. Prior to the inclusion of the SHINE site, the 226 ac. (91ha) district was created to facilitate development of a new industrial park. The district is zoned for light industrial uses and has the potential to be subdivided into 16parcels ranging from 10.99 to 18.86 ac. (4.45 to 7.6ha) in size. Wisconsin's Tax Increment District Law allows the City of Janesville to retain the property taxes levied against projected improved property value within TIF District No. 35 to pay for improvement costs that are incurred to attract new industrial development. The Project Plan proposes extension of utilities to the district and construction of an extension of Progress Drive from the north. Construction of additional utility and roadway extensions is expected to be phased to meet the needs of specific development projects.19.4.13.7.1Water Supply and Water Treatment As described in Subsection 19.4.13.2, the City of Janesville plans to install a water main and sanitary sewer main along the northern boundary of the SHINE site. The City has indicated that the water main and sewer main have more than enough capacity to support the facility and construction related population increase. Therefore, the City's water supply system and sanitary sewer system are not expected to require any upgrades. Development of the TIF District No.35 Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-121Rev. 0immediately north of the SHINE site will likely place additional demands on the City's water supply and water treatment system. The project plan for the TIF District No. 35 states that improvements to utilities will be made as needed to facilitate development and expansion (City of Janesville, 2012b). As new streets are constructed to provide access to new sites, sewer and water utilities are expected to be installed within the rights-of-way to minimize impacts. Therefore, cumulative effects to water supply and water treatment are SMALL.19.4.13.7.2Tax BaseThe development of TIF District No.35 facilitates industrial expansion, increases property values, and creates new jobs in the City of Janesville. These jobs support the diversification of the local economy and the increased manufacturing and warehousing/distribution payrolls and have a positive multiplier effect in the trade and service sectors. However, as discussed in Subsection19.4.7.1, the overall tax revenues from the SHINE and TIF District No.35 projects are positive, and relatively small in comparison to the established tax bases. Therefore, cumulative effects to the tax bases are SMALL.19.4.13.7.3Labor Force and PopulationThe NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes facility is planned to be constructed in neighboring Beloit in Rock County, WI. NorthStar plans to break ground in 2013, with production beginning in 2016, and is expected to create more than 150 jobs by 2016 (NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, 2012 and Beloit Daily News, 2011). The NorthStar facility is smaller in land area (33ac. [13ha]) and facility footprint (82,000 square ft. [7618square m]) compared to that of the SHINE facility. No workforce breakdown is available for the NorthStar facility. However, it is possible that the demand for workers may overlap between the two facilities for several labor categories. However, given the large workforce availability within the region, no significant labor category shortfalls are expected. The presence of the Blackhawk Technical College and the University of Wisconsin, Madison will help to ensure the availability of a workforce well trained for the required positions. In consideration of the availability and composition of the existing workforce, the cumulative effects on population growth are SMALL.19.4.13.7.4TransportationAs described in Subsection19.4.7.2, no modifications to the local traffic infrastructure are necessary as a result of construction-related traffic at the SHINE site. If construction activities at the TIF District No. 35 site are concurrent with those at SHINE, it is not expected to result in a significant impact on local traffic patterns or infrastructure. The other future development project in the area, NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, is located in the neighboring City of Beloit and therefore does not contribute to cumulative impacts due to the distance between facilities. Mitigation measures described in Subsection19.4.7.2.1 alleviate impacts on traffic patterns due to operation of the SHINE facility. It is anticipated that any impacts from operation of the TIF District No.35 or NorthStar facilities can be mitigated in a similar fashion. Therefore, cumulative effects to transportation infrastructure and traffic patterns are SMALL.19.4.13.7.5Summary of Socioeconomic Cumulative ImpactsIn summary, cumulative impacts from other actions identified in Table19.4.13-1 on aspects of socioeconomics, including water/wastewater systems, population growth, local tax base, the labor force, and transportation are SMALL. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-122Rev. 019.4.13.8Human HealthThe geographic area of analysis for evaluation of cumulative effects on human health is the same as that used in Subsection19.4.8 and includes the 91.27ac. (36.94 ha) within the site boundary and the 5 mi. (8 km) region surrounding the site. As discussed in Subsections19.4.8.1 and 19.4.8.2, impacts from operation of the SHINE facility has a SMALL impact on human health.Table19.4.13-2 identifies recent past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the geographic extent of analysis that can be assessed to determine cumulative effects on human health. Relevant "other actions" that are considered in this cumulative effects analysis are limited to the proposed facility, NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, and the two medical facilities located in Janesville: Mercy Clinic South and Mercy Hospital. The proposed SHINE and NorthStar facilities are future actions, whereas the hospital facilities are present and on-going.19.4.13.8.1Non-Radiological ImpactsConstruction of the SHINE and NorthStar facilities includes potential hazards to workers typical of any construction site. Normal construction safety practices will be employed to promote worker safety and reduce the likelihood of worker injury during construction. Since the Mercy Clinic South and Mercy Hospital are already operating, they have no associated construction
impacts.Potential non-radiological public and occupational hazards pertaining to the operation of the SHINE and NorthStar facilities are associated with emissions, discharges, and waste associated with processes within the facility as well as accidental spills/releases. The great majority of chemical processes at the SHINE facility are conducted inside of the RCA. Any wastes created by these processes are disposed of as radioactive waste and shipped off-site. Some lab-scale chemical use occurs outside the RCA. Liquid wastes produced as a result of these activities are treated to ensure they meet the requirements of the Janesville wastewater treatment facility before being discharged to the municipal sewer. Additionally, the facility sanitary wastewater is treated by the Janesville wastewater treatment facility.Control systems are in place for the SHINE facility and presumably for other permitted projects in accordance with WDNR and local requirements to minimize potential exposure to the public and include conveyance of all wastewater to appropriate approved wastewater treatment facilities, implementation of Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure Plans, and air emission controls, as appropriate. Therefore, cumulative impacts to non-radiological health are SMALL.19.4.13.8.2Radiological ImpactsThe proposed SHINE facility releases small quantities of radionuclides to the environment. Gaseous effluent activity releases and liquid effluent activity releases are discussed in Subsections 19.4.8.2.4.1 and 19.4.8.2.4.2, respectively. Direct dose to a member of the public at the site boundary is due to gamma radiation penetrating the walls of the production facility and the waste staging and shipping facility. As a result of site shielding design, the direct dose outside of the buildings is small and decreases with increasing distance. The nearest site boundary is located at an appreciable distance from the two fixed sources of radiation (production facility building and waste staging and shipping building); therefore the dose is negligible at the site boundary. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-123Rev. 0There are no nuclear fuel cycle facilities located within the 5 mi. (8 km) region around the SHINE site. However, Interstate 39/90 is approximately 2 mi. (3.2 km) from the site boundary, which may result in some radiation exposure from the transportation of radioactive material along the highway. The SHINE site is surrounded by railroads on all sides except for the southeast, so additional doses of radiation may result from transportation of radioactive materials along the
railroads. The NorthStar facility is not projecting to have any radioactive emissions related to the operation of the facility. The facility is designed to control the amount of radioactive material released to a negligible amount. Operations emissions are not expected to violate any federal or state criteria or trigger the need for a PSD or Title V operating permit. Additionally, liquid waste generated during operations will be collected, temporarily stored on-site, and sent off-site for treatment and disposal per WDNR regulations. No public dose from air emissi ons or wastewater from the NorthStar facility is expected. Mercy Clinic South and Mercy Hospital provide imaging services to patients that include radiation oncology and nuclear medicine. Doses of radiological exposure to the public from these facilities are negligible. Therefore, cumulative impacts to radiological health are SMALL.As described in Subsection 19.4.10, the effect of transportation of radioactive material from the SHINE facility on the public is SMALL compared to the background radiological dose in the vicinity of the SHINE facility. Transportation workers will receive a larger dose due to the number of shipments originating at the SHINE facility. The shipment of radioactive material for the SHINE and NorthStar facilities contributes to the cumulative impact of radioactive material production, storage, utilization and disposal for all facilities in the United States that utilize radioactive material. The cumulative impacts of the transportation of radioactive materials for the existing facilities in the region, including the Mercy medical facilities, are SMALL and the impacts from the addition of the SHINE facility do not change that conclusion. Therefore, cumulative effects on transportation of nuclear material from the addition of the SHINE facility are SMALL.19.4.13.9Environmental JusticeThe geographic area of analysis for evaluation of cumulative effects on environmental justice is the same as that used in Subsection19.4.12 and includes the 91.27ac. (36.94ha) within the site boundary and the 5 mi. (8km) region surrounding the site. As discussed in Subsection19.4.12, construction and operation impacts to environmental justice in the region are SMALL.Table 19.4.13-2 identifies recent past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the geographic extent of analysis that can be assessed to determine cumulative effects on environmental justice. Relevant "other actions" that are considered in this cumulative effects analysis are limited to the utility line extensions, the proposed facility, and the TIF District No. 35 Project Plan, all of which are future actions. No present or on-going actions were identified that are relevant to this analysis.Disproportionate impacts on low-income or minority populations from other actions are not expected. The proximity of the utility line extensions and TIF District No. 35 project to the SHINE site indicates that the populations of concern at these locations will be the same and that the cumulative impacts on environmental justice are SMALL. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-124Rev. 019.4.13.10ConclusionTable19.4.13-3 summarizes the cumulative impacts in all resource areas. In conclusion, there are no significant cumulative adverse environmental impacts from the construction and operation of the SHINE site when considered together with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects in the area. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-125Rev. 0Table 19.4.13-1 Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Projects and Other Actions Considered in the Cumulative Effects Analysis(Sheet 1 of 3) Project Name Summary of ProjectLocationPotentially Affected Resource(s)Retained for Cumulative Effects AnalysisBasisUtility ProjectsUtility line extensionInstallation of water and sewer lines Adjacent to SHINE siteLand Use; Geology; Noise, Water; Ecology; Historical and Cultural; Socioeconomics; Environmental JusticeYPart of overall development of TIF District No. 35; SHINE to tie into line extension.Water and Sewer System ImprovementsImprovements throughout the City of JanesvilleRock County, WILand Use; Water; SocioeconomicsNConstruction activities limited to previously disturbed/ developed landsEnergy ProjectsAlliant Energy Generation FacilityExisting power
generation facilityRock County, WIAir Quality, Visual ResourcesYExisting operating facility. Stacks visible in site
viewshedUniversity of Wisconsin Charter StreetReplacement of coal boilers with natural gas
boilersDane County, WIAir QualityYPlanned rebuild of current facilities with new construction permittedWest Campus CogenerationConstruction of new cooling towers for chiller plant expansionDane County, WIAir Quality YExisting facility with new construction permittedNew ConstructionFuture UrbanizationConstruction of housing, commercial buildings, roads, bridges, rail, and other utility facilities, as described in local land use planning documents.Throughout the regionLand Use; Visual; Geology; Air Quality; Noise; Water; Ecology; Historical and Cultural; Socioeconomics; Environmental JusticeNAll future actions with timeline uncertain. Not in immediate proximity to SHINE site Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-126Rev. 0Table 19.4.13-1 Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Projects and Other Actions Considered in the Cumulative Effects Analysis (Sheet 2 of 3)Project NameSummary of ProjectLocationPotentially Affected Resource(s) Retained for Cumulative Effects AnalysisBasisJanesville Innovation CenterProvides support and assistance for small businesses and start-upsRock County, WISocioeconomicsNConstruction activities limited to previously disturbed/ developed landsNorthStar Medical Radioisotopes Medical radioisotope production facility Rock County, WIAir Quality; Historical and Cultural; Socioeconomics; Human HealthYConstruction planned to start in 2013TIF District No. 35 Project PlanParcel zoned for industrial use as a TIF districtAdjacent to SHINE site, Rock County, WILand Use; Geology; Noise, Ecology; Historical and Cultural; Socioeconomics; Environmental JusticeYApproved by City of JanesvilleManufacturing FacilitiesGenerac Power SystemsModifications to venting stack at generator manufacturing location Jefferson County, WIAir QualityYExisting operation with new construction permittedKraft Foods GlobalNew boiler construction at a processing location for prepared foodsDane County, WIAir QualityYExisting operation with new construction permittedUnited EthanolFacility upgrades at an ethanol production plantRock County, WIAir QualityYExisting operation with new construction permittedTraffic ProjectsInterstate 39/90 CorridorExpansion and improvementsDane and Rock Counties, WILand Use; Water Resources; Air Quality; Noise; SocioeconomicsNTimeframe uncertain Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-127Rev. 0Table 19.4.13-1 Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Projects and Other Actions Considered in the Cumulative Effects Analysis (Sheet 3 of 3)Project NameSummary of ProjectLocationPotentially Affected Resource(s) Retained for Cumulative Effects AnalysisBasisPalmer Drive Bridge Railing replacementRock County, WILand Use; Water Resources; Air Quality; Noise; Socioeconomics NConstruction activities limited to previously disturbed/ developed landsRoad Improvement ProjectsCurb, gutter and sidewalk replacement; manhole rehabilitation and replacement; street resurfacingRock County, WILand Use; Water Resources; Air Quality; Noise; SocioeconomicsNConstruction activities limited to previously disturbed/ developed landsSouthern Wisconsin Regional AirportPublic airport Rock County, WIVisual Resources; Noise; WaterYExisting facility. OperationalWIS 26 CorridorRoad expansionRock County, WILand Use; Water Resources; Air Quality; Noise; SocioeconomicsNTimeframe uncertainUS 14 Corridor StudyRoad expansion studyDane and Rock Counties, WILand Use; Water Resources; Air Quality; Noise; SocioeconomicsNTimeframe uncertainUS 14/WIS 11 Corridor
StudyRoad expansion studyRock and Walworth Counties, WILand Use; Water Resources; Air Quality; Noise; SocioeconomicsNTimeframe uncertainRadiological SourcesMercy Clinic SouthMedical services facilityRock County, WIHuman HealthYOperationalMercy HospitalMedical services facilityRock County, WIHuman HealthYOperationalOther Projects/ ActionsGlen Erin Golf Course7000-yd. public golf courseRock County, WIWater QualityYExisting facility. Operational Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-128Rev. 0Table 19.4.13-2 Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Projects and Other Actions Retained for the Cumulative Effects Analysis(Sheet 1 of 2)Project NameSummary of ProjectLocationStatusUtility ProjectsUtility line extensionInstallation of water and sewer lines0.1 mi. north of siteTimeframe dependent on SHINE facility construction Energy ProjectsAlliant Energy Generation FacilityExisting power generation facility3.2 mi south of siteExisting operating facility, stacks visible in site viewshed(WDNR, 2011b)University of Wisconsin Charter StReplacement of coal boilers with natural gas boilers36.4 mi. northwest of
siteUnder construction (WDNR, 2011c; WDNR, 2012c) West Campus CogenerationConstruction of new cooling towers for chiller plant expansion37.1 mi. northwest of
siteExisting operation with new construction permitted(WDNR, 2010a)New ConstructionTIF District No. 35 Project PlanParcel zoned for industrial use as a TIF district0.9 mi. north of siteApproved by City of Janesville (City of Janesville, 2012b) NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes Medical radioisotope facility 7.7 mi. south of siteConstruction planned to start in 2013 (NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, 2012)Transportation ProjectsSouthern Wisconsin Regional AirportPublic airport 1.0 mi southwest of siteOperational (AirNav, 2013)Manufacturing FacilitiesGenerac Power SystemsModifications to venting stack at generator manufacturing location21.8 mi. northeast of siteExisting operation with new construction permitted(WDNR, 2010b)Kraft Foods GlobalNew boiler construction at a processing location for prepared foods37.5 mi. northwest of siteExisting operation with new construction permitted(WDNR, 2012e)United EthanolFacility upgrades at an ethanol production plant11.2 mi. northeast of siteExisting operation with new construction permitted(WDNR, 2012d) Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-129Rev. 0Table 19.4.13-2 Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Projects and Other Actions Retained for the Cumulative Effects Analysis(Sheet 2 of 2)Project NameSummary of ProjectLocationStatusRadiological SourcesMercy Clinic SouthMedical services facility1.8 mi. north of siteOperational (Mercy Health System, 2012a)Mercy HospitalMedical services facility4.4 mi. north of siteOperational (Mercy Health System, 2012b)Other Projects/ ActionsGlen Erin Golf Course7000-yd. public golf course1.6 mi southwest of siteOperational (Wisconsin Golf Courses, 2013) Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-130Rev. 0Table 19.4.13-3 Cumulative Impacts on Environmental Resources, Including the Impacts of the Proposed ProjectResource CategoryCumulative Impact LevelLand Use and Visual Resources Land UseSMALL Visual ResourcesSMALL Air Quality and Noise Air QualitySMALL NoiseSMALL Geologic EnvironmentSMALLWater Resources HydrologySMALL Water UseSMALL Water QualitySMALL Ecological Resources Terrestrial EcosystemsSMALL Aquatic EcosystemsSMALL SocioeconomicsSMALLHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSMALLHuman Health Nonradiological HealthSMALL Radiological HealthSMALL Environmental JusticeSMALLTransportationSMALL Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTable of ContentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-iRev. 0SECTION 19.5ALTERNATIVESTable of Contents SectionTitlePage19.5ALTERNATIVES..........................................................................................19.5-119.5.1NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE.....................................................................19.5-119.5.2REASONABLE ALTERNATIVES..............................................................19.5-219.5.3COST-BENEFIT OF THE ALTERNATIVES..............................................19.5-7219.5.4COMPARISON OF THE POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS......19.5-93 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-iiRev. 0List of Tables NumberTitle19.5.2-1Sensitive Features in the Chippewa Falls Site Area19.5.2-2Potential Land Use and Natural Habitat Impacts at the Chippewa Falls Site (USGS, 2006)19.5.2-3Plant Species Oberved at the Chippewa Falls Site19.5.2-4Endangered Resources Known or Likely to Occur in the Chippewa Falls Site Area19.5.2-5Annual Average Hourly Traffic Counts in the Chippewa Falls Site Area19.5.2-6Minority and Poverty Populations within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Chippewa Falls Site19.5.2-8Sensitive Features in the Stevens Point Site Area 19.5.2-9Potential Land Use and Natural Habitat Impacts at the Stevens Point Site (USGS, 2006)19.5.2-10Plant Species Observed at the Stevens Point Site 19.5.2-11Endangered Resources Known or Likely to Occur in the Stevens Point Site Area19.5.2-12Annual Average Hourly Traffic Counts in the Stevens Point Site Area19.5.2-13Minority and Poverty Populations within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Stevens Point Site19.5.2-14Potentially Significant Projects Identified within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Stevens Point Site Vicinity19.5.4-1Comparison of Construction Impacts for the SHINE Site and Alternative Sites 19.5.4-2Comparison of Operation Impacts for the SHINE Site and Alternative Sites19.5.4-3Comparison of Construction Impacts for the SHINE Technology and Alternative Technologies19.5.4-4Comparison of Operation Impacts for the SHINE Technology and Alternative Technologies Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of FiguresSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-iiiRev. 0List of Figures NumberTitle19.5.2-1Locations of States Considered for Potential Sites (Black Dots) Relative to Potential Customers (Yellow Stars)19.5.2-2Locations of Communities in Wisconsin Considered for Potential Sites (Black Dots) Relative to Potential Future Customers (Yellow Stars)19.5.2-3Locations of Potential Sites19.5.2-4Conceptual Layout of the Chippewa Falls Site19.5.2-5Sensitive Features Near the Chippewa Falls Site19.5.2-6Census Block Groups with Above Average Low Income Population within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Chippewa Falls Site 19.5.2-7Conceptual Layout of the Stevens Point Site19.5.2-8Sensitive Features Near the Stevens Point Site19.5.2-9Census Block Groups with Above Average Low Income Population within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Stevens Point Site Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-ivRev. 0Acronyms and AbbreviationsAcronym/Abbreviation Definition10 CFR 20Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 20oCdegrees Celsius oFdegrees Fahrenheitac.acreADAMSAgencywide Documents Access and Management SystemAHRaqueous homogeneous reactor B&W TSGBabcock & Wilcox Technical Services Group, Inc.CFRCode of Federal Regulations Cicurie CLSCanadian Light Sourcecmcentimetercm/scentimeters per second CPConstruction PermitDOEU.S. Department of EnergyERPEnvironmental Repair Program ft.feetGEHGE Hitachi Nuclear EnergyGISGeographic Information System gpmgallons per minutehahectareHEUhighly enriched uranium HIhealth imaging Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-vRev. 0I-131iodine-131 in.inchISGInterim Staff Guidance kmkilometer kWkilowattLliterL/minliters per minute LEUlow enriched uranium LUSTleaking underground storage tank mmeterMHAMaximum Hypothetical Accident mi.mileMo-98molybdenum-98 Mo-99molybdenum-99 Mo-100molybdenum-100MURRUniversity of Miss ouri Research Reactor MWmegawattNAAQSNational Ambient Air quality Standards NMNuclear MonitorNorthStarNorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, LLC NOxnitrogen oxides NRCU.S. Nuclear Regulator Commission NRCSNatural Resource Conservation Service NRHPNational Register of Historic PlacesAcronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-viRev. 0OLOperating License PMparticulate matter SHINESHINE Medical Technologies SO2sulfur dioxideSPCCSpill Prevention, Control, and CountermeasureSPTStandard Penetration Test sq.squareSWRASouthern Wisconsin Regional AirportTc-99mtechnetium-99m TIFTax Increment Financing UMUniversity of Missouri -ColumbiaUSCBU.S. Census BureauUSEPAU.S. Environmental Protection Agency USFWSU.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceUSGSU.S. Geological Survey UWUniversity of Wisconsin -MadisonWBNWisconsin BrokerNETWDNRWisconsin Department of Natural ResourcesWDORWisconsin Department of Revenue WDOTWisconsin Department of TransportationWDPIWisconsin Department of Public InstructionWGNHSWisconsin Geological and Natural History SurveyWNNWorld Nuclear NewsAcronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-viiRev. 0Xe-133xenon-133Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewNo-Action AlternativeSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-1Rev. 0CHAPTER 1919.5ALTERNATIVES19.5.1NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVEThis section defines the No-Action Alternative and describes the consequences of adopting the No-Action Alternative.The proposed federal action is the issuance of a Construction Permit (CP) and Operating License (OL) that would allow SHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. (SHINE) to construct and operate a medical SHINE facility to produce molybdenum -99 (Mo-99), iodine-131 (I-131), and xenon-133 (Xe-133). Under the No-Action Alternative, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) would not issue the CP and OL, and the construction and operation of the SHINE facility would not occur. In accordance with the Final Interim Staff Guidance (ISG) Augmenting NUREG-1537, Chapter 19, the environmental consequences of the No-Action Alternative are assumed to be the status quo. If the SHINE facility were not constructed and operated, the environmental consequences discussed in Section 19.4 would be avoided. The consequences that would be avoided include adverse impacts such as changes in land use; however, as discussed in Section 19.4, the severity of all of the adverse impacts is considered to be SMALL. Because the adverse impacts are not significant, the benefit of avoiding those impacts would also not be significant. In addition, as discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, construction and operation of the SHINE facility produces socioeconomic benefits, such as increases in tax revenues to local jurisdictions. If the SHINE facility were not constructed and operated, these beneficial socioeconomic impacts would not be realized.In addition to the beneficial socioeconomic impacts discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, the SHINE facility benefits the health of people who need diagnostic tests that require technetium-99m (Tc-99m) and other isotopes. The facility is expected to satisfy approximately half of the annual demand for Tc-99m in the United States, and to provide a more reliable supply of this isotope than currently exists. This represents a significant health benefit. The facility will also produce I-131 and Xe-133, which will have additional health benefits. If the SHINE facility were not constructed and operated, these health benefits would not be realized.The SHINE facility also produces significant programmatic benefits that would not be realized under the No-Action Alternative. These programmatic benefits are summarized in the following paragraphs.As discussed in Subsection 19.1.1, there is currently no commercial production of Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133 in the United States. Reactors outside the United States supply these isotopes. Two of these reactors are more than 50 years old (NRCL, 2009), and both have experienced supply disruptions related to maintenance problems. In addition to age-related maintenance problems, the reliability of the medical isotope supply is further jeopardized by increasing demand, both domestically and globally; by the increasing difficulty of transporting medical isotopes across international borders; and by the short half-life of these medical isotopes. Because of these supply reliability concerns, the U.S. government has a policy to encourage the domestic production of medical isotopes. The SHINE facility makes a significant contribution toward advancing this policy. Under the No-Action Alternative, this benefit would not be realized, in direct Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-2Rev. 0contradiction of the stated policy of the U.S. government to encourage the domestic production of medical isotopes.The SHINE facility also helps achieve U.S. government nonproliferation objectives. Currently, most medical isotopes are produced by irradiating highly enriched uranium (HEU) targets in non-power reactors fueled with low enriched uranium (LEU).The United States currently exports HEU for medical SHINE. Congress passed the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (U.S. Government, 1992), which includes a nonproliferation objective to phase out exports of HEU for medical SHINE. Based on this, the U.S. government is encouraging medical SHINE without the use of HEU. The SHINE facility uses LEU to produce medical isotopes, thereby avoiding the use of HEU, reducing the need to ship HEU abroad, and helping to accomplish the nonproliferation objective. Under the No-Action Alternative, this benefit would not be realized.19.5.2REASONABLE ALTERNATIVES This section discusses alternatives to the proposed project as required by the NRC Final ISG Augmenting NUREG-1537. The fo llowing types of alter natives are discussed:*Alternative sites *Alternative technologiesBoth beneficial and adverse impacts are described for the associated environmental resource areas for alternative sites and alternative technologies. The analyses include direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts. Impacts are analyzed in proportion to their significance.It should be noted that alternative siting within each site is not discussed, because the alternative sites are relatively small and no reasonable arrangement of the SHINE facility components within the site boundaries would avoid or significantly reduce the expected environmental impacts. Modification of existing facilities (versus construction of an entirely new facility) is not discussed, because the SHINE facility is intended to be a new stand-alone facility employing a technology that has not previously been used anywhere in the world. Finally, alternative transportation methods are not discussed, because there are no reasonable alternatives considering the nature of the products that need to be transported from the SHINE facility. Due to the short half-life of Mo-99 (2.75 days), this isotope is normally shipped from the facility to the processing facility by air. Among the other possible products, I-131 has a half-life of 8.0 days, and Xe-133 has a half-life of 5.2 days. Due to their longer half-lives, these isotopes could be shipped by either truck or air. However, since the I-131 and Xe-133 would likely be shipped with the Mo-99 shipments, air shipment is the most reasonable method. (Knolls, 2002)19.5.2.1ALTERNATIVE SITES19.5.2.1.1Identification of Reasonable Alternatives This subsection discusses the identification of reasonable siting alternatives for the SHINE facility. The following information is provided:*Process used to determine reasonable alternatives to the proposed site.*All alternative sites considered. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-3Rev. 0*Alternative sites that were eliminated from further study.*Description of reasonable alternative sites.*Discussion of any alternative sites considered that would reduce or avoid adverse effects.The region considered for potential sites was based on SHINE's mission to serve the need for medical isotopes in the United States. In a market where the primary product decays at a rate of 1 percent per hour, being in close proximity to customers is of utmost importance, since minimizing product travel time is key.When determining potential customers, SHINE considered two scenarios: the near-term scenario, in which SHINE sells Mo-99 and other medical isotopes as an active pharmaceutical ingredient to packagers; and a possible long-term scenario, in which SHINE expands to also package and distribute the isotopes itself. The second, long-term scenario is outside the scope of this license application, but was considered in identifying and evaluating potential sites.In the near-term scenario, SHINE identified three likely customers: Nordion (Ottawa, Canada), Covidien (St. Louis, Missouri), and Lantheus Medical Imaging (Billerica, Massachusetts). A production site central to these locations minimizes product losses due to decay during shipment.In addition to these three customers, in the long-term scenario SHINE would be selling directly to consumers. As the hospitals and radiopharmacies that use medical isotopes are located throughout the country, the center of the United States was particularly appealing. Locating on either coast would result in fewer patients being served and therefore reduced social and economic benefits. In general, the Midwest provides a good balance between proximity to currently anticipated customers and customers anticipated in an expansion scenario.Given the Midwest as a starting point, SHINE proceeded to contact state economic development offices. States to be contacted were chosen based on their location and perceived potential ability to provide financial incentives to the project. SHINE contacted economic development offices in Wisconsin, Minnesota, Ohio, Michigan, and Louisiana. Although Louisiana is not considered part of the Midwest, the potential for high financial incentives prompted SHINE to request information.No response was received from Ohio or Michigan; therefore, they were eliminated from consideration. A preliminary check of the seismic conditions in Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Louisiana indicated no major fault lines in any of these states, thereby not eliminating any of them from consideration due to seismic activity. After careful analysis of the proposals from Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Louisiana, Wisconsin was chosen for its superior financial incentive package. Of the three states, Wisconsin also has the benefit of being most centrally located with respect to SHINE's three prospective customers (as seen in Figure 19.5.2-1), and being the home state of several project partners, including the University of Wisconsin-Madison (UW), the Morgridge Institute for Research, and Phoenix Nuclear Labs. Thereby, the states of Minnesota and Louisiana were eliminated from further consideration.After narrowing the search to the state of Wisconsin, SHINE identified four communities that met certain basic requirements for the SHINE plant. In the initial consideration process, the communities were required to have build-to-suit land available for development with good access to an interstate highway, and an airport capable of handling aircraft necessary for isotope Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-4Rev. 0distribution within approximately 10 minutes of the potential site. The four communities identified in Wisconsin that met these requirements were:*Madison*Chippewa Falls *Janesville *Stevens Point Madison was eliminated from consideration early in the study due to lack of community and local government support. The location of the remaining communities is shown in Figure 19.5.2-2. An approximate parcel size appropriate for the facility was determined and the search for parcels within each of the three remaining communities was limited to sites of comparable size. Each of these communities identified a potential site and prepared an incentive proposal detailing the advantages of their site. The location of the potential sites is shown in Figure 19.5.2-3. SHINE then proceeded to compare these sites on the basis of the following criteria:*Local government and community support.
- Financial incentives.
- Size and shape of the proposed parcel.*Access to a skilled workforce.*Proximity to potential future customers.
- Proximity to airport.*Proximity to an interstate highway.*Anticipated depth to groundwater table.
- Seismic characteristics.*Presence of endangered resources and wetlands.*Presence of historic and archaeological resources.The assessments of these criteria with respect to the potential sites are discussed as follows:Local government and community supportLocal government and community support will be essential to SHINE successfully completing its mission and, therefore, were very important factors in the site selection process. All three communities showed very high interest in the project and were extremely cooperative.
Financial incentivesFinancial incentives will also be key to SHINE's success and were thus key to the site selection process. All three communities were competitive with respect to economic incentives, though Janesville and Stevens Point had a slight economic advantage over Chippewa Falls. Size and shape of the proposed parcelA greater distance from the facility to the site boundary was considered beneficial, as a greater distance decreases likelihood of adverse impact to the public. The Janesville site, being 90 acres (ac.) (36.4 hectares [ha]) in size and roughly square, had the largest minimum distance to the site boundary at approximately 1000 feet (ft.) (304.8 meters [m]) in all directions. Stevens Point Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-5Rev. 0proposed an 80 ac. (32.4 ha), square site, roughly on par with the Janesville site minimum distance at just a little under 1000 ft. (304.8 m) in all directions. The Chippewa Falls site, being slightly less than 80 ac. (32.4 ha) and oblong in shape, had a considerably smaller minimum distance to the site boundary in some directions.Access to a skilled workforceTwo factors were considered when determining access to a skilled workforce: proximity to large cities and the potential cooperation with local universities or technical colleges willing to help train the production facility workforce. With respect to larger cities, Janesville has the advantage of being near Madison, Milwaukee, and Chicago. Chippewa Falls is fairly close to Minneapolis/St. Paul, while Stevens Point is a bit more remote. Janesville and Stevens Point both have access to universities or technical colleges willing to help train SHINE's workforce: Blackhawk Technical College and UW-Stevens Point, respectively. Workforce training was not offered by local officials at Chippewa Falls.Proximity to potential customersOf the three potential locations in Wisconsin, medical isotopes shipped from Janesville had the shortest overall distance to travel to each of SHINE's customers by air. Proximity to airportAs discussed earlier, efficient product transportation is extremely important in the medical isotope business. The closer the site was to the local airport, the better from this perspective. The Janesville site is directly across from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (SWAR), requiring SHINE's product to travel less than 0.5 mile (mi.) (0.8 kilometer [km]). The Stevens Point site was approximately 4 mi. (6.4 km) from the Stevens Point Municipal Airport. The Chippewa Falls site was approximately 10 mi. (16.1 km) from the Chippewa Valley Regional Airport. The perceived disadvantage of a higher risk of an airplane crash with increased proximity to the airport (no formal analysis was done on the risk of a crash at the alternative sites) is mitigated through design of the facility.In the case of local airport closure, it is likely that SHINE's product would be transported by truck to the nearest secondary airport. The Janesville site is approximately 1 hour from Dane County Regional Airport in Madison, and within 2 hours of both O'Hare International Airport in Chicago and Mitchell International Airport in Milwaukee. The Chippewa Falls site is within 2hours of Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport. The Stevens Point site is more than 2hours from all of these airports.Proximity to an interstate highwayIn the case of a local airport closure, SHINE would intend to ship its product by truck either to thenext closest airport or, depending on the circumstances, directly to the customer. To facilitate ease of transport by truck, close proximity to an interstate highway is desired.The Janesville site is approximately 3 mi. (4.8 km) by road from I-39/90. The Stevens Point site is less than 2 mi. (3.2 km) by road from I-39, and the Chippewa Falls site is approximately 18 mi. (29.0 km) from I-94. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-6Rev. 0Anticipated depth to groundwaterRough approximations of groundwater depth from U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) historical data were taken into consideration. In general, deeper groundwater was considered to be beneficial as deeper groundwater is less likely to impact the facility and vice versa.The Janesville site is located in Rock County, Wisconsin. Historical wells in counties adjacent to Rock County are between 70 and 100 ft. (21.3 and 30.5 m) deep. Recent measurements down to 30 ft. (9.1 m) found no water and the nearby river elevation is approximately 70 ft. (21.3 m) lower than site elevation. Using this information, groundwater depth at the Janesville site was estimated at greater than 30 ft. (9.1 m). Since then, boreholes and wells drilled on-site have found groundwater at between 55 and 65 ft. (16.8 and 19.8 m) below grade.Using similar estimation methods, groundwater depth at the Chippewa Falls site was estimated to be at 20 to 30 ft. (6.1 to 9.1 m). Records of an on-site borehole subsequently showed groundwater at approximately 50 ft. (15.2 m) below grade. Groundwater depth at the Stevens Point site was estimated to be at 10 ft. (3.0 m) or less. Since then, boreholes and wells drilled on-site at Stevens Point have found groundwater at about 8 to 11 ft. (2.4 to 3.4 m) below grade. Seismic characteristicsA preliminary check of the seismic characteristics of each site was made to determine if there were any major advantages or disadvantages between the three. The Janesville site was deemed slightly more likely to have a very weak shaking event than the other two sites; however, both Chippewa Falls and Stevens Point were predicted to be located on glacial sands that might have higher amplification factors than the ground at Janesville. Overall, Janesville was rated slightly preferable from a seismic perspective. Since that time, a geotechnical investigation of the Janesville site has shown glacial deposits at the Janesville site as well.Presence of endangered resources and wetlandsAn Endangered Resources Review by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) was requested for all three sites. Because of the Janesville site's current condition as an active agricultural field far from any wetlands, water or buffer areas, it was determined to be an unsuitable habitat for endangered resources likely to be in the area. No conservation or compliance actions were recommended for the site.Although the Chippewa Falls site was not found to provide suitable habitat for the four Threatened or Special Concern species identified in its vicinity, strict erosion and siltation controls during the entire construction period were recommended to avoid indirect impact to sensitive aquatic species that could be present in the nearby Lake Wissota or Chippewa River. It was also recommended that the small wetland community on the eastern edge of the project site be protected as much as possible to avoid impacting any rare or declining species it may contain.Like Chippewa Falls, the Stevens Point site was determined to be unlikely to provide suitable habitat for the four Threatened or Special Concern species recorded within the vicinity of the project site. No impacts were expected and no conservation or compliance actions were recommended. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-7Rev. 0Input from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) was also requested for all three sites. No federally-listed, proposed, or candidate species are expected within the project area at either the Janesville or Chippewa Falls sites and neither site contains critical habitat.A portion of the Stevens Point site was found to be within the high potential range of the Karner blue butterfly (Lycaeides melissa samuelis), a federally-listed endangered species in Wisconsin. A survey for wild lupine (Lupinus perennis), the host plant of the Karner blue butterfly, was recommended. It was also recommended that any disturbance of migratory bird nesting places occur before May 1 or after August 30 to minimize impacts to migratory birds. As the Stevens Point site is mostly wooded and the trees would need to be cleared for the SHINE project, it is likely that some migratory bird nesting places would be disturbed. Presence of historic and archaeological resourcesThere was no indication that significant archaeological sites or other cultural resources had been reported on or near any of the sites; however, at the time of the potential site evaluations, none of the sites had been surveyed. Since that time a Phase I archaeaological survey of the Janesville site has been completed. The survey did not identify any pre-contact or historic Euro-American archaeological sites. No additional field work is recommended. No surveys are planned for Stevens Point or Chippewa Falls. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-8Rev. 0SummaryEach potential site was given a score based on the factors discussed above. These scores are summarized below:In consideration of these factors, the Janesville site was selected as the proposed site for the SHINE facility. The Chippewa Falls site and the Stevens Point site were both considered to be viable and were identified as reasonable alternatives. As shown in the summary above, the Janesville site had scores equal to or better than the Chippewa Falls and Stevens Point sites on factors related to environmental impacts. The impact evaluations discussed in Subsection 19.5.2.1.2 subsequently confirmed that neither of the alternative sites would reduce nor avoid adverse effects as compared with the Janesville site.19.5.2.1.2Evaluation of Reasonable AlternativesAs discussed in the previous subsection, the Chippewa Falls site and the Stevens Point site are both considered to be viable sites and reasonable alternatives. This subsection describes the alternative sites in more detail, evaluates the major direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental impacts associated with the sites, and describes potential impact mitigation measures that would reduce or minimize adverse impacts.Information on the Chippewa Falls and Stevens Point sites was obtained through field reconnaissance in the site areas, contacts with appropriate government agencies (federal, state, and local), examination of published maps and aerial photographs, and analysis of digitized Geographic Information System (GIS) mapping data. In order to evaluate the environmental impacts of constructing and operating the SHINE facility, the facility design described in Section19.2 and the construction and operation practices described in Section 19.4 were (Max Score)Janesville StevensPointChippewaFallsLocal government and community support(10)101010Financial Incentives(10)998Minimum distance to site boundary(5)554Access to a skilled workforce(5)433 Proximity to potential future customers(5)543Proximity to airport(5)533Proximity to interstate highway(5)453 Anticipated depth to groundwater table(5)524Seismic characteristics(5) 4(a)33Presence of endangered resources and wetlands(5)522Presence of historic and archaeological resources (5)555Total:65615148a) Based on the geotechnical investigation conducted after site selection was completed, this score would be reduced by one point. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-9Rev. 0applied to each site. This allowed for a comprehensive and qualitatively-consistent assessment of environmental impacts. The potential impact of facility construction and operation on each resource category specified in the Final ISG Augmenting NUREG-1537 was assigned a significance level according to the criteria established in 10 CFR 51, Appendix B, Table B-1, Footnote 3, as follows:SMALL - Environmental effects are not detectable or are so minor that they will neither destabilize nor noticeably alter any important attribute of the resource. MODERATE - Environmental effects are sufficient to alter noticeably, but not to destabilize, any important attribute of the resource.LARGE - Environmental effects are clearly noticeable and are sufficient to destabilize any important attributes of the resource.For some analyses, it was determined that the additional impact criteria established by the NRC in NUREG-1437 were appropriate, and those criteria were used to assign a significance level to certain impacts, as noted in the subsections below.In addition to the direct and indirect impacts of the SHINE facility itself, related cumulative impacts from other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future federal and non-federal projects and activities in the area around each site were considered. The specific environmental resources that could be impacted by the incremental effects of the SHINE facility together with other projects in the vicinity were identified, and the cumulative impacts were assessed.The following subsections summarize the evaluation of each alternative site. 19.5.2.1.2.1Chippewa Falls Site19.5.2.1.2.1.1DescriptionThe Chippewa Falls site is located in the Wissota Lake Business Park, near the northern edge of the corporate boundaries of the City of Chippewa Falls in Chippewa County, Wisconsin. The site is bordered to the west by Commerce Parkway, to the north by County Highway S, and to the east by State Highway 178. The southern boundary of the site is not defined by any observable landmarks; it is located in a fallow agricultural field at the edge of property that has been platted but not yet developed for the Lake Wissota Business Park. The site boundaries were determined by the City of Chippewa Falls when they recommended the site to SHINE.The terrain across the site is flat with little noticeable relief other than a gentle slope to the southwest. No residences or other structures are located within the site boundaries. Most of the site is cultivated cropland used for growing corn and soybeans. An abandoned railroad right of way (with the tracks removed) cuts diagonally through the southern portion of the site. South of this right-of-way is a fallow agricultural field, some of which has been graded for use by the Business Park.Figure 19.5.2-4 shows a conceptual layout of the SHINE facility on the Chippewa Falls site, including the area that would be developed with permanent facility structures, the area that would be temporarily disturbed for construction laydown and parking, and the remaining area within the site boundaries. The area developed with permanent structures occupies part of the abandoned Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-10Rev. 0railroad right-of-way, part of the cropland to the north, and part of the fallow field to the south, while the area temporarily disturbed for construction laydown and parking is located entirely in the cropland. The production facility building, which is the only part of the facility that contains safety-related equipment, is located near the center of the site, positioned so as to maximize the distance to the site boundaries in all directions.The area within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the site is a mixture of agricultural land and suburban-type residential and commercial development. The nearest occupied residence is a house located on County Highway S less than 0.1 mi. (0.16 km) northwest of the northern site boundary. Another house is located on County Highway S slightly more than 0.1 mi. (0.16 km) northeast of the site boundary. Several commercial buildings are located along Commerce Parkway less than 0.1 mi. (0.16 km) west of the western site boundary. The nearest residential concentration is a subdivision located on the north side of County Highway I approximately 0.7 mi. (1.0 km) southwest of the southern site boundary. Other residential concentrations are located within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the site boundaries to the west, north, and east.In addition to residences, several other sensitive features are located within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the site boundaries. These include a hospital, a nursing home, a child day care facility, an adult day care facility, several medical clinics, and two colleges. Table 19.5.2-1 lists the distance to each of these sensitive features from the nearest site boundary and the center point of the safety-related area in the production facility building. Table 19.5.2-1 also lists the distance to the nearest public park, public school, and listed historical property, all of which are more than 1 mi. (1.6 km) from the site boundaries. Figure 19.5.2-5 shows the location of the sensitive features identified within 1 mi. (1.6 km).U.S. Highway 53, which is located about 5 mi. (8.0 km) west of the site at its nearest point, provides long-distance road access to the site area. The exit nearest to the site is Exit 99 (County Highway S), which is approximately 5 mi. (8.0 km) west of the site. State Highway 178, which borders the site to the east, also provides access to the site area. U.S. Highway 53 and State Highway 178 are well-maintained multi-lane divided highways. The other roads in the immediate site area are well-maintained two- or four-lane roads with paved shoulders. Chippewa Valley Regional Airport is located approximately 8 mi. (12.8 km) southwest of the site. Aircraft using this airport would be the primary means of transporting isotopes produced by the SHINE facility.An overhead electrical line and underground natural gas pipeline are located along Commerce Parkway at the western edge of the site. An underground municipal water supply pipeline and sanitary sewer pipeline are located approximately 0.2 mi. (3.2 km) south of the site. It is assumed that if this site were developed, the City of Chippewa Falls would extend the sewer and water utilities to the site boundary.19.5.2.1.2.1.2Land Use and Visual Resources ImpactsExisting land use on the Chippewa Falls site is predominantly agricultural, with approximately the northern two-thirds of the site planted in cultivated crops. The abandoned railroad right of way that cuts through the site and the land south of the right-of-way are primarily fallow. Virtually the Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-11Rev. 0entire site is composed of soils classified as prime farmland. No recreational use of the site or the immediate vicinity was identified.No residences or other structures are located within the site boundaries. The site is zoned for Light Industrial use, as are the adjacent parts of the Wissota Lake Business Park (City of Chippewa Falls, 2011). The City of Chippewa Falls has indicated that a Special Use Permit would probably need to be obtained in order to construct the SHINE facility. A public hearing before the City Council could be required as part of the Special Use Permit application process.The acreage of each major land use category found within the areas affected by the conceptual facility layout was estimated based on USGS land use/land cover GIS mapping data (USGS, 2006). Table 19.5.2-2 summarizes the acreages in the major land use categories and compares those quantities with the total acreages found within a 5 mi. (8.0 km) radius of the site. It can be seen that the acreage of each land use category potentially affected by the facility layout is less than 1 percent of the total acreage of that category found within 5 mi. (8.0 km). There is no reason to believe that construction of the SHINE facility would destabilize any important land use resources. Construction would change much of the site from predominantly agricultural use to industrial use, which would noticeably alter the existing land use resources of the site. However, this alteration is consistent with the existing zoning of the site and the intended land use in the Wissota Lake Business Park. Therefore, the land use impact due to project construction would be SMALL. During operation of the SHINE facility, land use impacts would be reduced. No new land use impacts would occur beyond those described above for project construction, and some areas that were temporarily disturbed for construction laydown and parking might be returned to agricultural use. Therefore, the land use impact due to operation of the SHINE facility would be SMALL.Visual resources in the vicinity of the site could be affected by the visual intrusion of industrial structures and equipment. During project construction, dust could create additional visual intrusions. Given that the site area currently includes some rural and residential scenery, in addition to institutional, commercial, and industrial scenery, project construction and operation would alter the existing visual conditions somewhat. However, the severity of visual impacts on the human population would depend primarily on the visibility of the proj ect facilities from sensitive viewing areas.Field reconnaissance and examination of aerial photographs indicate that more than 100 residences are located within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the site boundaries. As discussed in Subsection 19.5.2.1.2.1.1, the area within 1 mi. (1.6 km) also includes several other sensitive viewing areas, including a hospital, a nursing home, a child day care facility, an adult day care facility, several medical clinics, and two colleges. Although trees and existing buildings would block the view from some of these locations, many would be expected to have at least a partial view of the SHINE facility during construction and operation. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-12Rev. 0NUREG-1437 establishes the following criteria for judging the severity of aesthetic impacts:SMALL - No complaints from affected public about a changed sense of place or a diminution in enjoyment of the physical environment, and no measurable impact on socioeconomic institutions and processes.MODERATE - Some complaints from affected public about a changed sense of place or a diminution in enjoyment of the physical environment, and measurable impacts that do not alter the continued functioning of socioeconomic institutions and processes.LARGE - Continuing and widely shared opposition to the project based on a perceived degradation of the area's sense of place or diminution in enjoyment of the physical environment, and measurable social impacts that perturb the continued functioning of community institutions and processes.Considering that the SHINE facility would noticeably alter the appearance of the project site and be at least partially visible from numerous sensitive viewing areas, it is possible that project construction would generate some public complaints related to a changed sense of place and diminished enjoyment of the physical environment. However, it is not likely that there would be "continuing and widely shared opposition" to the project or that there would be "measurable social impacts that perturb the continued functioning of community institutions and processes." Therefore, the visual resources impact associated with project construction would be MODERATE.Project operation would not result in significant further alteration of aesthetic conditions, and it does not seem likely that there would be continued public complaints related to diminished enjoyment of the physical environment. Therefore, the visual resources impact associated with project operation would be SMALL.As shown in Figure 19.5.2-4, the conceptual layout of the Chippewa Falls si te includes provisions to plant trees along the boundaries of the site that border public roads. These provisions would partially mitigate the visual impact of the project, especially during project operation, and this mitigation is considered in the impact assessment discussed above. No other feasible mitigation measures for land use or visual impacts have been identified.19.5.2.1.2.1.3Air Quality and Noise ImpactsThe Chippewa Falls site is located in Chippewa County, Wisconsin, which is part of the Southeast Wisconsin - La Crosse (West Central Wisconsin) Interstate Air Quality Control Region (WDNR, 2012a). The ambient air quality in Chippewa County currently is in attainment with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for all criteria pollutants (ozone, particulate matter, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, and lead) (USEPA, 2012a). The nearest county out of attainment with the NAAQS is Dakota County, Minnesota, which is non-attainment for lead (USEPA, 2012b). Dakota County is located in the Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan area, approximately 75 mi. (120 km) west of the Chippewa Falls site. The nearest Wisconsin county out of attainment is Sheboygan County, Wisconsin, which is non-attainment for ozone (USEPA, 2012a). Sheboygan County is located along the western shore of Lake Michigan, approximately 190 mi. (306 km) southeast of the Chippewa Falls site. At these distances and beyond, air pollution emissions from the Chippewa Falls site would not be expected to have any noticeable effect on non-attainment areas. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-13Rev. 0The air quality impacts of constructing and operating the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be very similar to the impacts discussed for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.2. Potential air pollution emissions during construction would include dust from earthmoving and material handling activities, and exhaust emissions from construction equipment and vehicles. In general, these emissions would be the same as the emissions associated with any large construction project. Emission-specific control measures, such as watering areas of disturbed soil, would be implemented to limit air quality impacts and ensure compliance with applicable federal and state regulations. Therefore, air quality impacts associated with facility construction would be SMALL.During facility operation, the SHINE process would emit small quantities of nitrogen oxides. Natural gas firing to heat buildings and occasional testing of the standby diesel generator would emit nitrogen oxides and very small quantities of particulate matter and sulfur dioxide. Standard emission control measures, such as proper mixing of fuels and combustion air, would be implemented to limit air quality impacts. Emissions during facility operation would be governed by applicable air permits, which would ensure compliance with the NAAQS and other applicable regulatory requirements. Therefore, air quality impacts associated with facility operation would be SMALL.As discussed above, standard emission control measures would be implemented to limit air quality impacts during construction and operation. These measures would ensure that impacts on air quality would be SMALL, and there would be no need for any other air quality impact mitigation measures.Noise emissions during construction at the Chippewa Falls site would be very similar to the emissions discussed for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.2. Based on the depth to bedrock at the Chippewa Falls site (see Subsection 19.5.2.1.2.1.4), blasting and pile driving would not be required for excavation or installation of foundations. The primary source of noise during construction would be the operation of heavy equipment. This noise would be noticeable in the immediate construction area, but it generally would be expected to attenuate to acceptable levels before reaching sensitive receptors. However, vehicular traffic due to construction workers commuting to and from the site and deliveries of equipment and supplies to the site would increase noise levels in the immediate vicinity of several sensitive receptors. It is expected that most project-related traffic would move on Commerce Parkway, County Highway S, and/or County Highway I, and all of these roads have sensitive receptors (residences, medical clinics, day care facilities, a hospital, etc. ) in close proximity. It is likely that increased traffic noise would be noticeable at some of these receptors; therefore, noise impacts associated with project construction would be MODERATE.During operation, project-related traffic would be greatly reduced, and there would be no use of heavy construction equipment on the site. As discussed in Subsection 19.4.2, no significant sources of noise have been identified for project operation. Therefore, noise impacts associated with operation would be SMALL.As shown in Figure 19.5.2-4, the conceptual layout of the Chippewa Falls si te includes provisions to plant trees along the facility access road and the boundaries of the site that border public roads. The layout also would accommodate a low earthen berm around the permanent project facilities. These provisions would be expected to achieve some attenuation of operational noise, and this mitigation is considered in the impact assessment discussed above. No other feasible mitigation measures for noise impacts have been identified. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-14Rev. 019.5.2.1.2.1.4Geology, Soils, and Seismology ImpactsThe majority of the surface soils at the Chippewa Falls site consist of Sattre loam derived from glacial outwash materials. The upper 30 inches (in.) (76.2 centimeters [cm]) of the soil horizon is a mixture of sand, silt, and clay with roughly equal proportions of each. Below 30 in. (76.2 cm), sand becomes the predominant constituent (approximately 90 percent) with a substantial increase in the hydraulic conductivity (approximately 0.015 centimeters per second [cm/s]). Soils at the site are generally well-drained and not susceptible to ponding or flooding. Erosion potential of the surficial soils is expected to be slight to moderate. (UW, 1964; NRCS, 2012)Subsoil information obtained from one boring drilled at the site (American Engineering Testing, 2011) and records of two water wells drilled within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the site (WGNHS, 2004) corroborate the soils information provided above. The on-site boring log (American Engineering Testing, 2011) also shows an apparently man-made layer of fill material, approximately 3 ft. (0.9m) thick, at the surface. The fill material was identified as a mixture of sand, gravel, and clay. It is not known how much of the site is covered by this fill material. Bedrock lies directly beneath the glacial outwash materials and primarily consists of granite (Mudrey, et al., 1982). Karst conditions are not expected in the bedrock (WGNHS, 2012). The single soil boring drilled at the site (American Engineering Testing, 2011) did not encounter bedrock at 82 ft. (25.0 m) below grade, the maximum depth of the boring. Driller's records (WGNHS, 2004) for the two water wells within 1 mi. (1.6 km) show sand and gravel to depths of 50 ft. and 61 ft (15.2 and 18.6 m). The wells were completed within the sand and gravel aquifer, and therefore do not indicate the depth of bedrock. However, a report by the UW (1983) indicates the thickness of unconsolidated materials (soils) as between 100 ft. and 200 ft. (30.5 and 61.0m), which indicates that the depth to bedrock is 100 ft. to 200 ft. (30.5 and 61.0 m) below grade elevation. As described in Subsection 19.4.3, the maximum depth of excavation required for the SHINE facility is 39 ft. (11.9 m) below grade. Therefore, blasting would not be required for installation of foundations or other construction activities.The USGS National Seismic Hazard Maps database (USGS, 2012a) indicates the following peak ground accelerations for the Chippewa Falls site area:*10-percent probability of exceedance in a 50-year period:0.78 percent of gravity.*2-percent probability of exceedance in a 50-year period:2.13 percent of gravity.Based on these values, seismicity in the site area is considered to be minimal. In addition, no significant historical earthquakes have been recorded in the site area or anywhere in Wisconsin (USGS, 2012b), and no Quaternary faults (age less than 1.6 x 106 years) are known to be present in the site area or anywhere in Wisconsin (USGS, 2012c).The Chippewa Falls site is flat and does not contain landslide hazards. Because the site soils are primarily granular (sand with very little silt and clay) below the upper 30 in. (76.2 cm) of the soil profile, and no underground mining activity has been identified in the site area, land subsidence is not anticipated due to either consolidation of the site soils or local loss of support resulting from underground mining. In addition, no potential for shrink/swell action in response to changes in the moisture content of the soil as related to the stability of shallow foundations is anticipated. Potential for frost heave beneath shallow foundations should also be minimal. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-15Rev. 0Standard Penetration Test (SPT) blow counts obtained during drilling of the one soil boring on the site indicate that the sand deposits are generally medium dense and not subject to substantial settlement under typical loads applied by shallow foundations. As described in Subsection 19.4.3, the main building for the SHINE facility has a concrete foundation at 39 ft. (11.9 m) below grade, and it should be possible to design this foundation without the need for piles or drilled piers. Due to the low seismicity of the site area and relatively high SPT blow counts, the potential for earthquake induced liquefaction of subsoil below the groundwater table does not need to be considered. Based on the information summarized above, the geology, soils, and seismology of the Chippewa Falls site would not be expected to have any significant impacts on the SHINE facility. Similarly, construction and operation of the SHINE facility would not be expected to have any significant impacts on the geology, soils, and seismology of the Chippewa Falls site. There is no indication that any rare or unique rock, mineral, or energy assets are present that could be impacted by development at the site. Mining of sand is being conducted in several locations around Chippewa County (where the Chippewa Falls site is located) for use in hydraulic fracturing associated with natural gas production (USGS, 2012c). It is not known whether the type and gradation of the sand at the site is suitable for use in hydraulic fracturing. However, suitable sand deposits appear to be common in Chippewa County and therefore cannot be considered rare or unique. There is no indication that any contaminated soils are present that could be exposed by development at the site. A USGS map of contaminated sites in Chippewa County shows a few closed leaking underground storage tank (LUST) and Environmental Repair Program (ERP) locations in the site area, but investigation and cleanup activities at these locations have been completed and approved by the state (USGS, 2012d). There is no reason to believe that any LUST or ERP concerns extend to the site.Considering the information presented above, geology, soils, and seismology impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL. There would be no need for impact mitigation measures.19.5.2.1.2.1.5Water Resources ImpactsNo streams or other surface water bodies have been identified within the boundaries of the Chippewa Falls site. Therefore, construction of the SHINE facility would have no direct impacts on surface water. The only surface water features identified in close proximity to the site are drainage ditches along the roads that border the site. These drainage ditches would receive rainfall runoff from the construction site, and they potentially could experience indirect impacts, such as increased runoff volumes or degradation of water quality due to sedimentation. However, potential impacts would be minimized by implementing best management practices, such as soil erosion and sediment control measures; runoff detention ponds; provisions to allow infiltration of rainfall; stormwater pollution prevention plans; and Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) plans. Therefore, surface water impacts associated with facility construction would be SMALL.The City of Chippewa Falls municipal water supply system would provide all water required for operation of the SHINE facility. A 16-inch water main currently serves the Wissota Lake Business Park, and this main would be expected to have more than enough capacity to satisfy the needs Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-16Rev. 0of the SHINE facility. The facility would have no need to withdraw surface water or ground water. Best management practices would continue to be used during facility operation to minimize potential impacts on the drainage ditches that receive rainfall runoff from the site. Wastewater other than uncontaminated runoff would be discharged to the City of Chippewa Falls sanitary sewer system after being treated as described in Subsection 19.4.4. Wastewater discharges would comply with state and local pretreatment requirements. Therefore, surface water impacts associated with facility operation would be SMALL.A soil boring drilled at the Chippewa Falls site in 2011 found ground water at a depth of 50 ft. (15.2 m) below the grade elevation (American Engineering Testing, 2011). As described in Subsection 19.4.3, the maximum depth of excavation required for the SHINE facility is 39 ft. (11.9 m) below grade. Although there could be some seasonal variation in the depth to ground water, it is not likely that significant dewatering of excavations would be required. Because the SHINE facility would not withdraw ground water during construction or operation, the only potential impact on ground water would be possible contamination due to a leak or spill of oil or chemicals. The soils found at the Chippewa Falls site have relatively high hydraulic conductivity, which increases the potential for ground water contamination (UW, 1989). However, oil and chemical storage and handling during both construction and operation would be governed by SPCC plans and standard best practices to prevent and contain leaks and spills. Therefore, ground water impacts associated with facility construction and operation would be SMALL.As described above, best management practices and other standard provisions would be used during construction and operation to avoid and minimize impacts on surface water and ground water. These measures would ensure that impacts on water resources would be SMALL, and there would be no need for any other water resources impact mitigation measures.19.5.2.1.2.1.6Ecological Resources ImpactsNo significant ecological resources were identified on or in the immediate vicinity of the Chippewa Falls site. The majority of land on the site is cultivated cropland used for growing corn and soybeans. An abandoned railroad right-of-way (with the tracks removed) cuts diagonally through the southern portion of the site. South of this right-of-way is a fallow agricultural field, some of which has been graded for use by the Wissota Lake Business Park. Observations during a field reconnaissance visit to the site indicate that the edges of the agricultural fields support weedy herbaceous plant species typical of early successional stages. The plant community associated with the abandoned railroad right-of way is a mid-successional disturbance community with a few deciduous tree species and few prairie remnant species observed during field reconnaissance. The fallow agricultural field south of the right-of-way appears to support a typical old field plant community. Representative plant species observed within these areas are listed in Table 19.5.2-3.An apparent wetland community was observed in a narrow drainage way along the eastern edge of the site, immediately west of State Highway 178. Representative plant species observed within this area are listed in Table 19.5.2-3.Wildlife observed at the site included red-tailed hawk, common crow, black-capped chickadee, and various sparrows. None of the plant or animal species observed during field reconnaissance are listed by the USFWS or the WDNR as Endangered, Threatened, or of Special Concern. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-17Rev. 0Figure 19.5.2-4 shows a conceptual facility layout, including the area that would be developed with permanent facility structures and the area that would be temporarily disturbed for construction laydown and parking. It can be seen that the permanently developed area occupies part of the abandoned railroad right-of-way, part of the cropland to the north, and part of the fallow field to the south, while the temporarily disturbed area is located entirely in the cropland.The acreage of natural habitats found within the areas affected by the conceptual facility layout was estimated based on USGS land use/land cover GIS mapping data. Table 19.5.2-2 summarizes the acreages in the natural habitat categories and compares those quantities with the total acreages found within a 5 mi. (8.0 km) radius of the site. It can be seen that the permanently developed area would occupy approximately 0.5 ac. (0.2 ha) of deciduous forest, which represents the trees scattered along the abandoned railroad right-of-way. This is a tiny percentage of the deciduous forest found within 5 mi. (8.0 km) of the site, and the loss of this habitat would not be expected to have any noticeable ecological impact. Table 19.5.2-2 does not show any other natural habitats within the site boundaries.The apparent wetland community observed along the eastern edge of the site is not identified as wetland habitat in the GIS data used to compile Table 19.5.2-2, probably because the community developed somewhat recently as a result of drainage alterations caused by State Highway 178. This wetland community may have some ecological value, but it would not be disturbed during construction or operation of the SHINE facility. The drainage ditch that supports the wetland community would receive rainfall runoff from the site and could potentially experience indirect impacts such as increased runoff volumes or degradation of water quality. However, as discussed in Subsection 19.5.2.1.2.1.5, potential impacts would be minimized by implementing best management practices and pollution prevention plans during construction and operation. Therefore, the wetland community would not be significantly affected.The nearest wetland habitat represented in GIS mapping data is a small area located along a railroad line west of the Chippewa Falls site. This wetland area is approximately 0.25 mi. (0.4km) from the site boundary at its nearest point, and it is separated from the site by two roads and a row of commercial buildings. It would not be directly or indirectly affected by construction or operation of the SHINE facility.As discussed in Subsection 19.5.2.1.2.1.5, no streams or other surface water bodies have been identified within the boundaries of the Chippewa Falls site, and the only surface water features identified in close proximity to the site are drainage ditches along the roads that border the site. These drainage ditches do not represent significant aquatic ecological habitats. The nearest significant surface water bodies are Lake Wissota, which at its nearest point is approximately 0.75 mi. (1.2 km) north-northwest of the site, and the Chippewa River, which at its nearest point is approximately 0.9 mi. (1.4 km) south of the site. Both of these are significant ecological habitats, but neither would be directly or indirectly affected by construction or operation of the SHINE facility.A consultation letter received from the USFWS (2012a) states that "no federally-listed, proposed, or candidate species, or designated critical habitat occurs within the project area." This letter does not express any concerns about or recommendations applicable to the development of the Chippewa Falls site. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-18Rev. 0A letter documenting an Endangered Resources Re view conducted by t he WDNR (2011a) lists four Endangered, Threatened, or Special Concern species known or likely to occur in the project area. These species and their regulatory status are shown in Table 19.5.2-4. The letter indicates that none of these species are likely to occur on the project site, because they all are associated with aquatic habitats, primarily Lake Wissota and the Chippewa River. The letter does not list any actions that need to be taken to comply with state or federal endangered species laws. It recommends avoiding impacts on the wetland community observed along the eastern edge of the site and implementing strict erosion and siltation controls during the entire construction period.Considering the information presented above, aquatic and terrestrial ecology impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL. The methods used to clear vegetation, control erosion and siltation, and restore temporarily disturbed areas would be selected so as to minimize impacts as described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.5. No other impact mitigation measures would be required.19.5.2.1.2.1.7Historic and Cultural Resources ImpactsNo properties listed on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) are located on or in the immediate vicinity of the Chippewa Falls site. The nearest listed property is the Notre Dame Church and Goldsmith Memorial Chapel, which is approximately 2 mi. (3.2 km) southwest of the southwestern corner of the site. This property is located in a densely populated part of the City of Chippewa Falls, and it is separated from the site by numerous buildings, roads, trees, and other obstructions. Therefore, this property would not be directly or indirectly affected by construction or operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site.The Wisconsin State Archeologist conducted a search of the Wisconsin Historic Preservation Database in order to identify any historic and archeological resources that have been reported in the site vicinity, regardless of whether those resources are listed on the NRHP or not. The database search did not identify any historic or archeological resources that have been reported on the site or within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the site boundaries. The Wisconsin State Archeologist did not express any concerns about potential construction at the site except that Wisconsin law must be followed if human remains are unearthed or if Native American burial mounds or any marked or unmarked burial is suspected to be present. (Broihahn, 2011)Field reconnaissance in the site vicinity did not identify any buildings or other features that appeared likely to have historic or cultural significance. Based on the information presented above, construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would not be expected to directly or indirectly affect historic or cultural resources. If human remains or archeological artifacts were discovered during construction or operation, the procedures outlined for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.6 would be followed. Therefore, cultural resources impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL. There would be no need for impact mitigation measures. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-19Rev. 019.5.2.1.2.1.8Socioeconomic ImpactsThis subsection evaluates the social and economic impacts that could result from constructing and operating the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site. The evaluation includes the impacts of construction and operation activities themselves and the demands placed by the construction and operation workforces on the site and the surrounding region. As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, the socioeconomic impacts of constructing and operating the SHINE facility at the Janesville site are expected to be largely restricted to Rock County, the county in which the site is located. Socioeconomic impacts in other counties are expected to be minimal and do not require evaluation. It is expected that the socioeconomic impacts of construction and operation at the Chippewa Falls site would similarly occur primarily in Chippewa County, the county in which the site is located. Therefore, the following impact evaluation focuses on Chippewa County. In accordance with the Revised ISG Augmenting NUREG-1537, the ev aluation considers potential impacts on housing, public services, public education, tax revenues, and transportation. HousingImpacts on housing could be caused by construction and operation workers moving, either permanently or temporarily, into the region surrounding the project site (Chippewa County). This influx of workers could decrease the availability of unoccupied housing units and increase the cost to buy or rent housing. The severity of such impacts would depend primarily on the existing availability of unoccupied housing units compared with the number of workers who would move into the area.NUREG-1437 establishes the following criteria for judging the severity of impacts on housing:SMALL - Small and not easily discernible change in housing availability. Increases in rental rates or housing values equal or slightly exceed the statewide inflation rate.MODERATE - Discernible but short-lived reduction in available housing units. Rental rates and housing values rise slightly faster than the inflation rate, but prices realign quickly once new housing units became available or project-related demand diminishes.LARGE - Project-related demand for housing units results in very limited housing availability and increases in rental rates and housing values well above normal inflationary increases in the state.Based on U.S. Census Bureau (USCB) data for 2010, the total number of housing units in Chippewa County was 27,185, and the number of vacant units was 2,775 (USCB, 2012a). As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for construction of the SHINE facility is 420. It is expected that many of these workers would be current residents of Chippewa County or the nearby region, but even if all of the workers moved into the county and required housing, the resulting demand for 420 housing units would represent only about 15 percent of the vacant housing units in the county. It is unlikely that this would result in any discernible change in ho using availability or increase in housing costs. Therefore, the housing impact associated with construction of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-20Rev. 0As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for operation of the SHINE facility is 150. This number is significantly smaller than the estimated number of construction workers. Therefore, the housing impact associated with operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL. Public ServicesPublic services include water supply and waste water treatment facilities; police, fire, and medical services; and social services. Impacts on public services could be caused by construction and operation workers moving into the region surrounding the project site (Chippewa County). This influx of workers and their families could increase the demand for public services, potentially requiring local governments to add facilities, programs, and/or staff.Per NUREG-1437, impacts on public services generally are considered to be SMALL if there is little or no need to add facilities, programs, and/or staff because of the influx of workers, and MODERATE or LARGE if additional facilities, programs, and/or staff are required. USCB estimates that the population of Chippewa County in 2011 was 62,778, and the average number of people per household was 2.5 (USCB, 2012b). As discussed above, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for construction of the SHINE facility is 420. It is expected that many of these workers would be current residents of Chippewa County or the nearby region, but even if all of the workers moved into the county with the average household size of 2.5 people, the resulting influx of 1,150 people would increase the population of the county by less than 2 percent. It is unlikely that this small population increase would result in a noticeable increase in the demand for public services or a need to add facilities, programs, and/or staff. Therefore, the public services impact associated with construction of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL.As discussed above, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for operation of the SHINE facility is 150. This number is significantly smaller than the estimated number of construction workers. Therefore, the public services impact associated with operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL.Public EducationImpacts on public education could be caused by construction and operation workers moving into and bringing school-aged children into the region surrounding the project site (Chippewa County). This increase in the number of school-aged children could cause crowding of local schools and potentially require school systems to add facilities and/or staff. Per NUREG-1437, impacts on education are considered to be SMALL if the project-related increase in school enrollment represents less than 3 percent of the total school enrollment in affected school systems, MODERATE if 4 to 8 percent, and LARGE if more than 8 percent.Based on Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (WDPI) data for 2010, the total public school enrollment in Chippewa County was 9,218 students (WDPI 2012). As discussed above, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for construction of the SHINE facility is 420. It is expected that many of these workers would be current residents of Chippewa County, but if all of the workers moved into the county and brought a school-aged child who attended a public school, the resulting influx of 420 students would increase school Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-21Rev. 0enrollment by approximately 4.6 percent. Using the NUREG-1437 guideline, this would indicate a MODERATE impact on education. However, given the conservativeness of the assumption that all construction workers would move into the county and the fact that the peak construction employment period would last less than 1 year, it is unlikely that the increase in school-aged children would result in noticeable crowding or a need to add facilities or staff. Therefore, the public education impact associated with construction of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALLAs discussed above, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for operation of the SHINE facility is 150. This number is significantly smaller than the estimated number of construction workers. Therefore, the public education impact associated with operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL.TaxesProperty taxes and other taxes paid during construction and operation of the SHINE facility would benefit the state and local jurisdictions that co llect the taxes. Per NUREG-1437, tax impacts are considered SMALL if project-related tax revenues represent less than 10 percent of the total tax revenues of the local taxing jurisdictions, MODERATE if 10 to 20 percent, and LARGE if more than 20 percent.As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, SHINE intends to enter into a Tax Increment Financing (TIF) agreement with the City of Janesville. This agreement is expected to cover the first 10 years of the NRC license period, which includes the construction period for the SHINE facility. Under this agreement, SHINE expects to pay a total of $635,000 per year in property taxes and payments in lieu of taxes. If the SHINE facility were constructed at the Chippewa Falls site, it is expected that SHINE would enter into a similar TIF agreement and make similar payments during the construction period. Based on Wisconsin Department of Revenue (WDOR) data for Chippewa County, the property taxes collected in 2011 were $14,887,300 (WDOR, 2012a). Therefore, even if the entire payments of $635,000 per year were counted toward property taxes, the payments would represent approximately 4.3 percent of the annual property tax revenues of Chippewa County, and the tax impact associated with construction of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL.After expiration of the 10-year TIF agreement with the City of Janesville, SHINE expects to pay property taxes of approximately $660,000 per year during the remaining period of operation for the SHINE facility. It is expected that tax payments at the Chippewa Falls site would be approximately the same, and such payments would represent approximately 4.4 percent of the annual property tax revenues of Chippewa County. Therefore, the tax impact associated with operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL.TransportationTransportation in the vicinity of the SHINE facility could be affected by the increase in vehicle traffic associated with construction and operation workers commuting to and from the site and the delivery of materials and equipment to the site. The increase in vehicle traffic could cause congestion and delays on local roads. The severity of such impacts would depend primarily on the existing road conditions and traffic volumes on the local roads compared with the expected volume of project-related traffic. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-22Rev. 0As shown in Figure 19.5.2-4, the entrance road for the SHINE facility would connect with Commerce Parkway, a City of Chippewa Falls street that forms the western boundary of the site. No other construction, modification of roads, or other transportation infrastructure would be required for construction, operation, or decommissioning of the SHINE facility. However, Commerce Parkway is a two-lane road that probably would experience a significant increase in traffic volume due to project-related traffic. Therefore, construction of turning lanes or other improvements might be necessary to avoid traffic delays on Commerce Parkway, as discussed below.U.S. Highway 53 provides long-distance road access to the site area. The exit nearest to the site is Exit 99, which is approximately 5 mi. (8.0 km) west of the site and connects with County Highway S. Thus, it is expected that most vehicles traveling to the site from outside of the Chippewa Falls metropolitan area would travel on County Highway S and then turn onto Commerce Parkway. Many vehicles traveling to the site from inside of the metropolitan area probably also would travel on County Highway S, although some might travel on County Highway I. Commerce Parkway and County Highway S are two-lane roads with paved shoulders, while County Highway I is a four-lane road with curbed shoulders and a two-way turning lane as the median. Table 19.5.2-5 provides Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WDOT) peak hourly traffic data for Commerce Parkway, County Highway S, County Highway I, and other roads in the site area (WDOT, 2011). It can be seen that the traffic volume on most of these roads is around 400 vehicles per hour during both the morning and evening peak periods. As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, the maximum number of vehicles expected to travel to and from the site during construction of the SHINE facility is 465 per day. The great majority of these vehicles (approximately 420) would represent commuting construction workers. These vehicles generally would arrive at the site on Commerce Parkway at about the same time each morning and leave on Commerce Parkway at about the same time each evening. Thus, commuting construction workers could roughly double the volume of traffic on Commerce Parkway during the peak morning and evening periods. The increase in traffic volumes on other roads in the site vicinity probably would not be as great but could be significant.Considering the nature of the roads in the site vicinity and the increase in traffic volume these roads would experience, it is likely that the peak construction-related traffic would noticeably alter existing transportation conditions (cause noticeable traffic delays) but not be sufficient to destabilize transportation resources. Therefore, the transportation impact associated with project construction would be MODERATE.As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, the maximum number of vehicles expected to travel to and from the site during operation of the SHINE facility is 118 per day. The great majority of these vehicles would represent commuting operation workers, but it is expected that these workers would be divided into three shifts. Thus, the maximum number of vehicles arriving at or departing from the site at any one time would be much less than during the construction period. Therefore, the transportation impact associated with facility operation would be SMALL.In order to alleviate traffic congestion during project construction, mitiga tion measures, such as adding turning lanes might be necessary, especially on Commerce Parkway. Specific mitigation measures would be selected after a detailed evaluation of traffic patterns and potential problem areas. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-23Rev. 019.5.2.1.2.1.9Human Health Impacts19.5.2.1.2.1.9.1Nonradiological ImpactsNo unusual existing sources of nonradioactive chemical exposure or effluents have been identified in the vicinity of the Chippewa Falls site. No operating industrial facilities with environmental monitoring programs have been identified in the site vicinity. A SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be essentially the same as the SHINE facility described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.8.1 with regard to the following factors:*Nonradioactive chemical sources (location, type, strength).*Nonradioactive liquid, gaseous, and solid waste management and effluent control systems.*Nonradioactive effluents released into the on-site and off-site environment.
- Chemical exposure to the public and on-site workforce.
- Physical occupational hazards.*Mitigation measures for nonradiological human health impacts.Nonradiological chemical sources, wastes, effluents, and occupational hazards associated with the SHINE facility would be strictly controlled to ensure compliance with applicable environmental and occupational regulations and standards as discussed in Subsection 19.4.8.1. Therefore, the nonradiological human health impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL.19.5.2.1.2.1.9.2Radiological Impacts No unusual existing sources of radiation have been identified in the vicinity of the Chippewa Falls site. The major sources and levels of background radiation exposure at the Chippewa Falls site are very similar to the sources and levels described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.3.8.2. The physical layout of the Chippewa Falls site is shown in Figure 19.5.2-4. Radioactive materials would be located in the central part of the production facility building. A SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be essentially the same as the SHINE facility described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.8.2 with regard to the following factors:*Characteristics of radiation sources and expected radioactive effluents.*Compliance with 10 CFR 20.1301, including calculated radiation dose rates at the site boundary.*Annual radiation dose to the maximally exposed worker.
- Mitigation measures to minimize public and occupational exposures to radioactive material.Radiation sources and radioactive effluents would be strictly controlled to ensure compliance with applicable regulations and standards as discussed in Subsection 19.4.8.2. Therefore, the radiological human health impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL.
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-24Rev. 019.5.2.1.2.1.10Waste Management ImpactsNo conditions have been identified for the Chippewa Falls site that would significantly affect waste management impacts. A SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be essentially the same as the SHINE facility described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.9 with regard to the following factors:*Sources, types, and approximate quantities of solid, hazardous, radioactive, and mixed wastes.*Proposed waste management systems designed to collect, store, and process the waste.
- Anticipated waste disposal or waste management plans.*Anticipated waste-minimization plans to minimize the generation of waste.Wastes would be handled, processed, stored, and disposed as discussed in Subsection 19.4.9. Therefore, the waste management impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL.19.5.2.1.2.1.11Transportation ImpactsPer the Final ISG Augmenting NUREG-1537, the traffic impacts of vehicles associated with the SHINE facility are discussed in Subsection 19.5.2.1.2.1.8. This subsection discusses the radiological and other human health impacts of transporting nuclear and non-nuclear materials associated with the project. No conditions have been identified fo r the Chippewa Falls site that would significantly affect the impacts of transporting nuclear and non-nuclear materials, including radioactive waste, nonradioactive waste, and medical isotopes. Because the Chippewa Falls site and the Janesville site are relatively close to each other in comparison with the projected origins and destinations of nuclear and non-nuclear materials, distance-related impacts of transportation would be essentially the same. A SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be essentially the same as the SHINE facility described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.10 with regard to the
following factors:*Transportation modes.
- Approximate transportation distances.
- Treatment and packaging for radioactive and nonradioactive wastes.*Calculated radiological dose to members of the public and workers from incident-free transportation scenarios.The impact of the transportation of nuclear and non-nuclear materials is discussed in Subsections 19.4.10.1.3 and 19.4.10.2. The transportation impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls si te would be SMALL.
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-25Rev. 019.5.2.1.2.1.12Postulated Accident ImpactsNo conditions have been identified fo r the Chippewa Falls site that would significantly affect the radiological and nonradiological impacts from postulated accidents. A SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be essentially the same as the SHINE facility described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.11 with regard to the following factors:*Credible accidents having a potential for releases into the environment. *Radiological and nonradiological consequences from the postulated accidents.The SHINE facility would be designed, constructed, and operated to ensure that the consequences of postulated accidents would comply with applicable regulations and standards as discussed in Subsection 19.4.11. Therefore, the postulated accident impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL.19.5.2.1.2.1.13Environmental Justice ImpactsEnvironmental justice issues involve aspects of the project that could disproportionately impact minority or low-income populations. The potential for disproportionate impacts depends primarily on the location of the project facilities in relation to existing minority and low-income populations.Minority and low-income populations within 5 mi. (8 km) of the Chippewa Falls site were identified based on USCB Census block group data (USCB, 2012c and 2012d). Census block groups with above-average minority and low-income populations were determined by comparing the minority and poverty populations in each block group to the total population in that block group and to the average minority and poverty populations in the county and state. Where the minority or poverty population in a block group exceeded 50 percent of the total population in that block group, or where the minority or poverty population was found to be at least 20 percentage points greater than the comparable county and/or state averages, the minority or poverty population was defined as "above average." This methodology is consistent with NRC guidance for identification of Environmental Justic e populations (NRC, 2004).Table 19.5.2-6 shows the block groups and census tracts within 5 mi. (8 km) of the Chippewa Falls site, the percentage of households below the poverty level in each, and the percentage of each minority group, including American Indian and Hispanic populations, in each. The percentage of households below the poverty level, the percentage of each minority group, and aggregate percentage of all minority groups are compared with the average percentage in Chippewa County and the state of Wisconsin.As shown in Table 19.5.2-6, none of the block groups/census tracts within 5 mi. (8 km) of the Chippewa Falls site has an above average percentage of any minority groups individually or in the aggregate, and only one block group/census tract has an above average percentage of households below the poverty level. This block group/census tract has 36.5 percent of households below the poverty level, compared with 10.9 percent in Chippewa County and 11.2percent in the state of Wisconsin. The location of this block group/census tract is shown in Figure 19.5.2-6. It is approximately 2 mi. (3.2 km) southwest of the Chippewa Falls site. It is located in a densely populated part of the City of Chippewa Falls, and it is separated from the site by numerous buildings, roads, trees, and other obstructions. None of the primary transportation routes that would be used to transport workers, materials, or equipment to the Chippewa Falls Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-26Rev. 0site pass through this block group/census tract. Therefore, this population would not be directly or indirectly affected by construction or operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site.No American Indian reservations or other special communities have been identified within 5 mi. (8 km) of the Chippewa Falls site. The nearest American Indian reservation is the Winnebago Reservation, which belongs to the Ho-Chunk Nation and is located approximately 35 mi. (56 km) southeast of the site (National Atlas of the United States, 2012; WDNR, 2012b).Based on the information presented above, there is no indication that any minority or low-income population would be disproportionately affected during project construction or operation as compared to the effect on the general population. Based on the potential for disproportionate exposure to environmental hazards from the SHINE facility as well as multiple-hazard and cumulative hazard conditions, the human health and environmental effects on minority and low-income populations would not be significantly high or adverse. Therefore, the environmental justice impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL.19.5.2.1.2.1.14Cumulative ImpactsPast, present, and reasonably foreseeable future development projects and other actions that could result in cumulative impacts at the Chippewa Falls site were identified by searching for economic development plans, permit lists, news releases, and similar sources of information. An effort was made to identify all relevant activities conducted, regulated, or approved by a federal agency or non-federal entity within 5 mi. (8 km) of the site. Available information about the projects and other activities identified is provided in Table 19.5.2-7.As shown in Table 19.5.2-7, the projects and other activities located within 5 mi. (8 km) of the Chippewa Falls site generally are of a relatively small scale and would not be expected to have significant impacts in the same areas affected by the SHINE facility. The Wissota Green Housing Development, a planned neighborhood that was to be developed approximately 1 mi. (1.6 km) from the Chippewa Falls site might have contributed significantly to the land use impacts of the SHINE facility; however, current information indicates that this project is not likely to proceed in the form originally proposed. It is possible that the individual lots may be developed by private owners, but this type of development would likely occur gradually over a number of years, which would mitigate the cumulative impacts somewhat. The projects in Table 19.5.2-7 that are procedeeding or appear likely to proceed would not be expected to have significant land use impacts. However, some of these projects could produce increases in vehicle traffic and ambient noise that might affect some of the same areas as the SHINE facility. Therefore, the cumulative effects of these projects might contribute to the traffic and noise impacts of the SHINE facility, which are expected to be MODERATE as discussed above.19.5.2.1.2.2Stevens Point Site 19.5.2.1.2.2.1DescriptionThe Stevens Point Site is located adjacent to the eastern edge of the corporate boundaries of the City of Stevens Point, in Portage County, Wisconsin. No public roads currently border the site. The site boundaries were determined by the City of Stevens Point when they recommended the Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-27Rev. 0site to SHINE. The city has indicated that if the SHINE project proceeded at this site they would annex the site property and install public streets along the northern and western site boundaries. The SHINE project would be dependent on the installation of these public streets, and the street impacts are considered part of the direct project impacts discussed below.The terrain across the site is flat, with little noticeable relief other than a gentle slope to the south. No residences or other structures are located within the site boundaries. Most of the site is occupied by a woodlot, but there are areas of cultivated cropland along the western and southern sides of the site.Figure 19.5.2-7 shows a conceptual layout of the SHINE facility on the Stevens Point site, including the area that would be developed with permanent facility structures, the area that would be temporarily disturbed for construction laydown and parking, and the remaining area within the site boundaries. The area developed with permanent structures occupies most of the woodlot, while the area temporarily disturbed for construction laydown and parking is located in the cropland along the western edge of the site. The production facility building, which is the only part of the facility that contains safety-related equipment, is located near the center of the site, positioned so as to maximize the distance to the site boundaries in all directions.The area within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the site is a mixture of agricultural land and suburban-type residential and commercial development. The nearest occupied residences are two houses located along Old Highway 18 approximately 0.2 mi. (0.32 km) north of the northern site boundary. The nearest residential concentration is a subdivision located along Old Highway 18 approximately 0.6 mi. (0.96 km) northwest of the site boundary. A Lands' End outlet facility is located immediately west of the site, and the grounds of this facility include an exercise track that passes less than 0.1 mi. (0.16 km) from the site boundary.In addition to residences, several other sensitive features are located within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the site boundaries. These include a preschool, two child day care facilities, a medical clinic, and a city park. Table 19.5.2-8 lists the distance to each of these sensitive features from the nearest site boundary and the center point of the safety-related area in the production facility building. Table 19.5.2-8 also lists the distance to the nearest hospital, public sc hool, and listed historical property, all of which are more than 1 mi. (1.6 km) from the site boundaries. Figure 19.5.2-8 shows the location of the sensitive features identified within 1 mi. (1.6 km). It should be noted that GIS data identifies a public school known as Stockton School located along Old Highway within 1mi. (1.6 km) of the site boundaries, but during field reconnaissance in November 2011, it appeared that this school was no longer in use. Therefore, Stockton School is not listed as a public school but is listed as a potential historical property in Table 19.5.2-8. Interstate 39, which is located about 1 mi. (1.6 km) west of the site at its nearest point, provides long-distance access to the site area. The exit nearest to the site is Exit 156 (County Highway HH), which is approximately 1.5 mi. (2.4 km) southwest of the site. Exit 158 (U.S. Highway 10) is approximately 2 mi. (3.2 km) northwest of the site. U.S. Highway 10 is a well-maintained multi-lane divided highway. The other roads in the immediate vicinity of the site (County Highway HH, Old Highway 18, County Highway R, and Burbank Road) are two- or four-lane roads of variable width and condition. Stevens Point Municipal Airport is located approximately 2.8 mi. (4.5 km) northwest of the site. Aircraft using this airport would be the primary means of transporting isotopes produced by the SHINE facility. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-28Rev. 0An overhead electrical line, municipal water supply pipeline, sanitary sewer pipeline, and natural gas pipeline are located north of the Lands' End facility along County Highway R, approximately 0.3 mi. (0.48 km) from the site. It is assumed these utilities would be extended to the site when the city constructed the public streets that would border the site.19.5.2.1.2.2.2Land Use and Visual Resources ImpactsExisting land use on the Stevens Point site is predominantly forestry and agriculture. Most of the site is occupied by a second-growth woodlot, and some evidence of logging was observed during field reconnaissance in November 2011. There are areas of cultivated cropland along the western and southern sides of the site, and these areas appeared to have been planted in corn. The field at the southern side of the site was pivot-irrigated. Virtually, the entire site is composed of soils classified as Prime Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance. No recreational use of the site or the immediate vicinity was identified except for the exercise track on the grounds of the Lands' End outlet facility, which is immediately west of the site.No residences or other structures are located within the site boundaries. The site currently is zoned by Portage County partly for Agricultural use and partly for Industrial use (Portage County, 2012a), but the City of Stevens Point has indicated that if the SHINE project proceeded they would annex the site property and zone it for Industrial use. The City's Comprehensive Plan (Cityof Stevens Point, 2011a) shows the site property as part of a planned business park. However, Portage County's Comprehensive Plan (Portage County, 2012b) indicates that the area is planned partly for Rural Residential use (2 ac. or more per residence) and partly for Limited Agriculture/Mixed use (low intensity agricultural uses that maintain the rural characteristics of the area).The acreage of each major land use category currently found within the areas affected by the conceptual facility layout was estimated based on USGS land use/land cover GIS mapping data (USGS, 2006). Table 19.5.2-9 summarizes the acreages in the major land use categories and compares those quantities with the total acreages found within a 5 mi. (8.0 km) radius of the site. It can be seen that the acreage of each land use category potentially affected by the facility layout is less than 1 percent of the total acreage of that category found within 5 mi. (8.0 km).There is no reason to believe that construction of the SHINE facility would destabilize any important land use resources. However, construction would change much of the site from predominantly forestry and agricultural use to industrial use, which would noticeably alter the existing land use resources of the site. This alteration may be consistent with the City of Stevens Point's plan to develop the area as a business park, but it is not consistent with the existing zoning on parts of the site or with Portage County's planning of the area for rural residential and low intensity agricultural use. In addition, the project would depend on the City constructing a public street along at least one of the site boundaries, and this would have further land use impacts, converting a somewhat isolated rural area into a more urbanized area. Therefore, the land use impact associated with project construction would be MODERATE.During operation of the SHINE facility, land use impacts would be reduced. No new land use impacts would occur beyond those described above for project construction, and some areas that were temporarily disturbed for construction laydown and parking might be returned to agricultural use. Therefore, the land use impact associated with facility operation would be SMALL. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-29Rev. 0Visual resources in the vicinity of the site could be affected by the visual intrusion of industrial structures and equipment. During project construction, dust could create additional visual intrusions. Given that the site area currently includes some rural and residential scenery, in addition to institutional and commercial scenery, project construction and operation would alter the existing visual conditions somewhat. However, the severity of visual impacts on the human population would depend primarily on the visibility of the project facilities from sensitive viewing areas.Field reconnaissance and examination of aerial photographs indicate that more than 100 residences are located within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the site boundaries. As discussed in Subsection 19.5.2.1.2.2.1, the area within 1 mi. (1.6 km) also includes several other sensitive viewing areas, including a preschool, two child day care facili ties, a medical clinic, and a city park. Although trees and existing buildings would block the view from some of these locations, some would be expected to have at least a partial view of the SHINE facility during construction and operation. In addition, the exercise track on the grounds of the Lands' End outlet facility would have at least a partial view of the SHINE facility during construction and operation.NUREG-1437 establishes the following criteria for judging the severity of aesthetic impacts:SMALL - No complaints from affected public about a changed sense of place or a diminution in enjoyment of the physical environment, and no measurable impact on socioeconomic institutions and processes.MODERATE - Some complaints from affected public about a changed sense of place or a diminution in enjoyment of the physical environment, and measurable impacts that do not alter the continued functioning of socioeconomic institutions and processes.LARGE - Continuing and widely shared opposition to the project based on a perceived degradation of the area's sense of place or diminution in enjoyment of the physical environment, and measurable social impacts that perturb the continued functioning of community institutions and processes.Considering that the construction of the SHINE facility would noticeably alter the appearance of the project site and be at least partially visible from numerous sensitive viewing areas, it is possible that project construction would generate some public complaints related to a changed sense of place and diminished enjoyment of the physical environment. However, it is not likely that there would be "continuing and widely shared opposition" to the project or that there would be "measurable social impacts that perturb the continued functioning of community institutions and processes." Therefore, the visual resources impact associated with project construction would be MODERATE.Operation of the SHINE facility would not result in significant further alteration of aesthetic conditions, and it does not seem likely that there would be continued public complaints related to diminished enjoyment of the physical environment. Therefore, the visual resources impact associated with project operation would be SMALL.As shown in Figure 19.5.2-7, the conceptual layout of the Stevens Point site includes provisions to plant trees along the facility access road and the boundaries of the site that border public roads. These provisions would partially mitigate the visual impact of the project, especially during Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-30Rev. 0project operation, and this mitigation is considered in the impact assessment discussed above. No other feasible mitigation measures for land use or visual impacts have been identified.19.5.2.1.2.2.3Air Quality and Noise ImpactsThe Stevens Point site is located in Portage County, Wisconsin, which is part of the North Central Wisconsin Intra-State Air Quality Control Region (WDNR, 2012a). The ambient air quality in Portage County currently is in attainment with the NAAQS for all criteria pollutants (ozone, particulate matter, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide and lead) (USEPA, 2012a). The nearest county out of attainment with the NAAQS is Sheboygan County, Wisconsin, which is
non-attainment for ozone (USEPA, 2012a). Sheboygan County is located along the western shore of Lake Michigan, approximately 100 mi. (161 km) east-southeast of the Stevens Point site. At this distance and beyond, air pollution emissions from the Stevens Point site would not be expected to have any noticeable effect on non-attainment areas.The air quality impacts of constructing and operating the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be very similar to the impacts discussed for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.2. Potential air pollution emissions during construction would include dust from earthmoving and material handling activities, and exhaust emissions from construction equipment and vehicles. In general, these emissions would be the same as the emissions associated with any large construction project. Emission-specific control measures, such as watering areas of disturbed soil, would be implemented to limit air quality impacts and ensure compliance with applicable federal and state regulations. Therefore, air quality impacts associated with facility construction
would be SMALL.During facility operation, the isotope production process would emit very small quantities of nitrogen oxides. Natural gas firing to heat buildings and occasional testing of the emergency diesel generator would emit nitrogen oxides and very small quantities of particulate matter and sulfur dioxide. Standard emission control measures, such as proper mixing of fuels and combustion air, would be implemented to limit air quality impacts. Emissions during facility operation would be governed by applicable state permits, which would ensure compliance with the NAAQS and other applicable regulatory requirements. Therefore, air quality impacts associated with facility operation would be SMALL.As discussed above, standard emission control measures would be implemented to limit air quality impacts during construction and operation. These measures would ensure that impacts on air quality would be SMALL, and there would be no need for any other air quality impact mitigation measures.Noise emissions during construction at the Stevens Point site would be very similar to the impacts discussed for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.2. Based on the depth to bedrock at the Stevens Point site (see Subsection 19.5.2.1.2.2.4), blasting and pile driving would not be required for excavation or installation of foundations. The primary source of noise during construction would be the operation of heavy equipment. This noise would be noticeable in the immediate construction area, but it generally would be expected to attenuate to acceptable levels before reaching sensitive receptors. However, vehicular traffic due to construction workers commuting to and from the site and deliveries of equipment and supplies to the site would increase noise levels in the immediate vicinity of several sensitive receptors. It is expected that much of the project-related traffic would move on County Highway R (Eisenhower Road) and/or County Highway HH (McDill Avenue), and these roads have numerous residences, a medical Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-31Rev. 0clinic, two day care facilities, and a preschool in close proximity. It is likely that increased traffic noise would be noticeable at some of these receptors. In addition, construction noise would be noticeable at the exercise track on the grounds of the Lands' End outlet facility. Therefore, noise impacts associated with project construction would be MODERATE.During operation, project-related traffic would be greatly reduced, and there would be no use of heavy construction equipment on the site. As discussed in Subsection 19.4.2, no significant sources of noise have been identified for project operation. Therefore, noise impacts associated with operation would be SMALL.As shown in Figure 19.5.2-7, the conceptual layout of the Stevens Point site includes provisions to plant trees along the facility access road and the boundaries of the site that border public roads. The layout also would accommodate a low earthen berm around the permanent project facilities. These provisions would be expected to achieve some attenuation of operational noise, and this mitigation is considered in the impact assessment discussed above. No other feasible mitigation measures for noise impacts have been identified.19.5.2.1.2.2.4Geology, Soils, and Seismology ImpactsThe majority of the surface soils at the Stevens Point site consist of Richford loamy sand derived from glacial outwash materials. The Richford loamy sand consists of about 65 to 95 percent sand, generally less than 10 percent silt, and 1 to 10 percent clay. The hydraulic conductivity of the loamy sand is high (approximately 0.015 cm/s), and therefore it is well-drained and not susceptible to ponding or flooding. Erosion potential of the surficial soils is expected to be slight. (UW, 1964; NRCS, 2012) Subsoil information obtained from a set of borings drilled at the site and records of four water wells and one test hole drilled within 1 to 2 mi. (1.6 to 3.2 km) of the site (WGNHS, 2005) corroborate the soils information provided above.Bedrock directly lies beneath the glacial outwash materials and primarily consists of granite (Greenberg and Brown, 1986). Karst conditions are not anticipated in the bedrock (Mudrey, et al., 1982; WGNHS, 2012). The drilling log of one water well in the site vicinity indicates granite bedrock at a depth of 77 ft. (23.5 m), while the other wells in the vicinity were drilled to depths of 54 ft. to 72 ft. (16.5 to 21.9 m) and did not encounter bedrock. A borehole at the site was advanced to a depth of 140 ft. (42.7 m) and did not encounter bedrock. Based on this information, bedrock at the site is expected to be more than 50 ft. (15.2 m) below the grade elevation. As described in Subsection 19.4.3, the maximum depth of excavation required for the SHINE facility is 39 ft. (11.9 m) below grade. Therefore, blasting would not be required for installation of foundations or other construction activities.The USGS National Seismic Hazard Maps database (USGS, 2012a) indicates the following peak ground accelerations for the Stevens Point site area:*10-percent probability of exceedance in a 50-year period:0.90 percent of gravity.*2-percent probability of exceedance in a 50-year period:2.46 percent of gravity.Based on these values, seismicity in the site area is considered to be minimal. In addition, no significant historical earthquakes have been recorded in the site area or anywhere in Wisconsin Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-32Rev. 0(USGS, 2012b), and no Quaternary faults (age less than 1.6 x 106 years) are known to be present in the site area or anywhere in Wisconsin (USGS, 2012c).The Stevens Point site is flat and does not contain landslide hazards. Because the site soils are primarily granular (sand with small percentages of silt and clay), and no underground mining activity has been identified in the site area, land subsidence is not anticipated due to either consolidation of the site soils or local loss of support resulting from underground mining. In addition, no potential for shrink/swell action in response to changes in the moisture content of the soil as related to the stability of shallow foundations is anticipated. Potential for frost heave beneath shallow foundations should also be minimal.Available on-site boring logs indicate a generally loose condition in the site soils. Therefore, it is expected that the load bearing capacity of the site soils is rather low and the soils would be susceptible to settlement under heavy loads. For the SHINE facility main building and any other structures that generate large foundation loads, the site soils would likely need to be improved with dynamic compaction, vibro-compaction, cement mixing, and/or grouting. However, it should be possible to design the foundations without the need for piles or drilled piers. Due to the low seismicity of the site area, the potential for earthquake induced liquefaction of subsoil below the groundwater table does not need to be considered. Based on the information summarized above, the geology, soils, and seismology of the Stevens Point site would not be expected to have any significant impacts on the SHINE facility. Similarly, construction and operation of the SHINE facility would not be expected to have any significant impacts on the geology, soils, and seismology of the site. There is no indication that any rare or unique rock, mineral, or energy assets are present that could be impacted by development at the site. Mining of sand is conducted in certain parts of Wisconsin for use in hydraulic fracturing associated with natural gas production. It is not known whether the type and gradation of the sand at the Stevens Point site is suitable for use in hydraulic fracturing. However, suitable sand deposits appear to be common in some parts of Wisconsin and therefore cannot be considered rare or unique. There is no indication that any contaminated soils are present that could be exposed by development at the site. A USGS map of contaminated sites in Portage County (where the Stevens Point site is located) shows a few closed LUST and ERP locations in the site area, but investigation and cleanup activities at these locations have been completed and approved by the state (USGS, 2012e). There is no reason to believe that any LUST or ERP concerns extend to the site.Considering the information presented above, geology, soils, and seismology impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL. There would be no need for impact mitigation measures. 19.5.2.1.2.2.5Water Resources Impacts No streams or other surface water bodies have been identified within the boundaries of the Stevens Point site. Therefore, construction of the SHINE facility would have no direct impacts on surface water. The only surface water features identified in close proximity to the site are local drainage ditches. These drainage ditches would receive rainfall runoff from the construction site, and they potentially could experience indirect impacts such as increased runoff volumes or Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-33Rev. 0degradation of water quality due to sedimentation. However, potential impacts would be minimized by implementing best management practices such as soil erosion and sediment control measures; runoff detention ponds; provisions to allow infiltration of rainfall; stormwater pollution prevention plans; and SPCC plans. Therefore, surface water impacts associated with facility construction would be SMALL.The City of Stevens Point municipal water supply system would provide all water required for operation of the SHINE facility. A 12 inch water main currently is located along County Highway R, to the northwest of the site, and it is assumed that the city would extend this main to the site when they constructed the public streets that would border the site. This main would be expected to have more than enough capacity to satisfy the needs of the SHINE facility. The facility would have no need to withdraw surface water. Best management practices would continue to be used during facility operation to minimize potential impacts on the drainage ditches that receive rainfall runoff from the site. Wastewater other than uncontaminated runoff would be discharged to the City of Stevens Point sanitary sewer system after being treated as described in Subsection 19.4.4. Wastewater discharges would comply with state and local pretreatment requirements. Therefore, surface water impacts associated with facility operation would be SMALL.Several soil borings drilled at the Stevens Point site in 2011 encountered ground water at a depth of 8 ft. to 11 ft. (2.4 to 3.4 m) below the grade elevation. The depth to ground water observed inside of water wells recorded in the site vicinity varied between 7 ft. and 20 ft. (2.1 and 6.1m) below the grade elevation (WGNHS, 2005). As described in Subsection 19.4.3, the maximum depth of excavation required for the SHINE facility is 39 ft. (11.9m) below grade. Therefore, it is likely that extensive dewatering of excavations would be required during construction. This dewatering probably would be required for a period of several months and could have a noticeable impact on ground water levels in the immediate site vicinity. Therefore, ground water impacts associated with facility construction would be MODERATE.High ground water levels could continue to be a concern after the completion of construction, but it is anticipated that the facility foundations could be designed so as to avoid the need for continued dewatering. Because the facility would not need to withdraw ground water during operation, the only potential impact on ground water would be possible contamination due to a leak or spill of oil or chemicals. The soils found at the Stevens Point site have relatively high hydraulic conductivity, which increases the potential for ground water contamination (UW, 1989). However, oil and chemical storage and handling would be governed by SPCC plans and standard good practices to prevent and contain leaks and spills. Therefore, ground water impacts associated with facility operation would be SMALL.As described above, best management practices and other standard provisions would be used during construction and operation to avoid and minimize impacts on surface water and ground water. The need for continued dewatering during facility operation would be avoided by proper design of foundations. There would be no need for any other water resources impact mitigation measures.19.5.2.1.2.2.6Ecological Resources ImpactsNo significant ecological resources were identified on or in the immediate vicinity of the Stevens Point site. Approximately two-thirds of the site is occupied by a second-growth woodlot dominated by oak and maple species with a few pines and other evergreens. Some evidence of logging was observed along the southern edge of the woodlot during a field reconnaissance visit Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-34Rev. 0to the site. Representative plant species observed within the woodlot are listed in Table 19.5.2-10. The western and southern portions of the site are cultivated cropland, primarily used for growing corn. The edges of these agricultural fields support weedy herbaceous plant species typical of early successional stages. Representative plant species observed within the fields and field edges are listed in Table 19.5.2-10.Wildlife observed at the site included red-tailed hawk, blue jay, common crow, red-bellied woodpecker, white-breasted nuthatch, black-capped chickadee, and various sparrows. None of the plant or animal species observed during field reconnaissance are listed by the USFWS or WDNR as Endangered, Threatened, or of Special Concern.Figure 19.5.2-7 shows a conceptual facility layout, including the area that would be developed with permanent facility structures and the area that would be temporarily disturbed for construction laydown and parking. It can be seen that the permanently developed area occupies less than half of the woodlot, while the temporarily disturbed area is located entirely in the western cropland area.The acreage of natural habitats found within the areas affected by the conceptual facility layout was estimated based on USGS land use/land cover GIS mapping data. Table 19.5.2-9 summarizes the acreages in the natural habitat categories and compares those quantities with the total acreages found within a 5 mi. (8.0 km) radius of the site. It can be seen that the entire site comprises approximately 48.2 ac. (19.5 ha) of deciduous forest, which is less than 1 percent of the deciduous forest found within 5 mi. (8.0 km) of the site. Even if all of the forest on the site was cleared (which could be required for site security purposes), the loss of this habitat would not be expected to have any noticeable ecological impact. The only other natural habitat shown in Table 19.5.2-9 is 1.6 ac. (0.6 ha) of mixed forest.No wetland habitat was observed on or near the site during field reconnaissance, and none is represented in GIS mapping data within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the site boundaries. The nearest wetland habitat in GIS mapping data is a small area located approximately 1.2 mi. (1.9 km) north of the site boundary at its nearest point. This area is separated from the site by U.S. Highway 10, Old Highway 18, a railroad line, and several buildings. It would not be directly or indirectly affected by construction or operation of the SHINE facility.As discussed in Subsection 19.5.2.1.2.2.5, no streams or other surface water bodies have been identified within the boundaries of the Stevens Point site, and the only surface water features identified in close proximity to the site are local drainage ditches. These drainage ditches do not represent significant aquatic ecological habitats. The nearest significant surface water bodies are the Plover River, which at its nearest point is approximately 2.0 mi. (3.2 km) northwest of the site, and the Wisconsin River, which at its nearest point is approximately 3.5 mi. (5.6 km) southwest of the site. Both of these are significant ecological habitats, but neither would be directly or indirectly affected by construction or operation of the SHINE facility.A consultation letter received from the USFWS (2012b) states that the Stevens Point site is within the high potential range of the Karner blue butterfly, a federal Endangered species. The letter recommends conducting a survey for wild lupine, the host plant for the Karner blue butterfly, before proceeding with a project at the site. A survey would be conducted if the Stevens Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-35Rev. 0Point site were to be developed, but at this time there is no indication that either wild lupine or the Karner blue butterfly occurs on the site. A letter documenting an Endangered Resources Re view conducted by t he WDNR (2011b) lists four Endangered, Threatened, or Special Concern species known or likely to occur in the project area. These species and their regulatory status are shown in Table 19.5.2-11. The letter indicates that none of these species are likely to occur on the project site, due to lack of suitable habitat. The letter does not list any actions that need to be taken to comply with state or federal endangered species laws, and it does not list any recommendations.Considering the information presented above, aquatic and terrestrial ecology impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL. The methods used to clear vegetation, control erosion and siltation, and restore temporarily disturbed areas would be selected so as to minimize impacts, as described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.5. No other impact mitigation measures would be required.19.5.2.1.2.2.7Historic and Cultural Resources ImpactsNo properties listed on the NRHP are located on or in the immediate vicinity of the Stevens Point site. The nearest listed property is Nelson Hall, which is approximately 3.8 mi. (6.1 km) northwest of the northwestern corner of the site. This property is located in a densely populated part of the City of Stevens Point, and it is separated from the site by numerous buildings, roads, trees, and other obstructions. Therefore, this property would not be directly or indirectly affected by construction or operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site.The Wisconsin State Archeologist conducted a search of the Wisconsin Historic Preservation Database in order to identify any historic and archeological resources that have been reported in the site vicinity, regardless of whether those resources are listed on the NRHP or not. The database search did not identify any historic or archeological resources that have been reported on the site or within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the site boundaries. The Wisconsin State Archeologist did not express any concerns about potential construction at the site except that Wisconsin law must be followed if human remains are unearthed or if Native American burial mounds or any marked or unmarked burial is suspected to be present. (Broihahn, 2011)Field reconnaissance in the site vicinity identified two features that were not identified in the NRHP or the Wisconsin Historic Preservation Database search, but appeared to possibly have historic significance. These features are described below.A small, unnamed cemetery was observed at the intersection of Count y Highway HH (McDill Avenue) and Burbank Road southeast of the Stevens Point site. The cemetery was enclosed by a fence and locked gated, but several of the headstones appeared to be quite old. The cemetery is approximately 0.9 mi. (1.4 km) from the nearest part of the site boundary, and it is separated from the site by several existing buildings and scattered trees. It would not be directly affected by construction or operation of the SHINE facility, but it might be indirectly affected by the visual impacts of the facility and/or by increased traffic on County Highway HH and Burbank Road (see Subsection 19.5.2.1.2.2.8). If the Stevens Point site were selected for development, the historical significance of the cemetery and potential impacts on it would have to be evaluated in more detail. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-36Rev. 0An old school building was observed on Old Highway 18 northeast of the Stevens Point site. A sign on the building read "Stockton School Dist. No. 1 Est. 1857." The building appeared to be a one-room school that is no longer in use. The building is approximately 0.7 mi. (1.1 km) from the nearest part of the site boundary and is separated from the site by a railroad line and scattered trees. It would not be directly affected by construction or operation of the SHINE facility, but it might be indirectly affected by the visual impacts of the facility and/or by increased traffic on Old Highway 18 (see Subsection 19.5.2.1.2.2.8). If the Stevens Point site were selected for development, the historical significance of the school building and potential impacts on it would have to be evaluated in more detail.Based on the information presented above, it is possible that construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site could indirectly disturb historic resources, but such impacts cannot be positively determined at this time. On the basis of known historic and cultural resources, there would not be significant impacts. If human remains or archeological artifacts were discovered during construction or operation, the procedures outlined for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.6 would be followed. Therefore, cultural resources impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL. There would be no need for impact mitigation measures.19.5.2.1.2.2.8Socioeconomic ImpactsThis subsection evaluates the social and economic impacts that could result from constructing and operating the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site. The evaluation includes the impacts of construction and operation activities and the demands placed by the construction and operation workforces on the site and the surrounding region. As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, the socioeconomic impacts of constructing and operating the SHINE facility at the Janesville site are expected to be largely restricted to Rock County, the county in which the site is located. Socioeconomic impacts in other counties are expected to be minimal and do not require evaluation. It is expected that the socioeconomic impacts of construction and operation at the Stevens Point site would similarly occur primarily in Portage County, the county in which the site is located. Therefore, the following impact evaluation focuses on Portage County. In accordance with the Final ISG Augmenting NUREG-1537, t he evaluation considers potential impacts on housing, public services, public education, tax revenues, and transportation. HousingImpacts on housing could be caused by construction and operation workers moving, either permanently or temporarily, into the region surrounding the project site (Portage County). This influx of workers could decrease the availability of unoccupied housing units and increase the cost to buy or rent housing. The severity of such impacts would depend primarily on the existing availability of unoccupied housing units compared with the number of workers who would move into the area.NUREG-1437 establishes the following criteria for judging the severity of impacts on housing: SMALL - Small and not easily discernible change in housing availability. Increases in rental rates or housing values equal or slightly exceed the statewide inflation rate. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-37Rev. 0MODERATE - Discernible but short-lived reduction in available housing units. Rental rates and housing values rise slightly faster than the inflation rate, but prices realign quickly once new housing units became available or project-related demand diminishes.LARGE - Project-related demand for housing units results in very limited housing availability and increases in rental rates and housing values well above normal inflationary increases in the state.Based on USCB data for 2010, the total number of housing units in Portage County was 30,054, and the number of vacant units was 2240 (USCB, 2012a). As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for construction of the SHINE facility is 420. It is expected that many of these workers would be current residents of Portage Countyand the nearby region, but even if all of the workers moved into the county and required housing, the resulting demand for 420 housing units would represent less than 19 percent of the vacant housing units in the county. It is unlikely that this would result in any discernible change in housing availability or an increase in housing costs. Therefore, the housing impact associated with construction of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL.As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for operation of the SHINE facility is 150. This number is significantly smaller than the estimated number of construction workers. Therefore, the housing impact associated with operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL. Public ServicesPublic services include water supply and waste water treatment facilities; police, fire, and medical services; and social services. Impacts on public services could be caused by construction and operation workers moving into the region surrounding the project site (PortageCounty). This influx of workers and their families could increase the demand for public services, potentially requiring local governments to add facilities, programs, and/or staff.Per NUREG-1437, impacts on public services generally are considered to be SMALL if there is little or no need to add facilities, programs, and/or staff because of the influx of workers, and MODERATE or LARGE if additional facilities, programs, and/or staff are required. USCB estimates that the population of Portage County in 2011 was 70,084, and the average number of people per household was 2.4 (USCB, 2012e). As discussed above, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for construction of the SHINE facility is 420. It is expected that many of these workers would be current residents of Portage County and the nearby region, but even if all of the workers moved into the county with the average household size of 2.4 people, the resulting influx of 1,008 people would increase the population of the county by less than 2 percent. It is unlikely that this small population increase would result in a noticeable increase in the demand for public services or a need to add facilities, programs, and/or staff. Therefore, the public services impact associated with construction of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALLAs discussed above, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for operation of the SHINE facility is 150. This number is significantly smaller than the estimated number of construction workers. Therefore, the public services impact associated with operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-38Rev. 0Public EducationImpacts on public education could be caused by construction and operation workers moving into and bringing school-aged children into the region surrounding the project site (Portage County). This increase in the number of school-aged children could cause crowding of local schools and potentially require school systems to add facilities and/or staff. Per NUREG-1437, impacts on education are considered to be SMALL if the project-related increase in school enrollment represents less than 3 percent of the total school enrollment in affected school systems, MODERATE if 4 to 8 percent, and LARGE if more than 8 percent.Based on WDPI data for 2010, the total public school enrollment in Portage County was 9,528 students (WDPI, 2012). As discussed above, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for construction of the SHINE facility is 420. It is expected that many of these workers would be current residents of Portage County and the nearby region, but if all of the workers moved into the county and brought a school-aged child who attended a public school, the resulting influx of 420 students would increase school enrollment by approximately 4.4 percent. Using the NUREG-1437 guideline, this would indicate a MODERATE impact on education. However, given the conservativeness of the assumption that all construction workers would move into the county, and the fact that the peak construction employment period would last less than 1 year, it is unlikely that the increase in school-aged children would result in noticeable crowding or a need to add facilities or staff. Therefore, the public education impact associated with construction of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALLAs discussed above, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for operation of the SHINE facility is 150. This number is significantly smaller than the estimated number of construction workers. Therefore, the public education impact associated with operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL.TaxesProperty taxes and other taxes paid during construction and operation of the SHINE facility would benefit the state and local jurisdictions that co llect the taxes. Per NUREG-1437, tax impacts are considered SMALL if project-related tax revenues represent less than 10 percent of the total tax revenues of the local taxing jurisdictions, MODERATE if 10 to 20 percent, and LARGE if more than 20 percent.As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, SHINE intends to enter into a TIF agreement with the City of Janesville. This agreement is expected to cover the first 10 years of the NRC license period, which includes the construction period for the SHINE facility. Under this agreement, SHINE expects to pay a total of $635,000 per year in property taxes and payments in lieu of taxes. If the SHINE facility were constructed at the Stevens Point site, it is expected that SHINE would enter into a similar TIF agreement and make similar payments during the construction period. Based on WDOR data for Portage County, the property taxes collected in 2011 were $24,819,000 (WDOR, 2012a). Therefore, even if the entire payment of $635,000 per year were counted toward property taxes, the payments would represent approximately 2.6percent of the annual property tax revenues of Portage County, and the tax impact associated with construction of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would beSMALL. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-39Rev. 0After expiration of the 10-year TIF agreement with the City of Janesville, SHINE expects to pay property taxes of approximately $660,000 per year during the remaining period of operation for the SHINE facility. It is expected that tax payments at the Stevens Point site would be approximately the same, and such payments would represent approximately 2.7 percent of the annual property tax revenues of Portage County. Therefore, the tax impact associated with operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL.TransportationTransportation in the vicinity of the SHINE facility could be affected by the increase in vehicle traffic associated with construction and operation workers commuting to and from the site and the delivery of materials and equipment to the site. The increase in vehicle traffic could cause congestion and delays on local roads. The severity of such impacts would depend primarily on the existing road conditions and traffic volumes on the local roads compared with the expected volume of project-related traffic.As shown in Figure 19.5.2-7, the entrance road for the SHINE facility would connect with a new street that the City of Stevens Point has indicated they would construct along the northern boundary of the site. It is expected that this new street would connect with County Highway R (Eisenhower Road), an existing public road located approximately 1.0 mi. (1.6 km) west of the site, and Burbank Road, an existing public road located approximately 1.5 mi. (2.4 km) east of the site. The City also has indicated that they would construct a new street along the western boundary of the site, between the new street to the north and County Highway HH (McDill Avenue), an existing public road to the south. No other construction or modification of roads or other transportation infrastructure would be required for construction, operation, or decommissioning of the SHINE facility. Interstate-39 provides long-distance access to the site area. The exit nearest to the site is Exit156, which is approximately 1.5 mi. (2.4 km) southwest of the site and connects with County Highway HH. Exit 158, which is approximately 2 mi. (3.2 km) northwest of the site, connects with U.S. Highway 10. Thus, it is expected that most vehicles traveling to the site from outside of the Stevens Point metropolitan area would travel on County Highway HH or U.S. Highway 10, then turn onto County Highway R, and then turn onto the new street to be constructed along the northern boundary of the site. Many vehicles traveling to the site from inside of the metropolitan area probably also would travel on County Highways R and HH, although some might travel on Old Highway 18 or Burbank Road, which are the nearest existing public roads to the north and east of the site, respectively.U.S. Highway 10 is a multi-lane divided highway. County Highway R is an undivided four-lane road with a curbed shoulder. County Highway HH, Old Highway 18, and Burbank Road are two lane roads with minimal paved shoulders. Old Highway 18 and Burbank Road are narrow and do not have painted center stripes.Table 19.5.2-12 provides peak hourly traffic data for the roads in the site area (WDOT, 2011). It can be seen that the traffic volume on these roads varies greatly. Most relevantly, however, the traffic volume on County Highway R in the site area (south of U.S. Highway 10) is around 400 vehicles per hour during the morning peak period and around 700 vehicles per hour during the evening peak period. The traffic volume on County Highway HH is around 350 vehicles per hour during the morning peak period and around 500 vehicles per hour during the evening peak Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-40Rev. 0period. The traffic volume on both Old Highway 18 and Burbank Road is less than 50 vehicles per hour during both the morning and evening peak periods.As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, the maximum number of vehicles expected to travel to and from the site during construction of the SHINE facility is 465 per day. The great majority of these vehicles (approximately 420) would represent commuting construction workers. These vehicles generally would arrive at the site on County Highway R at about the same time each morning and leave on County Highway R at about the same time each evening. Thus, commuting construction workers could roughly double the volume of traffic on County Highway R during the peak morning period. The increase in traffic volumes on other roads in the site vicinity would not be as great but could be significant. Given the low existing traffic volumes and relatively poor road conditions on Old Highway 18 and Burbank Road, any appreciable increase in traffic could be significant for these roads.Considering the nature of the roads in the site vicinity and the increase in traffic volume these roads would experience, it is likely that the peak construction-related traffic would noticeably alter existing transportation conditions (cause noticeable traffic delays) but not be sufficient to destabilize transportation resources. Therefore, the transportation impact associated with project construction would be MODERATE.As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, the maximum number of vehicles expected to travel to and from the site during operation of the SHINE facility is 118 per day. The great majority of these vehicles would represent commuting operation workers, but it is expected that these workers would be divided into three shifts. Thus, the maximum number of vehicles arriving at or departing from the site at any one time would be much less than during the construction period. Therefore, the transportation impact associated with facility operation would be SMALL.In order to alleviate traffic congestion during project construction, mitiga tion measures such as widening or adding turning lanes might be necessary, especially on Old Highway 18 and Burbank Road. Specific mitigation measures would be selected after a detailed evaluation of traffic patterns and potential problem areas.19.5.2.1.2.2.9Human Health Impacts19.5.2.1.2.2.9.1Nonradiological Impacts No unusual existing sources of nonradioactive chemical exposure or effluents have been identified in the vicinity of the Stevens Point site. No operating industrial facilities with environmental monitoring programs have been identified in the site vicinity. A SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be essentially the same as the SHINE facility described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.8.1 with regard to the following factors:*Nonradioactive chemical sources (location, type, strength).
- Nonradioactive liquid, gaseous, and solid waste management and effluent control systems.*Nonradioactive effluents released into the on-site and off-site environment.
- Chemical exposure to the public and on-site workforce.*Physical occupational hazards.*Mitigation measures for nonradiological human health impacts.
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-41Rev. 0Nonradiological chemical sources, wastes, effluents, and occupational hazards associated with the SHINE facility would be strictly controlled to ensure compliance with applicable environmental and occupational regulations and standards as discussed in Subsection 19.4.8.1. Therefore, the nonradiological human health impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL.19.5.2.1.2.2.9.2Radiological Impacts No unusual existing sources of radiation have been identified in the vicinity of the Stevens Point site. The major sources and levels of background radiation exposure at the Stevens Point site are very similar to the sources and levels described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.3.8.2. The physical layout of the Stevens Point site is shown in Figure 19.5.2-7. Radioactive materials would be located in the central part of the production facility building. A SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be essentially the same as the SHINE facility described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.8.2 with regard to the following factors:*Characteristics of radiation sources and expected radioactive effluents.
- Compliance with 10 CFR 20.1301, including calculated radiation dose rates at the site boundary.*Annual radiation dose to the maximally exposed worker.*Mitigation measures to minimize public and occupational exposures to radioactive material.Radiation sources and radioactive effluents would be strictly controlled to ensure compliance with applicable regulations and standards as discussed in Subsection 19.4.8.2. Therefore, the radiological human health impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL.19.5.2.1.2.2.10Waste Management ImpactsNo conditions have been identified for the Stevens Point site that would significantly affect waste management impacts. A SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be essentially the same as the SHINE facility described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.9 with regard to the following factors:*Sources, types, and approximate quantities of solid, hazardous, radioactive, and mixed wastes.*Proposed waste management systems designed to collect, store, and process the waste.*Anticipated waste disposal or waste management plans.*Anticipated waste-minimization plans to minimize the generation of waste.Wastes would be handled, processed, stored, and disposed as discussed in Subsection 19.4.9. Therefore, the waste management impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL.
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-42Rev. 019.5.2.1.2.2.11Waste Management ImpactsPer the Final ISG Augmenting NUREG-1537, the traffic impacts of vehicles associated with the SHINE project are discussed in Subsection 19.5.2.1.2.2.8. This subsection discusses the radiological and other human health impacts of transporting nuclear and non-nuclear materials associated with the project.No conditions have been identified for the Stevens Point site that would significantly affect the impacts of transporting nuclear and non-nuclear materials, including radioactive waste, nonradioactive waste, and medical isotopes. Because the Stevens Point site and the Janesville site are relatively close to each other in comparison with the projected origins and destinations of nuclear and non-nuclear materials, distance-related impacts of transportation would be essentially the same. A SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be essentially the same as the SHINE facility described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.10 with regard to the following factors:*Transportation modes.*Approximate transportation distances.*Treatment and packaging for radioactive and nonradioactive wastes.
- Calculated radiological dose to members of the public and workers from incident-free transportation scenarios.The impact of the transportation of nuclear and non-nuclear materials is discussed in Subsections 19.4.10.1.3 and 19.4.10.2 . Therefore, the transportation impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL.19.5.2.1.2.2.12Postulated Accident ImpactsNo conditions have been identified for the Stevens Point site that would significantly affect the radiological and nonradiological impacts from postulated accidents. A SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be essentially the same as the SHINE facility described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.11 with regard to the following factors:*Credible accidents having a potential for releases into the environment.*Radiological and nonradiological consequences from the postulated accidents.The SHINE facility would be designed, constructed, and operated to ensure that the consequences of postulated accidents would comply with applicable regulations and standards, as discussed in Subsection 19.4.11. Therefore, the postulated accident impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL.19.5.2.1.2.2.13Environmental Justice ImpactsEnvironmental justice issues involve aspects of the project that could disproportionately impact minority or low-income populations. The potential for disproportionate impacts depends primarily on the location of the project facilities in relation to existing minority and low-income populations.Minority and low-income populations within 5 mi. (8 km) of the Stevens Point site were identified based on USCB Census block group data (USCB, 2012c and 2012d). Census block groups with above-average minority and low-income populations were determined by comparing the minority Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-43Rev. 0and poverty populations in each block group to the total population in that block group and to the average minority and poverty populations in the county and state. Where the minority or poverty population in a block group exceeded 50 percent of the total population in that block group, or where the minority or poverty population was found to be at least 20 percentage points greater than the comparable county and/or state averages, the minority or poverty population was defined as "above average." This methodology is consistent with NRC guidance for identification of Environmental Justic e populations (NRC, 2004).Table 19.5.2-13 shows the block groups and census tracts within 5 mi. (8 km) of the Stevens Point site, the percentage of households below the poverty level in each, and the percentage of each minority group, including American Indian and Hispanic populations, in each. The percentage of households below the poverty level, the percentage of each minority group, and aggregate percentage of all minority groups are compared with the average percentage in Portage County and the state of Wisconsin.As shown in Table 19.5.2-13, none of the block groups/census tracts within 5 mi. (8 km) of the Stevens Point site has an above average percentage of any minority groups individually or in the aggregate, but four block groups/census tracts have an above average percentage of households below the poverty level. These block groups/census tracts have 36.4 to 59.5 percent of households below the poverty level, compared with 12.4 percent in Portage County and 11.2percent in the state of Wisconsin. The location of these block groups/census tracts is shown in Figure 19.5.2-9. It can be seen that all of the block groups/census tracts are located west-northwest of the Stevens Point site, with the nearest one being approximately 3.5 mi. (5.6km) from the site. All of the block groups/census tracts are located on the far side of the City of Stevens Point, and all are separated from the site by numerous buildings, roads, trees, and other obstructions. None of the primary transportation routes that would be used to transport workers, materials, or equipment to the Stevens Point site pass through these block groups/
census tracks. Therefore, these populations would not be directly or indirectly affected by construction or operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site.No American Indian reservations or other special communities have been identified within 5 mi. (8 km) of the Stevens Point site. The nearest American Indian reservation is the Winnebago Reservation, which belongs to the Ho-Chunk Nation and is located approximately 20 mi. (32 km) southwest of the site (National Atlas of the United States, 2012; WDNR, 2012b).Based on the information presented above, there is no indication that any minority or low income population would be disproportionately affected during project construction or operation as compared to the effect on the general population. Based on the potential for disproportionate exposure to environmental hazards from the SHINE facility as well as multiple-hazard and cumulative hazard conditions, the human health and environmental effects on minority and low-income populations would not be significantly high or adverse. Therefore, the environmental justice impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-44Rev. 019.5.2.1.2.2.14Cumulative ImpactsPast, present, and reasonably foreseeable future development projects and other actions that could result in cumulative impacts at the Stevens Point site were identified by searching for economic development plans, permit lists, news releases, and similar sources of information. An effort was made to identify all relevant activities conducted, regulated, or approved by a federal agency or non-federal entity within 5 mi. (8 km) of the site. Available information about the projects and other activities identified is provided in Table 19.5.2-14.As shown in Table 19.5.2-14, the projects and other activities located within 5 mi. (8 km) of the Stevens Point site generally are of a relatively small scale and would not be expected to have significant impacts in the same areas affected by the SHINE facility. Construction of a new ethanol plant, as planned by Central Wisconsin Alcohol, Inc. approximately 1 mi. (1.6 km) from the Stevens Point site might have contributed to the land use impacts of the SHINE facility; however, the air construction permit application for this project recently was rejected and it is not clear that the project will proceed. The projects that are proceeding or appear likely to proceed would not be expected to have significant land use impacts. However, some of these projects could produce increases in vehicle traffic and ambient noise that might affect some of the same areas as the SHINE facility. Therefore, the cumulative effects of these pr ojects might contribute to the traffic and noise impacts of the SHINE facility, which are expected to be MODERATE as discussed above.19.5.2.2ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGIES 19.5.2.2.1Identification of Reasonable AlternativesThe SHINE facility uses a new, proprietary technology developed by SHINE in order to domestically produce medical isotopes such as Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has provided support to SHINE and three additional technologies for the domestic production of medical isotopes (NRC, 2011). The DOE conducted a rigorous technical review of proposed technologies for producing Mo-99 domestically before selecting its four cooperative agreement partners. The DOE intentionally chose four distinct technologies to support. Rather than repeat this selection process for the purpose of this section, the three other DOE cooperative agreement partner technologies were selected as the alternative technologies to be considered in this section.The three technologies considered were:*Linear accelerator-based technology (for production of Mo-99 only).*Neutron capture using existing power reactors (for production of Mo-99 only).*Low enriched uranium (LEU) aqueous homogenous reactors.Each of these technologies were evaluated to determine if they could reasonably be implemented at the Janesville site. While both an aqueous homogeneous reactor and linear accelerator facility could concievably be built at the SHINE site, there is no power reactor at the site. As a result, neutron capture in an existing power reactor was considered unreasonable for the purpose of this section and eliminated from the list.The two remaining technologies are considered reasonable alternatives to the SHINE technology for the Janesville site and are evaluated in the following subsections. However, as noted below, Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-45Rev. 0the linear accelerator-based approach is not able to produce medical isotopes other than Mo-99, and therefore, does not address the need for domestic SHINE as effectively as the SHINE technology.19.5.2.2.2Evaluation of Reasonable AlternativesThe two alternative technologies evaluated are as follows:*Linear accelerator-based approach (for production of Mo-99 only).*Low enriched uranium (LEU) aqueous homogeneous reactor approach.The following subsections describe these alternative technologies in more detail and evaluate the major environmental impacts associated with construction and operation of the technologies at the SHINE site. Cumulative impacts and potential impact mitigation measures would be largely determined by the project site conditions, and therefore, would be the same as described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.13.19.5.2.2.2.1Linear Accelerator Approach (Production of Mo-99 Only)19.5.2.2.2.1.1DescriptionThis technology uses multiple linear accelerators to produce Mo-99. The linear accelerator accelerates electrons that collide with a metal target, producing extremely intense high-energy photons. The high energy photons irradiate a target made of molybdenum-100 (Mo-100), producing Mo-99 (CLS, 2012). The Mo-99 is shipped to pharmacies for TechneGenŽ processing and Tc-99m generation. The design allows for increasing production when required by demand.19.5.2.2.2.1.2Land Use and Visual Resources ImpactsThe linear accelerator SHINE facility for this technology is 77,000 square (sq.) ft. (7200 sq. m) in size and requires an approximately 33 ac. site (13.4 ha) (DOE, 2012). The size of the facility is similar to the size of the SHINE facility, and it would be expected to have similar impacts on land use and visual resources (see Subsection 19.4.1). Therefore, the land use and visual impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.1.3Air Quality and Noise ImpactsConstruction activities associated with the proposed facility would generate air pollutant emissions from site-disturbing activities, such as grading, filling, compacting, trenching, and operation of construction equipment. The maximum annual greenhouse gas emissions would be about 0.037 percent of Wisconsin's 2009 carbon dioxide emissions (DOE, 2012). The proposed facility would produce air emissions from operation of the building's heating system. Process emissions would not be expected, but the use of chemicals used to dissolve Mo-99 targets and the resulting evaporation could result in small emissions. Operations emissions under the proposed project would not be expected to (1) cause or contribute to a violation of any Federal or State ambient air quality standard; (2) expose sensitive receptors to substantially increased pollutant concentrations; or (3) exceed any evaluation criteria established by a State implementation plan. Operation of the facility would also result in an increase in vehicular emissions and noise due to shipping radioisotopes and operating and maintaining the Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-46Rev. 0facility. Noise would stem from the operation of linear accelerator and chemical processing equipment. While operations are likely to produce considerable noise, the noise would be contained within the production facility and would have no impact on the surrounding ambient noise levels. Employees working in this environment would follow best management practices, such as the use of hearing protection equipment, as necessary to limit exposure above the permissible levels defined by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (DOE, 2012). Therefore, the air quality and noise impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.1.4Geology, Soils, and Seismology ImpactsThe linear accelerator SHINE facility would be designed to withstand the same seismic and geologic hazards as the SHINE facility. Construction of the linear accelerator SHINE facility would require some excavation and the use of some geologic resources for fill material. No information on the design of the linear accelerator SHINE facility is available except the size, but the need for excavation and geologic resources should be similar to those described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.3. Therefore, the geology, soils, and seismology impacts during construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.1.5Water Resources ImpactsConstruction of the proposed facility and associated parking areas and roadways would likely involve conversion of less than 2 hectares (5 acres) of the property to impervious surface. This would result in a slight increase in potential runoff from the project site compared with the site's undeveloped state. Facility operations would not be expected to require di rect withdrawals of groundwater, as all required water would be obtained from municipal supplies (DOE, 2012). The water resource impacts would be similar to those described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.4. Therefore, the water resource impacts during construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.1.6Ecological Resources ImpactSince the linear accelerator SHINE facility is similar in size to the SHINE facility, the ecological resource impacts would be similar to those described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.5. Therefore, the ecological impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.1.7Historic and Cultural Resources Impacts Since the linear accelerator SHINE facility is similar in size to the SHINE facility, the historical and cultural resource impacts would be similar to those described for the SHINE facility discussed in Subsection 19.4.6. Therefore, the historical and cultural resource impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.1.8Socioeconomic ImpactsConstruction of the linear accelerator SHINE facility would have a positive socioeconomic impact related to employment and tax revenues. Operation of the facility would create 150 jobs (HI, 2011) as well as provide additional tax revenues and alleviate shortages of medical isotopes. These beneficial impacts, as well as potential adverse impacts on public services and transportation, would be similar to those described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.7. Therefore, the socioeconomic impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-47Rev. 019.5.2.2.2.1.9Human Health ImpactsConstruction would entail potential hazards to workers typical of any construction site. Normal construction safety practices would be employed to promote worker safety and reduce the likelihood of worker injury during construction. Nonetheless, construction accidents could occur. Air emissions from the facility have the potential to contain radioactive material as a result of the accelerator operations and the dissolution and packaging of radioactive materials in the hot cells. However, the facility design and operation would be intended to control the amount of radioactive material released to a negligible amount. Liquid waste generated during operations would be collected, temporarily stored on-site, and sent off-site for treatment and disposal. The proposed facility would not release any radioactive material through wastewater. No public dose from air emissions or wastewater is expected. Although radiological emissions would not be expected, if any emissions were to occur, impacts on the public would be negligible (DOE, 2012).The potential sources of exposure for the workers include the activities associated with the linear accelerator irradiation of the Mo-100 targets, transfer of irradiated material into the hot cells, packaging and shipment of the Mo-99 product, and preparation of any radioactive waste for disposal. The Mo-99 production facility design and operation would include several features to limit worker dose. Only a fraction of the workers at the Mo-99 production facility would be expected to receive any radiation dose; individual worker doses would not exceed the 5-rem-per-year regulatory limit (DOE, 2012). The human health impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.1.10Waste Management ImpactsExcavation of the subgrade portion of the facility would generate up to 23,000 cubic meters (30,000 cubic yards) of soil/rock that would be disposed of off-site if not used for on-site grading. The soil/rock material would be recycled/reused as construction fill for other construction or grading purposes, if the material properties are acceptable. Construction activities would generate about 160 metric tons (175 tons) of solid waste in the form of wood, metal, concrete, or other miscellaneous construction debris. Construction waste would be recycled to the extent practicable or disposed of at an appropriate licensed landfill or waste management facility (DOE,2012). Operation of this type of facility would be expected to result in waste generation during the process of bombarding targets and preparing the Mo-99 product for shipment. About 10.4 cubic meters (14cubic yards) of low-level radioactive waste, 2.4 cubic meters (3.1 cubic yards) of hazardous waste, and 45 cubic meters (59 cubic yards) of solid waste would be generated annually. No mixed low-level radioactive waste generation would be expected. Existing commercial or municipal treatment and disposal facilities would be able to accommodate all projected quantities of waste generated by the proposed facility (DOE, 2012).No process-water discharges would be expected. Sanitary waste from the facility would be discharged to the sanitary sewer system; the quantity of waste, primarily from personnel water use, would be a small addition to the load on the local sewer system (DOE, 2012). The waste management impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-48Rev. 019.5.2.2.2.1.11Transportation ImpactsLow-level radioactive waste would be shipped by truck and/or rail to waste disposal facilities, and Mo-99 would be shipped by air for processing. The transportation impacts would be similar or less (since there would be no fission product wastes) than those for the SHINE facility discussed in Subsection 19.4.10. Therefore, the transportation impacts would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.1.12Postulated Accidents ImpactsA range of accidents involving radioactive Mo-99 or chemicals to be used in the process was postulated. Risks to the public from most postulated accidents would be small. Impacts of extremely unlikely severe accidents, such as building collapse from an earthquake or explosion, could extend to members of the public. A severe accident causing release of the entire helium inventory (from the linear accelerator target-cooling system) could result in dispersion of hazardous concentrations to a distance of about 85 meters (280 feet) from the building; the distance from the building to the site boundary is about 20 meters (66 feet). A severe accident involving direct exposure to a freshly irradiated molybdenum target would result in a risk of a latent cancer fatality of 7 x 10 -4 (1 chance in 1,400) to someone exposed at the site boundary for an hour. Although considered extremely unlikely, an intentional destructive act involving release of a significant portion of a freshly-irradiated target would result in a risk of a latent cancer fatality of 8 x 10 -5 to 3x 10-4 (1 chance in 3,000 to 13,000) to a person at the site boundary (DOE, 2012). The environmental impact of postulated accidents would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.1.13Environmental Justice ImpactsEnvironmental justice impacts are largely dependent on the site location, and since the alternative technologies are assumed to be constructed at the SHINE site, the impacts would be similar to those described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.12. Given that the impacts in all environmental resource areas discussed above would be SMALL, the environmental justice impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.2Low Enriched Uranium Aqueous Homogeneous Reactor Approach (Production of Mo-99, I-131 and Xe-133)19.5.2.2.2.2.1DescriptionThis process consists of an array of aqueous homogeneous reactors (AHR) to produce Mo-99, I-131 and Xe-133. The AHR uses an LEU uranyl nitrate solution for fuel and target material. Once produced, these isotopes are extracted and sent for processing, distribution to pharmacies, and Tc-99m generation. This technology has the potential to supply more than 50 percent of the US demand for Mo-99 (B&W TSG, 2009a).The facility consists of a small number of AHR modules, each with a generating capacity of 200 to 240 kilowatt (kW), less than 1 MW total (B&W TSG, 2009b). The use of LEU uranyl nitrate solution for both reactor fuel and target material allows Mo-99 to be produced in the entire reactor solution. The design reduces waste production and proliferation issues, and allows for a large negative coefficient of reactivity, passive safety factor, operating temperature of 80 degrees Celsius (°C) (176°F [degrees Fahrenheit]), and atmospheric operating pressure (B&W TSG, 2009c). The low power and small footprint of the AHR modules allows for additional facilities Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-49Rev. 0and/or increased production at the first facility. To produce Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133, LEU is dissolved in nitric acid and brought to criticality. To extract these isotopes, the solution is transferred from the reactor to a vent tank. After degassing, the solution is transferred to an extraction column where it undergoes nitric acid wash, water wash, and sodium hydroxide elution processes. The processed solution is cleaned up and returned to the reactor (B&W TSG, 2009b; B&W TSG, 2009c). 19.5.2.2.2.2.2Land Use and Visual Resources ImpactsThere is no information on the size of this type of facility. It is anticipated the size would be similar to the SHINE facility (see Subsection 19.4.1) (B&W TSG, 2009c). Therefore, the land use and visual resource impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.2.3Air Quality and Noise Impacts Construction of the facility results in an increase in dust and vehicular emissions and noise. Operation of the facility results in an increase in vehicular emissions and noise due to shipping radioisotopes and operating and maintaining the facility. The air quality and noise impacts would be similar to those described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.2. Therefore, the air quality and noise impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.2.4Geology, Soils, and Seismology ImpactsThe facility would be designed to withstand the same seismic and geologic hazards as the SHINE facility. Construction of the facility would require some excavation and the use of some geologic resources for fill material. No information on the design of the facility is available, but the need for excavation and geologic resources should be similar to those described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.3. Therefore, the geology, soils, and seismology impacts during construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.2.5Water Resources ImpactsThere is no information on the water requirements for this type of facility. However, the water requirements are anticipated to be greater than that of the SHINE facility (see Subsection 19.4.4) (B&W TSG, 2009c). However, the water resource impacts of construction and operation would likely be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.2.6Ecological Resources Impact There is no information on the size of this type of facility. However, the size is likely to be similar to the SHINE facility (B&W TSG, 2009c). Therefore, the ecological resource impacts of construction and operation would be similar to those described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.5 and the impacts would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.2.7Historic and Cultural Resources ImpactsThere is no information on the size of this type of facility. However, the size is likely to be similar to the SHINE facility (B&W TSG, 2009c). Therefore, the historic and cultural resource impacts of construction and operation would be similar to those described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.6 and the impacts would be SMALL. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-50Rev. 019.5.2.2.2.2.8Socioeconomic ImpactsConstruction of the facility would have a positive socioeconomic impact related to employment and tax revenues. While there is no information on the number of jobs that would be created by operating this type of facility, it is likely to be similar to the operation of the SHINE facility. Operation also would provide additional tax revenues and alleviate shortages of medical isotopes. These beneficial impacts, as well as potential adverse impacts on public services and transportation, would be similar to those described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.7. Therefore, the socioeconomic impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.2.9Human Health ImpactsThere is no information available on this type of facility to directly assess the human health impacts of its construction and operation. However, the radiological and nonradiological human health impacts of this type of facility (B&W TSG, 2009b) is likely to be greater than those of the SHINE facility (see Subsection 19.4.8). However, the human health impacts of construction and operation are likely to be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.2.10Waste Management ImpactsThere is no information available on this type of facility to directly assess the radiological and nonradiological waste management impacts of its construction and operation. However, given the similar Mo-99 production levels, the waste production is anticipated to be similar to the SHINE facility (see Subsection 19.4.9). Therefore, the waste management impacts of construction and operation are likely to be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.2.11Transportation ImpactsThere is no information available on this type of facility to directly assess transportation impacts. However, given the similar Mo-99 production levels, the impacts of transporting spent fuel and radioactive waste from this type of facility is anticipated to be similar to those of the SHINE facility (see Subsection 19.4.10). Transportation impacts due to the shipment of Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133 to processing facilities would be similar to the impact of shipping isotopes from the SHINE facility as described in Subsection 19.4.10. Therefore, environmental impacts due to transportation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.2.12Postulated Accidents ImpactsThere is no information available on this type of facility to directly assess the impacts of postulated accidents. However, the postulated accident impacts of this type of facility are anticipated to be greater than those of the SHINE facility (see Subsection 19.4.11). Regardless, the environmental impact of postulated accidents would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.2.13Environmental Justice Impacts Environmental justice impacts are largely dependent on the site location, and since the alternative technologies are assumed to be constructed at the SHINE site, the impacts would be similar to those described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.12. Given that the impacts in all environmental resource areas discussed above would be SMALL, the environmental justice impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-51Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-1 Sensitive Features in the Chippewa Falls Site Area Measured fromSite NearestBoundaryMeasured fromCenter PointNearest Residence 10.07 mi. (0.12 km)0.40 mi.(0.65 km)Nearest Residence 20.12 mi. (0.19 km)0.39 mi.(0.63 km)Monkey Business Child Care Center0.21 mi. (0.34 km)0.40 mi.(0.65 km)Grace Adult Day Services0.49 mi. (0.79 km)0.64 mi.(1.04 km)Oral & Maxillofacial Associates0.58 mi. (0.93 km)0.74 mi.(1.19 km)Lakeland College and Chippewa Valley Technical College 0.56 mi.(0.90 km)0.70 mi.(1.13 km)Family Health Associates0.55 mi. (0.89 km)0.70 mi.(1.13 km)Chippewa Valley Eye Clinic0.54 mi (0.86 km)0.69 mi.(1.12 km)Wissota Health and Regional Vent Center0.69 (1.12 km)0.88 mi.(1.41 km)Marshfield Clinic Chippewa Falls Center0.64 mi. (1.03 km)0.84 mi.(1.35 km)St. Joseph's Hospital0.65 mi. (1.05 km)0.82 mi.(1.32 km)Wissota Sprints Assisted Living Center0.63 mi. (1.01 km)0.81 mi.(1.31 km)Marshfield Clinic Chippewa Falls Dental
Center0.69 mi.(1.11 km)0.93 mi.(1.50 km)Kids USA Learning Center0.81 mi. (1.30 km)1.00 mi.(1.60 km)Sunrise Family Care Clinic0.77 mi. (1.24 km)0.95 mi.(1.53 km)Irvine Park (nearest public park)1.45 mi. (2.34 km)1.79 mi.(2.89 km)Notre Dame Church and Goldsmith Chapel (nearest listed historical site) 1.85 mi.(2.98 km)2.11 mi.(3.40 km)Parkview Elementary School (nearest public school) 1.50 mi.(2.41 km)1.79 mi.(2.88 km) Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-52Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-2 Potential Land Use and Natural Habitat Impacts at the Chippewa Falls Site (USGS, 2006) Land Use CategoryPermanently Developed AreaTemporarilyDisturbed AreaRemaining Area within Site BoundariesTotal Within Site BoundariesTotal Witin 5-Mile RadiusPercentage of 5-MileRadius within Site BoundariesDeveloped land2.6 ac.(1.0 ha)0.01 ac.(0.004 ha)6.5 ac.(2.6 ha)9.1 ac.(3.7 ha)8,966.4 ac.(3,628.6 ha)0.10%Cultivated Crops14.9 ac.(6.0 ha)13.7 ac.(5.5 ha)37.9 ac.(15.4 ha)66.5 ac.(26.9 ha)19,133.0 ac.(7,742.9 ha)0.35%Pasture/Hay0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)3,237.0 ac.(1,310.0 ha)0.0%Grassland/Herbaceous0 ac. (0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)895.6 ac.(362.4 ha)0.0%Shrub/Scrub0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)568.9 ac.(230.2 ha)0.0%Deciduous Forest0.5 ac.(0.2 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0.3 ac.(0.1 ha)0.8 ac.(0.3 ha)7,301.3 ac.(2,954.7 ha)0.01%Evergreen Forest0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)1,116.1 ac.(451.7 ha)0.0%Mixed Forest0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)495.9 ac.(200.7 ha)0.0%Woody Wetlands0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)1,268.9 ac.(513.5 ha)0.0%Emergent, HerbaceousWetlands0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)732.8 ac.(296.5 ha)0.0%Open Water0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)6,549.0 ac.(2,650.3 ha)0.0%Barren Land (Rock/Sand/Clay)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0.0%Totals17.9 ac.(7.3 ha)13.7 ac.(5.5 ha)44.8 ac.(18.1 ha)76.4 ac.(30.9 ha)50,264.9 ac.(20,341.5 ha)0.15% Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-53Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-3 Plant Species Oberved at the Chippewa Falls Site(Sheet 1 of 2)Site LocaleScientific Name Common NameCultivated FieldEdgesBromus inermissmooth brome Cirsium vulgare thistleFestuca elatior fescuePicea sp. (treeline to north)sprucePinus resinosa (treeline to north)red pinePoa pratensisKentucky bluegrassPopulus deltoides (treeline to north)cottonwoodRubus sp. (treeline to north) blackberrySetaria glaucafoxtail grassSolidago sp. (treeline to north)goldenrod Symphyotrichum sp. asterTaraxicum officinalecommon dandelionTrifolium repenswhite cloverWetland Community Eleocharis sp.spikerushPhalaris arundinaceareed canary grass Rumex sp. dockScirpus cyperinus woolgrassTypha latifoliacommon cattail Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-54Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-3 Plant Species Oberved at the Chippewa Falls Site(Sheet 2 of 2)Site LocaleScientific Name Common NameOldfield/Railroad ROWAmbrosia artemisiifoliacommon ragweedAmorpha canescensleadplantAndropogon gerardiibig bluestemAristida sp.three-awned grassAsclepias syriacacommon milkweedAster nove-angliaeNew England aster Bromus inermissmooth bromeCornus speciesdogwood speciesFestuca elatior fescueLespedeza captitataprairie bush cloverMonarda fistulosawild bergamotPoa pratensisKentucky bluegrassPopulus deltoidescottonwoodPopulus tremuloides trembling aspenRubus flagellarusdewberryRubus sp. blackberryRudbeckia hirtablack-eyed susanSchizachyrium scoparium little bluestemSetaria glaucafoxtail grassSolidago sp. goldenrod Symphyotrichum sp. aster Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-55Rev. 0a)Species designated by the WDNR in Endangered Resources Review (WDNR, 2011a). b)Global ranking system ranging from G1: critically imperiled globally to G5: common, widespread, and abundant as described in the Wisconsin Natural Heritage Working List. c)State ranking system ranging from S1: critically imperiled in Wisconsin to S5: demonstrably secure in Wisconsin as described in the Wisconsin Natural Heritage Working List. d)Bald eagles are not expected to be present on project site due to lack of suitable habitat; however, as a result of Federal protection under the Bald & Golden Eagle Protection Act and Migratory Bird Act, Wisconsin DNR must be contacted if individuals begin to nest in or near sit e.e)Classification signifying an issue with abundance or distribution to increase awareness before species becomes threatened or endangered. Species not legally protected by state or federal endangered species laws, but may be protected by other laws, policies, or permitting processes requiring or strongly encouraging protection of these resources. f)The term "threatened" is defined in the Endangered Species Act as "any species which is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range". Table 19.5.2-4 Endangered Resources Known or Likely to Occur in the Chippewa Falls Site Area (a)Scientific NameCommon NameState StatusGlobal Rank (b)State Rank (c)BirdsHaliaeetus IeucocephalusBald eagle (d)Special Concern (Fully Protected) (e)G5S4 (breeding);S4 (non-breeding)FishAcipenser fulvescens lake sturgeonSpecial Concern (Regulated by harvest seasons) (e)G3; G4S3Moxostoma valenciennesigreater redhorseThreatened (f)G4S3InsectsOphiogomphus smithisand snaketailSpecial Concern (No regulations) (e)G2; G3S3 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-56Rev. 0a)Traffic count for the hour between 00:00 and 09:59 hours with the greatest traffic volume.b)Traffic count for the hour between 10:00 and 14:59 hours with the greatest traffic volume.c)Traffic count for the hour between 15:00 and 23:59 hours with the greatest traffic volume.Table 19.5.2-5 Annual Average Hourly Traffic Counts in the Chippewa Falls Site AreaAnnual Average Hourly Traffic (WDOT, 2011) AM Peak (a)Middday Peak (b)PM Peak (c)Daily TotalCounty Highway S between WI-124 and 149th Street4302984054,573County Highway S west of WI-1783382223623,831WI-178 between Lake View and Chippewa Drive2242052512,7771st Avenue east of State Street258N/A3843,253 Commerce Parkway between Bergman and Warren Street3844124505,211County Highway I between Scheidler Road an d WI-1784844555715,643WI-178 between County Highway I and Chippewa River7046047838,283 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-57Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-6 Minority and Poverty Populations within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Chippewa Falls Site (a)(Sheet 1 of 2)Minority Population (%)Block Group and TractHouseholdsLiving BelowPoverty LevelBlack orAfricanAmericanAmericanIndian andAlaska NativeAsianNative Hawaiianand Other PacificIslander alone SomeOtherRace aloneTwo or More RacesHispanicor LatinoAggregateBlock Group 1, Census Tract 10212.4%0.5%0.6%1.3%0.0%0.1%0.5%1.3%4.3%Block Group 2, Census Tract 1022.1%0.6%0.3%2.6%0.0%0.1%1.0%2.4%7.0%Block Group 3, Census Tract 1028.8%0.4%0.6%0.8%0.0%0.1%1.2%1.7%4.7%Block Group 1, Census Tract 10336.5%1.6%0.5%0.1%0.0%0.0%1.4%2.2%5.9%Block Group 2, Census Tract 10314.5%0.0%0.6%0.1%0.1%0.3%1.1%1.8%4.0%Block Group 3, Census Tract 10310.4%0.7%0.5%0.5%0.0%0.0%1.1%0.5%3.3%Block Group 4, Census Tract 10325.0%0.6%0.7%0.1%0.0%0.0%1.0%1.4%3.8%Block Group 5, Census Tract 1033.1%0.3%0.3%1.1%0.0%0.0%0.9%1.1%3.7%Block Group 6, Census Tract 1036.0%0.1%0.2%2.0%0.0%0.0%0.7%2.6%5.6%Block Group 1, Census Tract 1047.0%0.1%0.3%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.9%2.2%Block Group 3, Census Tract 1041.0%0.4%0.4%4.2%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.7%5.9%Block Group 1, Census Tract 1058.4%0.9%0.0%0.5%0.0%0.0%0.6%1.8%3.9%Block Group 2, Census Tract 10518.3%1.2%0.1%1.3%0.1%0.0%2.0%1.0%5.7%Block Group 3, Census Tract 1057.0%0.6%1.2%0.6%0.0%0.0%2.4%0.7%5.4%Block Group 4, Census Tract 10516.5%6.4%1.5%1.1%0.0%0.0%1.2%2.2%12.4%Block Group 1, Census Tract 1075.9%0.4%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%1.0%0.7%2.6%Block Group 2, Census Tract 1076.5%0.3%0.1%0.7%0.0%0.0%0.8%0.8%2.8%Block Group 3, Census Tract 10713.7%0.5%0.4%1.0%0.0%0.0%1.2%1.1%4.2%Block Group 3, Census Tract 1081.0%0.1%1.1%0.9%0.0%0.0%1.0%0.4%3.5%Block Group 4, Census Tract 1102.3%0.1%0.1%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.9%0.5%2.0%Block Group 5, Census Tract 1105.4%0.6%0.1%0.3%0.0%0.1%1.1%0.4%2.6%Block Group 4, Census Tract 1121.9%0.1%0.0%0.2%0.0%0.0%0.2%0.5%1.0% Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-58Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-6 Minority and Poverty Populations within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Chippewa Falls Site (a)(Sheet 2 of 2)a)Shaded cells indicate "Above Average Populations" (USCB, 2012c).Minority Population (%)Block Group and TractHouseholdsLiving BelowPoverty LevelBlack orAfricanAmericanAmericanIndian andAlaska NativeAsianNative Hawaiianand Other PacificIslander alone SomeOther RacealoneTwo orMore RacesHispanicor LatinoAggregateTotal Area, 5 Mi. Radius9.5%0.9%0.5%1.0%0.0%0.0%1.0%1.2%4.6%Chippewa County10.9%1.5%0.4%1.2%0.0%0.0%0.9%1.3%5.4%State of Wisconsin11.2%6.2%0.9%2.3%0.0%0.1%1.4%5.9%16.7% Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-59Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-7 Potentially Significant Projects Identified within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Cippewa Falls Site Vicinity(Sheet 1 of 2)Project/Company NameSummary of ProjectLocationDistancefrom SiteStatusReferenceEOG Resources Inc.Silica sand processing plant.Chippewa Falls 1 mi. (1.6 km)Operating, achieved full operation in May 2012.The Chippewa Herald, 2012EOG Resources, 2012Wissota Green Housing DevelopmentBuilding of a traditional neighborhood, complete with neighborhood parks and a home owners association park with access to Lake Wissota. (100 lots, with varying lot sizes).Chippewa Falls1 mi. (1.6 km)Conditional Use Permit approved in 2005; developer went bankrupt in 2009; land scheduled to be sold to continue development individually.The Chippewa Herald, 2009CN Railway Intermodal Train-Truck ProjectRail to truck transfer facility; future expansion that will allow an estimated 400 trucks per week. Chippewa Falls2 mi. (3.2 km)Operating, with plans for expansion.Rubenzer, 2011Chippewa Falls Irvine Park and ZooUpdates to current exhibits. Next step is to design the primate/small animal building and visitor/artifact center.Chippewa Falls2 mi. (3.2 km)Approved by Chippewa Falls Park Board in December 2011; progress will not occur until fundraising completed.Vetter, 2012Indianhead Plating, Inc.Construction of a hard chrome plating tank.Chippewa Falls2 mi. (3.2 km)Applied for air construction permit in December 2011, waiting for approval.WDNR, 2012cSpectrum Industries Construction of burn off oven for paint hangers.Chippewa Falls2 mi. (3.2 km)Air construction permit issued in February 2011.WDNR, 2012dGreat Northern Corporation Construction of printers.Chippewa Falls2 mi. (3.2 km)Air construction permit issued in March 2011.WDNR, 2012eDairyland Power Cooperative -Seven Mile Creek Landfill Gas to Renewable Energy StationModifications to an existing internal combustion engine and existing landfill gas to energy generating facility.Eau Claire 2 mi. (3.2 km)Air construction permit issued in March 2011.WDNR, 2012f Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-60Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-7 Potentially Significant Projects Identified within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Cippewa Falls Site Vicinity(Sheet 2 of 2)Project/Company NameSummary of ProjectLocationDistancefrom SiteStatusReferenceWRR Environmental Services Company, Inc.Construction of tanks Q and R and modifications to the F-V (Full - Vacuum) Fractionation Distillation Column.Eau Claire 4 mi. (6.4 km)Air construction permit issued in February 2011.WDNR, 2012gWheaton Generating Station(430 MW maximum, fuel oil)Operating power plant with potential air pollution control projects for compliance with future regulatory requirements.Chippewa County5 mi. (8.0 km)Operating, with possible addition of air pollution control equipment in the
future.ThinkResources, Inc. 2008Elk Mound Generating
Station (71 MW, Combustion Turbines )Operating power plant with potential air pollution control projects for compliance with future regulatory requirements.Chippewa County5 mi. (8.0 km)Operating, with possible addition of air pollution control equipment in the future.McCarthy, 2011USEPA, 2012cEDI Aftermarket Services FacilityAdditional facility with new machining/ grinding capabilities for flat die rework.Chippewa Falls5 mi. (8.0 km)Scheduled to finish by October 2012.EDI, 2011 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-61Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-8 Sensitive Features in the Stevens Point Site Area Measured fromSite Nearest BoundaryMeasured from Center PointNearest Residence 10.20 mi.(0.33 km) 0.39 mi.(0.63 km)Nearest Residence 20.21 mi.(0.34 km) 0.41 mi.(0.65 km)Little Scholars Child Center and Preschool0.60 mi.(0.97 km) 0.83 mi.(1.34 km)Children's Discovery Center (day care)0.66 mi. (1.06 km) 0.85 mi.(1.37 km)Stockton School (potential historical site)0.69 mi.(1.12 km) 0.92 mi.(1.48 km)Conifer Park (city park)0.78 mi.(1.26 km) 1.03 mi.(1.67 km)Little Scholars Beginnings (day care)0.74 mi. (1.19 km) 0.93 mi.(1.50 km)Medical Office Building0.89 mi.(1.43 km)1.11 mi.(1.79 km)Unnamed Cemetery (potential historical site)0.85 mi.(1.37 km) 1.10 mi.(1.78 km)Oakview Dental Center0.83 mi.(1.34 km) 1.04 mi.(1.68 km)Aspirus Stevens Point Medical Clinic0.98 mi.(1.58 km) 1.21 mi.(1.95 km)Bannach Elementary School (nearest public school)1.53 mi.(2.46 km) 1.86 mi.(2.99 km)Saint Michael's Hospital (nearest hospital)3.54 mi.(5.69 km) 3.77 mi.(6.07 km)Nelson Hall (nearest listed historical site)3.54 mi.(5.69 km) 3.74 mi.(6.01 km) Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-62Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-9 Potential Land Use and Natural Habitat Impacts at the Stevens Point Site (USGS, 2006)Land Use CategoryPermanentlyDeveloped AreaTemporarilyDisturbed Area Remaining Areawithin Site BoundariesTotal WithinSite BoundariesTotal Within 5-Mile RadiusPercentage of 5-MileRadius within Site BoundariesDeveloped land 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)13,555.3 ac. (5,485.6 ha) 0.0%Cultivated Crops3.6 ac.(1.4 ha)13.6 ac.(5.5 ha)13.4 ac.(5.4 ha)30.6 ac.(12.4 ha)18,062.4 ac. (7,309.6 ha)0.17%Pasture/Hay 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)3,616.6 ac. (1,463.6 ha) 0.0%Grassland/Herbaceous 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)262.9 ac.(106.4 ha) 0.0%Shrub/Scrub 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)50.8 ac.(20.6 ha) 0.0%Deciduous Forest13.9 ac.(5.6 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)34.3 ac.(13.9 ha) 48.2 ac.(19.5 ha)7,537.7 ac. (3,050.4 ha)0.64%Evergreen Forest 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)1,566.5 ac.(633.9 ha) 0.0%Mixed Forest 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)1.6 ac.(0.6 ha)1.6 ac.(0.6 ha)935.2 ac.(378.4 ha)0.17%Woody Wetlands 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)2,627.1 ac. (1,063.2 ha) 0.0%Emergent, Herbaceous Wetlands 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)814.9 ac.(329.8 ha) 0.0%Open Water 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)1,126.8 ac.(456.0 ha) 0.0%Barren Land (Rock/ Sand/Clay) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)108.5 ac.(43.9 ha) 0.0%Totals 17.4 ac.(7.1 ha) 13.6 ac.(5.5 ha) 49.3 ac.(20.0 ha) 80.4 ac.(32.5 ha)50,264.9 ac.(20,341.5 ha)0.16% Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-63Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-10 Plant Species Observed at the Stevens Point Site(Sheet 1 of 2)Site LocaleScientific NameCommon Name Forested AreaAbies balsameabalsam firAcer saccharum sugar maple Carex sp. sedgeOstrya virginianahop hornbeamPinus strobuswhite pinePinus sylvestris scotch pinePrunus serotinablack cherryQuercus alba white oakQuercus macrocarpabur oakQuercus rubrared oakQuercus speciesother oak species Ribes sp.gooseberry Rubus sp. blackberry Smilax sp.green briarTilia americana American basswoodViburnum sp.viburnum Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-64Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-10 Plant Species Observed at the Stevens Point Site(Sheet 2 of 2)Site LocaleScientific NameCommon NameCultivated Field EdgesAmbrosia artemisiifoliacommon ragweedAmorpha canescensleadplantBromus inermissmooth bromeConyza canadensishorseweedEuthamia graminifoliaflattop goldenrodPanicum sp.panic grassPotentilla quinquefoliacreeping cinquefoilRubus flagellarusdewberrySetaria glaucafoxtail grass Solidago sp.goldenrod Symphyotrichum sp. aster Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-65Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-11 Endangered Resources Known or Likely to Occur in the Stevens Point Site Area (a)a)Species designated by the WDNR in Endangered Resources Review (WDNR, 2011b). b)Global ranking system ranging from G1: critically imperiled globally to G5: common, widespread, and abundant according to the Wisconsin Natural Heritage Working List. c)State ranking system ranging from S1: critically imperiled in Wisconsin to S5: demonstrably secure in Wisconsin according to the Wisconsin Natural Heritage Working List. d)Classification signifying an issue with abundance or distribution to increase awareness before species becomes threatened or endangered. Species not legally protected by state or federal endangered species laws, but may be protected by other laws, policies, or permitting processes requiring or strongly encouraging protection of these resources. e)The term "threatened" is defined in the Endangered Species Act as "any species which is likely to become an endangered specie s within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range". Scientific NameCommon NameState StatusGlobal Rank (b)State Rank (c)MammalsMicrotus ochrogasterprairie voleSpecial Concern (No regulations) (d)G5S2PlantsAsclepias lanuginose woolly milkweedThreatened (e)G4S1Arabis missouriensisMissouri rock-cressSpecial Concern (d)G5S2ReptilesGlyptemys insculpta wood turtleThreatened (e)G4S2 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-66Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-12 Annual Average Hourly Traffic Counts in the Stevens Point Site Area(Sheet 1 of 2)Annual Average Hourly Traffic (WDOT, 2011)AM Peak (a)Midday Peak (b)PM Peak (c)Daily TotalI-39 southbound off-ramp from US-103724966416,898I-39 southbound on-ramp from US-103154374975,710 I-39 northbound off-ramp from US-103041881872,787I-39 northbound on-ramp from US-107746276118,734US-10 between I-39 and Maple Bluff 1,8952,8232,54932,681County Highway R north of US-101892612953,440County Highway R south of US-103966037047,962I-39 between US-10 and County Highway HH1,4221,4071,77022,086Old Highway 18 west of Burbank Road (d)181929281Old Highway 18 between Burbank and Stockton Road (d)222845390Burbank Road south of Old Highway 18 (d)151830260 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-67Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-12 Annual Average Hourly Traffic Counts in the Stevens Point Site Area(Sheet 2 of 2)a)Traffic count for the hour between 00:00 and 09:59 hours with the greatest traffic volume.b)Traffic count for the hour between 10:00 and 14:59 hours with the greatest traffic volume.c)Traffic count for the hour between 15:00 and 23:59 hours with the greatest traffic volume. d)Annual average hourly traffic counts from 2009. e)Annual average hourly traffic counts from 2010.Annual Average Hourly Traffic (WDOT, 2011) AM Peak (a)Midday Peak (b)PM Peak (c)Daily TotalI-39 southbound off-ramp to County Highway HH1712483203,383I-39 southbound on-ramp from County
Highway HH1071862252,302I-39 northbound off-ramp to County Highway HH1692172312,888I-39 northbound on-ramp from County Highway HH2262182553,272County Highway HH between I-39 and
County Highway R3514265226,125County Highway R north of Porter Road (e)413N/A7236,565 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-68Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-13 Minority and Poverty Populations within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Stevens Point Site (a)(Sheet 1 of 2)Minority Population (%)Block Group and TractHouseholdsLiving BelowPoverty LevelBlack orAfricanAmericanAmericanIndian andAlaska NativeAsianNative Hawaiianand Other PacificIslander aloneSomeOther RacealoneTwo orMore RacesHispanicor LatinoAggregateBlock Group 3, Census Tract 96015.6%0.0%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.6%2.0%3.0%Block Group 4, Census Tract 96025.3%0.1%0.2%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.4%1.1%Block Group 1, Census Tract 960339.2%0.9%0.1%5.0%0.0%0.1%0.9%1.6%8.8%Block Group 2, Census Tract 960318.1%0.9%0.1%16.8%0.1%0.1%1.3%2.8%22.1%Block Group 3, Census Tract 960336.4%1.4%0.8%4.7%0.1%0.2%2.0%3.3%12.7%Block Group 4, Census Tract 960348.7%0.3%0.8%6.9%0.0%0.2%0.9%2.4%11.6%Block Group 1, Census Tract 960459.5%0.7%0.5%2.2%0.2%0.0%1.6%2.3%7.4%Block Group 2, Census Tract 960418.0%0.7%0.0%3.7%0.0%0.0%0.6%4.0%9.1%Block Group 3, Census Tract 960428.9%1.6%0.3%5.8%0.0%0.0%0.7%2.9%11.3%Block Group 4, Census Tract 960414.8%0.0%0.7%3.0%0.0%0.0%0.8%1.6%6.1%Block Group 5, Census Tract 960416.1%1.4%0.5%3.6%0.2%0.1%1.5%2.3%9.5%Block Group 1, Census Tract 96050.0%0.0%0.1%2.4%0.0%0.0%1.0%1.4%5.0%Block Group 2, Census Tract 96055.8%0.3%0.3%1.3%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.8%3.1%Block Group 3, Census Tract 960511.0%0.3%0.6%0.9%0.0%0.0%0.9%5.7%8.5%Block Group 4, Census Tract 96051.4%0.5%0.5%2.8%0.0%0.1%0.6%1.5%6.0%Block Group 1, Census Tract 96062.3%0.1%0.2%0.7%0.0%0.0%0.4%1.3%2.7%Block Group 4, Census Tract 96062.5%0.3%0.1%0.4%0.0%0.4%1.0%0.9%3.1%Block Group 1, Census Tract 9607.0111.7%0.5%0.3%4.2%0.0%0.1%1.5%6.0%12.5%Block Group 2, Census Tract 9607.012.6%0.3%0.2%2.8%0. 0%0.0%0.8%1.4%5.5%Block Group 3, Census Tract 9607.017.5%0.3%0.2%2.7%0. 0%0.1%1.1%2.3%6.7%Block Group 1, Census Tract 9607.025.3%0.8%0.2%4.4%0. 1%0.0%1.1%1.8%8.4%Block Group 2, Census Tract 9607.021.7%0.4%0.0%3.4%0. 0%0.1%0.5%1.6%6.0% Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-69Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-13 Minority and Poverty Populations within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Stevens Point Site (a)(Sheet 2 of 2)a)Shaded cells indicate "Above Average Populations" (USCB, 2012c) Minority Population (%)Block Group and TractHouseholdsLiving BelowPoverty LevelBlack orAfricanAmericanAmericanIndian andAlaska NativeAsianNative Hawaiianand Other PacificIslander alone SomeOther RacealoneTwo orMore RacesHispanicor LatinoAggregateBlock Group 1, Census Tract 96086.5%0.6%0.0%2.8%0.0%0.0%0.9%2.0%6.3%Block Group 2, Census Tract 960824.5%1.3%0.4%5.9%0.0%0.5%1.7%2.4%12.3%Block Group 3, Census Tract 960819.3%1.4%0.3%4.8%0.0%0.0%1.3%1.0%8.7%Block Group 4, Census Tract 960810.8%0.9%0.2%5.1%0.0%0.0%3.0%3.0%12.4%Block Group 1, Census Tract 96099.9%1.3%0.5%3.4%0.0%0.0%1.0%2.9%9.1%Block Group 2, Census Tract 960919.1%0.4%0.5%2.6%0.0%0.0%1.8%2.6%7.8%Block Group 3, Census Tract 960924.8%0.2%0.0%4.2%0.0%0.0%2.1%3.5%10.0%Block Group 4, Census Tract 96099.6%1.4%0.5%3.3%0.0%0.0%2.0%4.2%11.4%Block Group 1, Census Tract 961038.1%0.9%0.3%2.0%0.1%0.0%1.2%3.3%7.7%Block Group 2, Census Tract 961025.8%1.9%0.2%2.2%0.1%0.0%0.9%2.1%7.4%Block Group 1, Census Tract 96113.0%0.2%0.1%3.9%0.1%0.0%1.2%2.6%8.1%Block Group 2, Census Tract 961115.0%0.0%0.4%0.4%0.0%0.0%1.1%2.2%4.1%Block Group 3, Census Tract 961110.9%0.5%0.5%6.3%0.1%0.1%0.8%2.5%10.7%Block Group 4, Census Tract 961114.9%0.2%0.2%0.6%0.0%0.0%1.3%2.1%4.4%Block Group 2, Census Tract 96124.2%0.4%0.3%3.7%0.0%0.0%1.0%5.1%10.6%Block Group 3, Census Tract 961215.6%0.7%0.5%5.3%0.0%0.0%1.1%4.6%12.2%Total Area, 5 Mi. Radius13.6%0.6%0.3%3.5%0.0%0.1%1.1%2.5%8.1%Portage County12.4%0.5%0.3%2.8%0.0%0.0%1.0%2.6%7.3%State of Wisconsin11.2%6.2%0.9%2.3%0.0%0.1%1.4%5.9%16.7% Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-70Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-14 Potentially Significant Projects Identified within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Stevens Point Site Vicinity(Sheet 1 of 2)Project/Company NameSummary of ProjectLocationDistancefrom SiteStatusReferenceCentral Wisconsin Alcohol, Inc.Construction of an ethanol plant based on whey fermentation.Plover1 mi. (1.6 km)Air construction permit denied by the state March 20, 2012. WDNR, 2012hNAPA Distribution Center Replacing current parking lot with a new lot with 105 stalls. Also planning a 25,000 sq. ft. addition to distribution center.Stevens Point1 mi. (1.6 km)Plans approved in January 2012.City of Stevens Point, 2012aDonaldson Company Inc.Modifications to equipment configurations at existing filter manufacturing facility.Stevens Point1 mi. (1.6 km)Air construction permit issued in Oct. 2011, expires June 2013.WDNR, 2012iMunicipal Transit CenterDevelopment of a 35,070 sq. ft vacant lot for a parking lot with 57 parking spaces.Stevens Point1 mi. (1.6 km)Plans approved in January 2012.City of Stevens Point, 2012aFocus on Energy Methane/ Natural Gas-Fueled Electric
Generator New generator to be installed at existing Wastewater Treatment Facility; will burn digester gas (methane) produced there. Stevens Point3 mi. (4.8 km)Received funding in July 2012.City of Stevens Point, 2012bColumbia Energy Center (455 MW baseload, coal fired)Operating power plant with potential air pollution control projects for compliance with future regulatory requirements.Portage3 mi. (4.8 km)Operating, with possible addition of air pollution control equipment in the future.Jerde, 2011Copps Food CenterConstruction of a 70,000 sq. ft. store with 385 stall parking lot.Stevens Point3 mi. (4.8 km)Plans approved in January 2012.City of Stevens Point, 2012a Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-71Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-14 Potentially Significant Projects Identified within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Stevens Point Site Vicinity(Sheet 2 of 2)Project/Company NameSummary of ProjectLocationDistancefrom SiteStatusReferenceSchmeeckle Trails Housing DevelopmentExpansion of existing residential development.Stevens Point3.5 mi. (5.6 km)Beginning second phase of building "essential houses" in the development. iMakeSense, LLC, 2010WIMME Sand & GravelSand and gravel plant.Plover(Portage County)5 mi. (8.0 km)Operating.WDNR, 2012jU.S. Highway 10 Expansion ProjectNew four lane highway that will bypass downtown Stevens Point.Stevens Point5 mi. (8.0 km)Construction started in 2006, scheduled for completion in 2012.WDOT, 2012Water and Sewer Reconstruction Project Michigan Avenue and Fourth Avenue mains to be reconstructed.Stevens Point4 mi. (6.4 km)5 mi. (8.0 km)Scheduled to be completed in 2012.City of Stevens Point, 2012c Lake Dredging (several locations)Several areas are to be dredged and fill material hauled off-site.McDill Lake District(Portage County)5 mi. (8.0 km)Scheduled to start in 2012.City of Stevens Point, 2011bNeenah Paper Inc. Whiting Mill Biomass Plant (wood and waste fibers to steam)Operating power plant with potential air pollution control projects for compliance with future regulatory requirements.Stevens Point5 mi. (8.0 km)Operating, with possible addition of air pollution control equipment in the future.Environmental Leader, LLC, 2008 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-72Rev. 019.5.3COST-BENEFIT OF THE ALTERNATIVESThis section discusses the costs and benefits of each reasonable alternative and the proposed action, including a qualitative discussion of environmental impacts and identification of any assumptions and uncertainties. The following information on costs and benefits is provided:*Qualitative discussion of environmental degradation (including impacts to air and water quality; biotic resources; aesthetic resources; socioeconomic impacts, such as noise, traffic congestion, and increased demand for public services; and land use changes). *Qualitative discussion of effects on public health and safety.*Other costs (including lost tax revenue, decreased recreational value, and transportation, as appropriate).*Qualitative discussion of environmental benefits (comparable to the discussion of environmental degradation).*Average annual production of commercial products.
- Expected increase in tax payments to state and local tax jurisdictions during (1) the construction period and (2) facility operations.*Creation and improvement of transportation infrastructure and other facilities.*Other benefits.The following types of alternatives are discussed:*Alternative sites
- Alternative technologies19.5.3.1ALTERNATIVE SITESThis subsection discusses the costs and benefits of the proposed site (Janesville) and the two alternative sites (Chippewa Falls and Stevens Point). For this evaluation, the SHINE facility design, described in Section 19.2, and the construction and operation practices, described in Section 19.4, are assumed to be the same for each site. This assumption allows for a comprehensive and consistent comparison of costs and benefits.19.5.3.1.1Janesville (Proposed) Site19.5.3.1.1.1Environmental DegredationThe environmental impacts expected to result from construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Janesville site are summarized below.
Air Quality*Facility construction results in fugitive dust emissions and exhaust emissions due to on road and off-road vehicles.*Facility operation results in minor emissions of nitrogen oxides (NO x), particulate matter (PM), and sulfur dioxide (SO 2). Preliminary modeling indicates that the air quality impacts of these criteria pollutants are minimal and do not approach ambient air quality standards. However, the Significant Impact Level for 1-hour NO x may be exceeded, requiring more detailed modeling for state air pollution permitting. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-73Rev. 0Water Quality*Facility construction results in some discharge of suspended solids to local drainage ditch systems. Very small probability of affecting identified water resources due to low surface runoff potential and distance from the nearest surface water body (approximately 1.6 mi. [2.6 km]).*Construction activities will not reach groundwater. Dewatering of groundwater is not anticipated. *Increased potential for oil or chemical discharges to surface water and groundwater due to accidental spills during construction and operation. Very small probability of release, because of oil and chemical control measures. *Facility operation requires discharge of wastewater to the City of Janesville sanitary sewer system, which has adequate capacity. *Facility operation requires water withdrawal from the City of Janesville water supply system, which has adequate capacity. *Developed facility site results in minor pollutant loads and increased runoff from roadways, parking areas, industrial activities, and landscaping.Biotic Resources*Facility construction results in limited disturbance to on-site agriculture lands and minor displacement of migrating birds that use the agricultural lands to feed.*Construction activities, noise, and lighting result in some displacement of fauna, particularly birds and mammals.*Potential for bird collisions with man-made structures, such as cranes and buildings during construction.*Facility operation does not result in additional impacts except minor potential for bird collisions with buildings and minor disturbance of wildlife due to security lighting at night.Aesthetic Resources*During facility construction, dust, cranes, and facility structures partially obstruct views of existing landscape and create some visual elements that are out-of-character with the site setting. *During facility operation, the existing agricultural landscape is permanently altered, but the facility appearance is consistent with light industrial uses associated with the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport.*During both construction and operation, aesthetic impacts are limited by the presence of relatively few sensitive receptors in close proximity. Socioeconomics*Facility construction results in some temporary increases in noise, due to use of heavy equipment on the site and construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon.*Facility operation results in minor increases in noise primarily due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. Normal operations include noise from stationary equipment, such as heating, cooling, and ventilation equipment. Continuous noise levels at the site boundary are maintained below local and state noise limit criteria. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-74Rev. 0*During both construction and operation, noise impacts are limited by the presence of relatively few sensitive receptors in close proximity.*Facility construction results in some temporary increase in local traffic due to construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon and periodic construction vehicle traffic throughout the work day.*Facility operation results in minor increase in local traffic due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. *During both construction and operation, traffic impacts are limited by the capacity and good condition of the existing roads that serve the site area.*Facility construction results in some temporary increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and wastewater treatment facilities to serve construction workers who move into the site area.*Facility operation results in minor increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and treatment facilities to serve operations workers who move into the site area.*During both construction and operation, socioeconomic impacts are limited because most workers are expected to reside in Rock County (not relocate to the area) and because the housing market, public education resources, etc., generally have excess capacity.Land Use*Facility construction results in the permanent conversion of approximately 26 acres (ac.) (10.5 hectare [ha]) of agricultural lands to industrial land use, and the temporary conversion of approximately 14 ac. (5.7 ha) of agricultural lands to industrial land use.*All of the land permanently or temporarily converted to industrial land use is classified as Prime Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance.*Facility operation does not result in additional on-site land use impacts.
- No off-site land use impacts are expected during construction or operation except for minor construction of housing to serve facility workers who move into the site area.19.5.3.1.1.2Effects on Public Health and SafetyDuring facility construction, minor impacts to public health and safety may result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and fugitive dust), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. Any such impacts are expected to be temporary and restricted to the immediate vicinity of the project site.
During facility operation, minor impacts to public health and safety may result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and emissions of conventional pollutants from stationary equipment), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. In addition, the public is exposed to minor doses of radiation due to transportation of radioactive materials to and from the site, as well as direct radiation and releases of gaseous effluents from the SHINE process. All radioactive materials are strictly controlled, and all radiological doses comply with regulatory limits. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-75Rev. 019.5.3.1.1.3Other CostsNo other environmental costs, such as lost tax revenues or decreased recreational values, have been identified. The project is not expected to result in any transportation impacts except for the minor traffic impacts on local roads discussed in Subsection 19.5.3.1.1.1.19.5.3.1.1.4Environmental Benefits Facility construction is expected to create approximately 420 construction jobs during the peak of construction activities. Facility operation is expected to create approximately 150 permanent operational jobs. In addition, the wages earned and money spent by facility employees will stimulate additional economic activity, but this benefit has not been quantified. In addition to economic benefits, the project also will benefit the health of people who need diagnostic tests that require technetium-99m (Tc-99m) and other isotopes. The facility is expected to satisfy approximately half of the annual demand for Tc-99m in the United States, and to provide a more reliable supply of this isotope than currently exists. This represents a significant health benefit. The facility will also produce I-131 and Xe-133, which will have additional health benefits.19.5.3.1.1.5Production of Commercial ProductsThe facility has the capacity to produce an average of approximately 156,000 6-day Ci of Mo-99 per year. This translates to millions of doses of Tc-99m per year for diagnostic tests.In addition, the facility is expected to produce an average of approximately 100,000 Ci of I-131 and 100,000 Ci of Xe-133 per year.19.5.3.1.1.6Increase in Tax Payments The facility is expected to pay property taxes of approximately $635,000 per year during construction and approximately $660,000 per year during operation (after expiration of an initial 10-year TIF agreement), representing an increase of approximately 0.30 percent in the annual property tax revenues of Rock County. 19.5.3.1.1.7Creation and Improvement of InfrastructureNo creation or improvement of infrastructure is expected to result directly from the project. The City of Janesville plans to install a water main and a sewer main along the northern boundary of the site, but the project is not dependent on this construction.19.5.3.1.1.8Other BenefitsNo other significant benefits have been identified. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-76Rev. 019.5.3.1.2Chippewa Falls Site19.5.3.1.2.1Environmental DegredationThe environmental impacts that would be expected to result from construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site are summarized below. Air Quality*Facility construction results in fugitive dust emissions and exhaust emissions due to on road and off-road vehicles.*Facility operation results in minor emissions of NO x, PM, and SO
- 2. Although air quality modeling has not been performed at the Chippewa Falls site, it is expected that air quality impacts would be similar to those modeled at the Janesville site, meaning that pollutant concentrations would not approach ambient air quality standards but may exceed the Significant Impact Level for 1-hour NO x, requiring more detailed modeling for state air pollution permitting.Water Quality*Facility construction results in some discharge of suspended solids to local drainage ditch systems. Very small probability of affecting identified water resources due to low surface runoff potential and distance from the nearest surface water body (0.75 mi. [1.2 km]).*Construction activities will not reach groundwater. Dewatering of groundwater is not anticipated. *Increased potential for oil or chemical discharges to surface water and groundwater due to accidental spills during construction and operation. Very small probability of release, because of oil and chemical control measures. *Facility operation results in discharge of wastewater to City of Chippewa Falls sanitary sewer system, which has adequate capacity. *Facility operation requires water withdrawal from City of Chippewa Falls water supply system, which has adequate capacity. *Developed facility site results in minor pollutant loads and increased runoff from roadways, parking areas, industrial activities, and landscaping.Biotic Resources*Facility construction results in limited disturbance to on-site agricultural lands and minor displacement of migrating birds that use the agricultural lands to feed.*Construction activities, noise, and lighting result in some displacement of fauna, particularly birds and mammals.*Potential for bird collisions with man-made structures, such as cranes and buildings during construction.*Facility operation does not result in additional impacts except minor potential for bird collisions with buildings and minor disturbance of wildlife due to security lighting at night.
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-77Rev. 0Aesthetic Resources*During facility construction, dust, cranes, and facility structures partially obstruct views of existing landscape and create some visual elements that are out of character with the site setting. *During facility operation, the existing agricultural landscape is permanently altered, but the facility appearance is generally consistent with nearby commercial land uses.*During facility construction, aesthetic impacts may result in complaints from the public about a changed sense of place or a diminution in enjoyment of the physical environment, due to the presence of several sensitive receptors in close proximity to the site. Socioeconomics*Facility construction results in some temporary increases in noise, due to use of heavy equipment on the site and construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon.*Facility operation results in minor increases in noise primarily due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. Normal operations include noise from stationary equipment, such as heating, cooling, and ventilation equipment. Continuous noise levels at the site boundary are maintained below local and state noise limit criteria. *During facility construction, noise impacts may result in complaints from the public due to the presence of several sensitive receptors in close proximity to the site.*Facility construction results in some temporary increase in local traffic due to construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon and periodic construction vehicle traffic throughout the work day.*Facility operation results in minor increase in local traffic due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. *During facility construction, project-related traffic may noticeably alter transportation conditions on local roads, due to the condition of the existing roads that serve the site area.*Facility construction results in some temporary increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and wastewater treatment facilities to serve construction workers who move into the site area.*Facility operation results in minor increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and treatment facilities to serve operations workers who move into the site area.*During both construction and operation, socioeconomic impacts are limited because most workers are expected to reside in Chippewa County (not relocate to the area) and because the housing market, public education resources, etc., generally have excess capacity.Land Use*Facility construction results in the permanent conversion of approximately 15 ac. (6.1 ha) of agricultural lands and 3 ac. (1.2 ha) of fallow lands to industrial land use, and the temporary conversion of approximately 14 ac. (5.7 ha) of agricultural lands to industrial land use. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-78Rev. 0*Almost all of the land permanently or temporarily converted to industrial land use is classified as Prime Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance.*Facility operation does not result in additional on-site land use impacts.*No off-site land use impacts are expected during construction or operation except for minor construction of housing to serve facility workers who move into the site area.19.5.3.1.2.2Effects on Public Health and SafetyDuring facility construction, minor impacts to public health and safety might result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and fugitive dust), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. Any such impacts would be temporary and restricted to the immediate vicinity of the project site.During facility operation, minor impacts to public health and safety might result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and emissions of conventional pollutants from stationary equipment), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. In addition, the public would be exposed to minor doses of radiation due to transportation of radioactive materials to and from the site, as well as direct radiation and releases of gaseous effluents from the SHINE process. All radioactive materials would be strictly controlled, and all radiological doses would comply with regulatory limits.19.5.3.1.2.3Other CostsNo other environmental costs, such as lost tax revenues or decreased recreational values, have been identified. The project would not be expected to result in any transportation impacts except for the traffic impacts on local roads discussed in Subsection 19.5.3.1.2.1.19.5.3.1.2.4Environmental BenefitsFacility construction is expected to create approximately 420 construction jobs during the peak of construction activities. Facility operation is expected to create approximately 150 permanent operational jobs. In addition, the wages earned and money spent by facility employees will stimulate additional economic activity, but this benefit has not been quantified. In addition to economic benefits, the project also would benefit the health of people who need diagnostic tests that require Tc-99m and other isotopes. The facility is expected to satisfy approximately half of the annual demand for Tc-99m in the United States, and to provide a more reliable supply of this isotope than currently exists. This represents a significant health benefit. The facility will also produce I-131 and Xe-133, which will have additional health benefits.19.5.3.1.2.5Production of Commercial Products The facility has the capacity to produce an average of approximately 156,000 6-day Ci of Mo-99 per year. This translates to millions of doses of Tc-99m per year for diagnostic tests.In addition, the facility is expected to produce an average of approximately 100,000 Ci of I-131 and 100,000 Ci of Xe-133 per year. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-79Rev. 019.5.3.1.2.6Increase in Tax PaymentsThe facility would be expected to pay approximately the same amount of property taxes at the Chippewa Falls site as at the Janesville site. This means that the facility would pay approximately $635,000 per year during construction and approximately $660,000 per year during operation, representing an increase of approximately 4.4 percent in the annual property tax revenues of Chippewa County.19.5.3.1.2.7Creation and Improvement of InfrastructureNo creation or improvement of infrastructure is expected to result directly from the project. However, improvements such as widening or adding turning lanes to existing roads near the project site might be necessary to alleviate traffic congestion during construction.19.5.3.1.2.8Other BenefitsNo other significant benefits have been identified.19.5.3.1.3Stevens Point Site19.5.3.1.3.1Environmental DegredationThe environmental impacts that would be expected to result from construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site are summarized below. Air Quality*Facility construction results in fugitive dust emissions and exhaust emissions due to on road and off-road vehicles.*Facility operation results in minor emissions of NO x, PM, and SO
- 2. Although air quality modeling has not been performed at the Stevens Point site, it is expected that air quality impacts would be similar to those modeled at the Janesville site, meaning that pollutant concentrations would not approach ambient air quality standards but may exceed the Significant Impact Level for 1-hour NO x, requiring more detailed modeling for state air pollution permitting.Water Quality*Facility construction results in some discharge of suspended solids to local drainage ditch systems. Very small probability of affecting identified water resources due to low surface runoff potential and distance from the nearest surface water body (2.0 mi. [3.2 km]). *Construction activities will likely reach groundwater. Soil borings drilled on-site encountered groundwater at a depth of 8 to 11 ft. (2.4 to 3.4 m), and groundwater was observed inside water wells between the depths of 7 and 20 ft. (2.1 and 6.1 m). Dewatering of groundwater is anticipated during construction. *Increased potential for oil or chemical discharges to surface water and groundwater due to accidental spills during construction and operation. Very small probability of release, because of oil and chemical control measures.
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-80Rev. 0*Facility operation results in discharge of wastewater to the City of Stevens Point sanitary sewer system, which has adequate capacity. *Facility operation requires water withdrawal from the City of Stevens Point water supply system, which has adequate capacity. *Developed facility site results in minor pollutant loads and increased runoff from roadways, parking areas, industrial activities, and landscaping.Biotic Resources*Facility construction results in limited disturbance to on-site agricultural lands and minor displacement of migrating birds that use the agricultural lands to feed.*Facility construction results in clearing of on-site woodlot (partial or complete) and some displacement of fauna, particularly birds and mammals that inhabit the woodlot. *Construction activities, noise, and lighting result in some displacement of fauna, particularly birds and mammals.*Potential for bird collisions with man-made structures, such as cranes and buildings during construction.*Facility operation does not result in additional impacts except minor potential for bird collisions with buildings and minor disturbance of wildlife due to security lighting at night.Aesthetic Resources*During facility construction, dust, cranes, and facility structures partially obstruct views of existing landscape and create some visual elements that are out-of-character with the site setting. *During facility operation, the existing agricultural landscape and woodlot is permanently altered, but the facility appearance may be consistent with the City of Stevens Point's plan to develop the area as a business park. *During facility construction, aesthetic impacts may result in complaints from the public about a changed sense of place or a diminution in enjoyment of the physical environment, due to the presence of several sensitive receptors in close proximity to the site. Socioeconomics*Facility construction results in some temporary increases in noise due to use of heavy equipment on the site and construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon.*Facility operation results in minor increases in noise primarily due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. Normal operations include noise from stationary equipment, such as heating, cooling, and ventilation equipment. Continuous noise levels at the site boundary are maintained below local and state noise limit criteria. *During facility construction, noise impacts may result in complaints from the public due to the presence of several sensitive receptors in close proximity to the site.*Facility construction results in some temporary increase in local traffic due to construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon and periodic construction vehicle traffic throughout the work day.*Facility operation results in minor increase in local traffic due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-81Rev. 0*During facility construction, project-related traffic may noticeably alter transportation conditions on local roads, due to the condition of the existing roads that serve the site area.*Facility construction results in some temporary increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and wastewater treatment facilities to serve construction workers who move into the site area.*Facility operation results in minor increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and treatment facilities to serve operations workers who move into the site area.*During both construction and operation, socioeconomic impacts are limited because most workers are expected to reside in Portage County (not relocate to the area) and because the housing market, public education resources, etc., generally have excess capacity.Land Use*Facility construction results in the permanent conversion of approximately 3.6 ac. (1.4 ha) of agricultural lands and 13.9 ac. (5.6 ha) of wooded lands to industrial land use, and the temporary conversion of approximately 13.6 ac. (5.5 ha) of agricultural lands to industrial land use.*Almost all of the land permanently or temporarily converted to industrial land use is classified as Prime Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance.*Facility operation does not result in additional on-site land use impacts.*Off-site land use impacts expected are construction of two public streets along the northern and western site boundaries and minor construction of housing to serve facility workers who move into the site area. 19.5.3.1.3.2Effects on Public Health and SafetyDuring facility construction, minor impacts to public health and safety might result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and fugitive dust), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. Any such impacts would be temporary and restricted to the immediate vicinity of the project site.During facility operation, minor impacts to public health and safety might result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and emissions of conventional pollutants from stationary equipment), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. In addition, the public would be exposed to minor doses of radiation due to transportation of radioactive materials to and from the site, as well as direct radiation and releases of gaseous effluents from the SHINE process. All radioactive materials would be strictly controlled, and all radiological doses would comply with regulatory limits.19.5.3.1.3.3Other Costs No other environmental costs, such as lost tax revenues or decreased recreational values, have been identified. The project would not be expected to result in any transportation impacts except for the traffic impacts on local roads discussed in Subsection 19.5.3.1.3.1. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-82Rev. 019.5.3.1.3.4Environmental BenefitsFacility construction is expected to create approximately 420 construction jobs during the peak of construction activities. Facility operation is expected to create approximately 150 permanent operational jobs. In addition, the wages earned and money spent by facility employees will stimulate additional economic activity, but this benefit has not been quantified.In addition to economic benefits, the project also would benefit the health of people who need diagnostic tests that require Tc-99m and other isotopes. The facility is expected to satisfy approximately half of the annual demand for Tc-99m in the United States, and to provide a more reliable supply of this isotope than currently exists. This represents a significant health benefit. The facility will also produce I-131 and Xe-133, which will have additional health benefits.19.5.3.1.3.5Production of Commercial ProductsThe facility has the capacity to produce an average of approximately 156,000 6-day Ci of Mo-99 per year. This translates to millions of doses of Tc-99m per year for diagnostic tests.In addition, the facility is expected to produce an average of approximately 100,000 Ci of I-131 and 100,000 Ci of Xe-133 per year.19.5.3.1.3.6Increase in Tax PaymentsThe facility would be expected to pay approximately the same amount of taxes at the Stevens Point site as at the Janesville site. This means that the facility would pay approximately $635,000 per year during construction and approximately $660,000 per year during operation, representing an increase of approximately 2.7 percent in the annual property tax revenues of Portage County .19.5.3.1.3.7Creation and Improvement of InfrastructureThe City of Stevens Point would be expected to construct public streets along the northern and western site boundaries of the site in connection with the project. Other potential modifications of transportation infrastructure, such as widening or adding turning lanes to existing roads, might be necessary to alleviate traffic congestion during construction. 19.5.3.1.3.8Other BenefitsNo other significant benefits have been identified. 19.5.3.2ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGIESThis subsection discusses the costs and benefits of the proposed SHINE SHINE technology and the two alternative technologies. For this evaluation, the alternative technologies are assumed to be constructed at the proposed Janesville site. This assumption allows for a comprehensive and consistent comparison of costs and benefits. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-83Rev. 019.5.3.2.1SHINE (Proposed) Technology19.5.3.2.1.1Environmental DegredationThe environmental impacts expected to result from construction and operation of the SHINE SHINE technology are summarized below. Air Quality*Facility construction results in fugitive dust emissions and exhaust emissions due to on road and off-road vehicles.*Facility operation results in minor emissions of NO x, PM, and SO
- 2. These emissions result primarily from natural gas heating of the facility buildings and periodic testing of the emergency diesel generator, plus small amounts of NO x from the SHINE process. Water Quality*Facility construction results in some discharge of suspended solids to local drainage ditch systems. *Construction activities will not reach groundwater. Dewatering of groundwater is not anticipated. *Increased potential for oil or chemical discharges to surface water and groundwater due to accidental spills during construction and operation. Very small probability of release, because of oil and chemical control measures. *Facility operation requires water for use in SHINE (target solution and makeup water for the Target Solution Vessel), isotope processing (isotope extraction and purification, uranium extraction, and waste processing), potable water, fire protection, and facility heating and cooling systems. All required water is withdrawn from the City of Janesville water supply system. *Facility operation requires discharge of wastewater, including sanitary wastes, blowdown from building heating boilers, and liquid wastes from thermal denitration and vent system scrubbers. All wastewater is discharged to the City of Janesville sanitary sewer system and complies with local, state, and federal pre-treatment and wastewater discharge requirements.*Developed facility site results in minor pollutant loads and increased runoff from roadways, parking areas, industrial activities, and landscaping.Biotic Resources*Facility construction results in limited disturbance to on-site agriculture lands and minor displacement of migrating birds that use the agricultural lands to feed.*Construction activities, noise, and lighting result in some displacement of fauna, particularly birds and mammals.*Potential for bird collisions with man-made structures, such as cranes and buildings during construction.*Facility operation does not result in additional impacts except minor potential for bird collisions with buildings and minor disturbance of wildlife due to security lighting at night.
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-84Rev. 0Aesthetic Resources*During facility construction, dust, cranes, and facility structures partially obstruct views of existing landscape and create some visual elements that are out-of-character with the site setting.*During facility operation, the existing agricultural landscape is permanently altered, but the facility appearance is consistent with light industrial uses associated with the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport. Socioeconomics*Facility construction results in some temporary increases in noise due to use of heavy equipment on the site and construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon.*Facility operation results in minor increases in noise primarily due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. Normal operations include noise from stationary equipment, such as heating, cooling, and ventilation equipment. Continuous noise levels at the site boundary are maintained below local and state noise limit criteria. *Facility construction results in some temporary increase in local traffic due to construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon and periodic construction vehicle traffic throughout the work day.*Facility operation results in minor increase in local traffic due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. *Facility construction results in some temporary increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and wastewater treatment facilities to serve construction workers who move into the site area.*Facility operation results in minor increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and treatment facilities to serve operations workers who move into the site area.Land Use*Facility construction results in the permanent conversion of approximately 26 ac. (10.5ha) of agricultural lands to industrial land use, and the temporary conversion of approximately 14 ac. (5.7 ha) of agricultural lands to industrial land use.*Facility operation does not result in additional on-site land use impacts.*No off-site land use impacts are expected during construction or operation except for minor construction of housing to serve facility workers who move into the site area.19.5.3.2.1.2Effects on Public Health and SafetyDuring facility construction, minor impacts to public health and safety may result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and fugitive dust), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. Any such impacts are expected to be temporary and restricted to the immediate vicinity of the project site. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-85Rev. 0During facility operation, minor impacts to public health and safety may result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and emissions of conventional pollutants from stationary equipment), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. In addition, the public is exposed to minor doses of radiation due to transportation of radioactive materials to and from the site, as well as direct radiation and releases of gaseous effluents from the SHINE process. All radioactive materials are strictly controlled, and all radiological doses comply with regulatory limits.19.5.3.2.1.3Other CostsNo other environmental costs, such as lost tax revenues or decreased recreational values, have been identified. The project is not expected to result in any transportation impacts except for the minor traffic impacts on local roads discussed in Subsection 19.5.3.2.1.1.19.5.3.2.1.4Environmental BenefitsFacility construction is expected to create approximately 420 construction jobs during the peak of construction activities. Facility operation is expected to create approximately 150 permanent operational jobs. In addition, the wages earned and money spent by facility employees will stimulate additional economic activity, but this benefit has not been quantified .In addition to economic benefits, the project also will benefit the health of people who need diagnostic tests that require Tc-99m and other isotopes. The facility is expected to satisfy approximately half of the annual demand for Tc-99m in the United States, and to provide a more reliable supply of this isotope than currently exists. This represents a significant health benefit. The facility will also produce I-131 and Xe-133, which will have additional health benefits.19.5.3.2.1.5Production of Commercial ProductsThe facility has the capacity to produce an average of approximately 156,000 6-day Ci of Mo-99 per year. This translates to millions of doses of Tc-99m per year for diagnostic tests.In addition, the facility is expected to produce an average of approximately 100,000 Ci of I-131 and 100,000 Ci of Xe-133 per year.19.5.3.2.1.6Increase in Tax Payments The facility is expected to pay property taxes of approximately $635,000 per year during construction and approximately $660,000 per year during operation (after expiration of an initial 10-year TIF agreement), representing an increase of approximately 0.30 percent in the annual property tax revenues of Rock County .19.5.3.2.1.7Creation and Improvement of InfrastructureNo creation or improvement of infrastructure is expected to result directly from the project. The City of Janesville plans to install a water main and a sewer main along the northern boundary of the site, but the project is not dependent on this construction.19.5.3.2.1.8Other BenefitsNo other significant benefits have been identified. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-86Rev. 019.5.3.2.2Linear Accelerator Approach (Production of Mo-99 Only)19.5.3.2.2.1Environmental DegradationThe environmental impacts expected to result from construction and operation of the linear accelerator technology are summarized below.
Air Quality*Facility construction results in fugitive dust emissions and exhaust emissions due to on road and off-road vehicles.*Facility operation results in minor emissions of conventional air pollutants. Similarly to the SHINE facility, these emissions would be expected to result from natural gas heating of the facility buildings, periodic testing of the emergency diesel generator, and the SHINE process. Water Quality*Facility construction results in some discharge of suspended solids to local drainage ditch systems. *No information is available on the depth of excavation required for this type of facility. However, the depth to the lowest subfloor is assumed to be similar to the SHINE facility, and on that basis dewatering of groundwater is not expected to be required. *Increased potential for oil or chemical discharges to surface water and groundwater due to accidental spills during construction and operation. Very small probability of release, because of oil and chemical control measures. *Facility operation requires water for use in SHINE, isotope processing, potable water, fire protection, and facility heating and cooling systems. All required water is withdrawn from the City of Janesville water supply system. *Facility operation requires discharge of wastewater, including sanitary wastes, blowdown from building heating boilers, and liquid wastes from SHINE and isotope processing. All wastewater is discharged to the City of Janesville sanitary sewer system and complies with local, state, and federal pre-treatment and wastewater discharge requirements. *Developed facility site results in minor pollutant loads and increased runoff from roadways, parking areas, industrial activities, and landscaping.Biotic Resources*Facility construction results in limited disturbance to on-site agriculture lands and minor displacement of migrating birds that use the agricultural lands to feed.*Construction activities, noise, and lighting result in some displacement of fauna, particularly birds and mammals.*Potential for bird collisions with man-made structures, such as cranes and buildings during construction.*Facility operation does not result in additional impacts except minor potential for bird collisions with buildings and minor disturbance of wildlife due to security lighting at night. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-87Rev. 0Aesthetic Resources*During facility construction, dust, cranes, and facility structures partially obstruct views of existing landscape and create some visual elements that are out-of-character with the site setting. *During facility operation, the existing agricultural landscape is permanently altered, but the facility appearance is consistent with light industrial uses associated with the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport. Socioeconomics*Facility construction results in some temporary increases in noise due to use of heavy equipment on the site and construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon.*Facility operation results in minor increases in noise primarily due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. Normal operations include noise from stationary equipment, such as heating, cooling, and ventilation equipment. Continuous noise levels at the site boundary are maintained below local and state noise limit criteria. *Facility construction results in some temporary increase in local traffic due to construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon and periodic construction vehicle traffic throughout the work day.*Facility operation results in minor increase in local traffic due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. *Facility construction results in some temporary increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and wastewater treatment facilities to serve construction workers who move into the site area.*Facility operation results in minor increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and treatment facilities to serve operations workers who move into the site area.Land Use*Facility construction would result in the permanent conversion of approximately 30 ac. (12.1 ha) of agricultural lands to industrial land use. Temporary conversion of land to support construction activities would be expected to be similar to the SHINE facility, which means that approximately 14 ac. (5.7 ha) of agricultural lands would be temporarily converted to industrial use.*Facility operation does not result in additional on-site land use impacts.
- No off-site land use impacts are expected during construction or operation except for minor construction of housing to serve facility workers who move into the site area.19.5.3.2.2.2Effects on Public Health and SafetyDuring facility construction, minor impacts to public health and safety might result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and fugitive dust), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. Any such impacts would be temporary and restricted to the immediate vicinity of the project site.
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-88Rev. 0During facility operation, minor impacts to public health and safety might result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and emissions of conventional pollutants from stationary equipment), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. In addition, the public would be exposed to minor doses of radiation due to transportation of radioactive materials to and from the site, as well as direct radiation and releases of gaseous effluents from the SHINE process. All radioactive materials would be strictly controlled, and all radiological doses would comply with regulatory limits.19.5.3.2.2.3Other CostsNo other environmental costs, such as lost tax revenues or decreased recreational values, have been identified. The project is not expected to result in any transportation impacts except for the minor traffic impacts on local roads discussed in Subsection 19.5.3.2.2.1.19.5.3.2.2.4Environmental BenefitsConstruction of this type of facility would be expected to create approximately the same number of construction jobs as the SHINE facility, which means approximately 420 construction jobs during the peak of construction activities. Facility operation would create approximately 150 permanent operational jobs. In addition, the wages earned and money spent by facility employees will stimulate additional economic activity, but this benefit has not been quantified. In addition to economic benefits, the project would also benefit the health of people who need diagnostic tests that require Tc-99m. The facility would be expected to produce approximately the same amount of Tc-99m as the SHINE facility, which means it would satisfy approximately half of the annual demand for these isotopes in the United States. This represents a significant health benefit. However, this type of facility would not produce I-131 and Xe-133, as the SHINE facility does.19.5.3.2.2.5Production of Commercial ProductsThe linear accelerator SHINE facility is designed for increasing production when required by demand. However, at full production the facility would be expected to produce 3,000 6-day Ci per week, which means it has the capacity to produce up to approximately 156,000 6-day Ci of Mo-99 per year. 19.5.3.2.2.6Increase in Tax PaymentsThe facility would be expected to pay approximately the same amount of taxes as the SHINE facility. This means that the facility would pay property taxes of approximately $635,000 per year during construction and approximately $660,000 per year during operation (after expiration of an initial 10-year TIF agreement), representing an increase of approximately 0.30 percent in the annual property tax revenues of Rock County .19.5.3.2.2.7Creation and Improvement of InfrastructureNo creation or improvement of infrastructure would be expected to result directly from the project. The City of Janesville plans to install a water main and a sewer main along the northern boundary of the site, but the project is not dependent on this construction. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-89Rev. 019.5.3.2.2.8Other BenefitsNo other significant benefits have been identified.19.5.3.2.3Low Enriched Uranium (LEU) Aqueous Homogeneous Reactor Approach (Production of Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133)19.5.3.2.3.1Environmental DegradationThe environmental impacts expected to result from construction and operation of the LEU Aqueous Homogeneous Reactor technology are summarized below.
Air Quality*Facility construction results in fugitive dust emissions and exhaust emissions due to on road and off-road vehicles.*Facility operation results in minor emissions of conventional air pollutants. Similarly to the SHINE facility, these emissions would be expected to result from natural gas heating of the facility buildings, periodic testing of the emergency diesel generator, and the SHINE process. Water Quality*Facility construction results in some discharge of suspended solids to local drainage ditch systems. *No information is available on the depth of excavation required for this type of facility. However, the depth to the lowest subfloor is assumed to be similar to the SHINE facility, and on that basis dewatering of groundwater is not expected to be required. *Increased potential for oil or chemical discharges to surface water and groundwater due to accidental spills during construction and operation. Very small probability of release, because of oil and chemical control measures. *Facility operation requires water for use in SHINE, isotope processing, reactor cooling, potable water, fire protection, and facility heating and cooling systems. All required water is withdrawn from the City of Janesville water supply system. *Facility operation requires discharge of wastewater, including sanitary wastes, blowdown from building heating boilers, and liquid wastes from SHINE and isotope processing. All wastewater is discharged to the City of Janesville sanitary sewer system and complies with local, state, and federal pre-treatment and wastewater discharge requirements. *Developed facility site results in minor pollutant loads and increased runoff from roadways, parking areas, industrial activities, and landscaping.Biotic Resources*Facility construction results in limited disturbance to on-site agriculture lands and minor displacement of migrating birds that use the agricultural lands to feed.*Construction activities, noise, and lighting result in some displacement of fauna, particularly birds and mammals.*Potential for bird collisions with man-made structures, such as cranes and buildings during construction. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-90Rev. 0*Facility operation does not result in additional impacts except minor potential for bird collisions with buildings and minor disturbance of wildlife due to security lighting at night.Aesthetic Resources*During facility construction, dust, cranes, and facility structures partially obstruct views of existing landscape and create some visual elements that are out-of-character with the site setting. *During facility operation, the existing agricultural landscape is permanently altered, but the facility appearance is consistent with light industrial uses associated with the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport. Socioeconomics*Facility construction results in some temporary increases in noise due to use of heavy equipment on the site and construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon.*Facility operation results in minor increases in noise primarily due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. Normal operations include noise from stationary equipment, such as heating, cooling, and ventilation equipment. Continuous noise levels at the site boundary are maintained below local and state noise limit criteria. *Facility construction results in some temporary increase in local traffic due to construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon and periodic construction vehicle traffic throughout the work day.*Facility operation results in minor increase in local traffic due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. *Facility construction results in some temporary increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and wastewater treatment facilities to serve construction workers who move into the site area.*Facility operation results in minor increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and treatment facilities to serve operations workers who move into the site area.Land Use*Construction of this type of facility would be expected to result in approximately the same land disturbance as the SHINE facility, which means the permanent conversion of approximately 26 ac. (10.5 ha) of agricultural lands to industrial land use and the temporary conversion of approximately 14 ac. (5.7 ha) of agricultural lands to industrial land use.*Facility operation does not result in additional on-site land use impacts.*No off-site land use impacts are expected during construction or operation except for minor construction of housing to serve facility workers who move into the site area. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-91Rev. 019.5.3.2.3.2Effects on Public Health and SafetyDuring facility construction, minor impacts to public health and safety might result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and fugitive dust), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. Any such impacts would be expected to be temporary and restricted to the immediate vicinity of the project site.During facility operation, minor impacts to public health and safety might result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and emissions of conventional pollutants from stationary equipment), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. In addition, the public would be exposed to minor doses of radiation due to transportation of radioactive materials to and from the site, as well as direct radiation and releases of gaseous effluents from the SHINE process. All radioactive materials would be strictly controlled, and all radiological doses would comply with regulatory limits.19.5.3.2.3.3Other Costs No other environmental costs, such as lost tax revenues or decreased recreational values, have been identified. The project is not expected to result in any transportation impacts except for the minor traffic impacts on local roads discussed in Subsection 19.5.3.2.4.1.19.5.3.2.3.4Environmental BenefitsConstruction of this type of facility would be expected to create approximately the same number of construction jobs as the SHINE facility, which means approximately 420 construction jobs during the peak of construction activities. Facility operation would create approximately 150 permanent operational jobs. In addition, the wages earned and money spent by facility employees will stimulate additional economic activity, but this benefit has not been quantified. In addition to economic benefits, the project also would benefit the health of people who need diagnostic tests that require Tc-99m and other isotopes. The facility would be expected to produce approximately the same amount of Tc-99m as the SHINE facility, which means it would satisfy approximately half of the annual demand for these isotopes in the United States. This represents a significant health benefit. The facility would also produce I-131 and Xe-133, which would have additional health benefits.19.5.3.2.3.5Production of Commercial ProductsThe facility would be expected to produce 3,000 6-day Ci per week, which means it would produce approximately 156,000 6-day Ci of Mo-99 per year. This translates to approximately 9,500,000 doses of Tc-99m per year for diagnostic tests. In addition, the facility would be expected to produce approximately 100,000 Ci of I-131 and 100,000 Ci of Xe-133 per year.19.5.3.2.3.6Increase in Tax PaymentsThe facility would be expected to pay approximately the same amount of taxes as the SHINE facility. This means that the facility would pay property taxes of approximately $635,000 per year during construction and approximately $660,000 per year during operation (after expiration of an initial 10-year TIF agreement), representing an increase of approximately 0.30 percent in the annual property tax revenues of Rock County. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-92Rev. 019.5.3.2.3.7Creation and Improvement of InfrastructureNo creation or improvement of infrastructure would be expected to result directly from the project. The City of Janesville plans to install a water main and a sewer main along the northern boundary of the site, but the project is not dependent on this construction.19.5.3.2.3.8Other BenefitsNo other significant benefits have been identified. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewComparison of the Potential Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-93Rev. 019.5.4COMPARISON OF THE POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS19.5.4.1ALTERNATIVE SITESThis section compares the environmental impacts, costs, and benefits di scussed in Subsections 19.5.2 and 19.5.3 for the alternative sites with the impacts, costs, and benefits expected at the SHINE project site, and evaluates whether any of the alternatives would reduce or avoid adverse effects. Table 19.5.4-1 summarizes the expected environmental impacts of project construction at the SHINE project site (Janesville), each of the alternative sites (Chippewa Falls and Stevens Point), and the No-Action Alternative. Construction impacts at the SHINE project site are SMALL for every resource category. Both of the alternative sites have MODERATE construction impacts in several resource categories. Chippewa Falls and Stevens Point both have a MODERATE construction impact in Visual Resources, Noise, and Socioeconomic Transportation. In addition, Stevens Point has a MODERATE construction impact in Land Use and Ground Water Resources. As expected, the No-Action Alternative impacts are SMALL for every resource category as no construction would occur. However, the No-Action Alternative would not produce any of the benefits that would be produced by construction at the SHINE site or the alternative sites. These benefits include the creation of jobs and increases in tax payments to the local jurisdictions in which the site is located.Table 19.5.4-2 summarizes the expected environmental impacts of project operation at the SHINE project site, each of the alternative sites, and the No-Action Alternative. Operation impacts at the SHINE project site and both of the alternative sites are SMALL for every resource category. As expected, the No-Action Alternative impacts are SMALL for every resource category as project operation would not occur. Again, however, the No-Action Alternative would not produce any of the benefits that would be produced by operation at the SHINE project site or the alternative sites. These benefits include the of jobs, increases in tax payments to the local jurisdictions in which the site is located, the production of valuable commercial products, and the significant health benefits of having a reliable domestic source of diagnostic isotopes. Based on the information summarized above, neither of the alternative sites would reduce or avoid adverse effects as compared with the SHINE project site. The No-Action Alternative would avoid the environmental impacts associated with construction and operation, but since all of these impacts are SMALL at the SHINE project site, avoiding these impacts is not significant. The No-Action Alternative would not produce any of the benefits associated with the project.19.5.4.2ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGIESThis section compares the environmental impacts, costs, and benefits di scussed in Subsections 19.5.2 and 19.5.3 for the alternative technologies with the impacts, costs, and benefits expected for the SHINE technology, and evaluates whether any of the alternatives would reduce or avoid adverse effects. Table 19.5.4-3 summarizes the expected environmental impacts of project construction for the SHINE technology, each of the alternative technologies (linear accelerator technology and LEU aqueous homogeneous reactor), and the No-Action Alternative. Construction impacts for the SHINE technology are SMALL for every resource category. The alternative technologies also have SMALL construction impacts for every resource category. As expected, the No-Action Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewComparison of the Potential Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-94Rev. 0Alternative impacts are SMALL for every resource category as no construction would occur. However, the No-Action Alternative would not produce any of the benefits that would be produced by construction of the SHINE technology or the alternative technologies. These benefits include the creation of jobs and increases in tax payments to the local jurisdictions in which the project is located. Table 19.5.4-4 summarizes the expected environmental impacts of project operation for the SHINE technology, each of the alternative technologies, and the No-Action Alternative. Operational impacts for the SHINE technology are SMALL for every resource category. The alternative technologies also have SMALL operational impacts for every resource category. As expected, the No-Action Alternative impacts are SMALL for every resource category as project operation would not occur. Again, however, the No-Action Alternative would not produce any of the benefits that would be produced by operation of the SHINE technology or the alternative technologies. These benefits include the creation of jobs, increases in tax payments to the local jurisdictions in which the site is located, the production of valuable commercial products, and the significant health benefits of having a reliable domestic source of diagnostic isotopes. Based on the information summarized above, none of the alternative technologies would reduce or avoid adverse effects as compared with the SHINE technology. The No-Action Alternative would avoid the environmental impacts associated with construction and operation, but since all of these impacts are SMALL for the SHINE technology, avoiding these impacts is not significant. The No-Action Alternative would not produce any of the benefits associated with the project. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewComparison of the Potential Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-95Rev. 0Table 19.5.4-1 Comparison of Construction Impacts for the SHINE Site and Alternative SitesCategorySHINE (Janesville)Chippewa FallsStevens PointNo-Action Land Use Impacts SMALLSMALLMODERATESMALLVisual Resources Impacts SMALLMODERATEMODERATESMALLAir Quality Impacts SMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLNoise Impacts SMALLMODERATEMODERATESMALLGeology, Soils, and Seismology Impacts SMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLWater Resources Impacts Surface Water Impacts SMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL Ground Water ImpactsSMALLSMALLMODERATESMALLEcological Resources Impacts Aquatic Resource sSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL Terrestrial Resour cesSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLHistorical and Cultural Resources Impacts SMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLSocioeconomic Impacts HousingSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL Public Services SMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL Public EducationSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL TaxesSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL TransportationSMALLMODERATEMODERATESMALLHuman Health Impacts Nonradiological ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL Radiological ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLWaste Management Impacts SMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLTransportation Impacts SMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLPostulated Accident Impacts SMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLEnvironmental Justice Impacts SMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLEnvironmental Benefits - Jobs 420420 420 NoneEnvironmental Benefits - HealthNoneNoneNoneNoneProduction of Commercial ProductsNoneNoneNoneNoneProperty Tax Payments$635,000 per year$635,000 per year$635,000 per yearNone Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewComparison of the Potential Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-96Rev. 0Table 19.5.4-2 Comparison of Operation Impacts for the SHINE Site and Alternative Sitesa)The number of required operation workers and property tax payments are expected to be the same for all sites.CategorySHINE (Janesville)Chippewa FallsStevens PointNo-Action Land Use ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLVisual Resources ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLAir Quality ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLNoise ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLGeology, Soils, and Seismology ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLWater Resources Impacts Surface Water ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL Ground Water ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLEcological Resources Impacts Aquatic ResourcesSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL Terrestrial ResourcesSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLHistorical and Cultural Resources ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLSocioeconomic Impacts HousingSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL Public ServicesSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL Public EducationSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL TaxesSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL TransportationSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLHuman Health Impacts Nonradiological ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL Radiological ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLWaste Management ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLTransportation ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLPostulated Accident ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLEnvironmental Justice ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLEnvironmental Benefits - Jobs150150150NoneEnvironmental Benefits - HealthReliable source ofdiagnostic isotopesReliable source ofdiagnostic isotopesReliable source ofdiagnostic isotopesNoneProduction of Commercial Products Mo-99, I-131, Xe-133Mo-99, I-131, Xe-133Mo-99, I-131, Xe-133 NoneProperty Tax Payments(a)$660,000 per year$660,000 per year$660,000 per year None Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewComparison of the Potential Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-97Rev. 0Table 19.5.4-3 Comparison of Construction Impacts for the SHINE Technology and Alternative TechnologiesCategorySHINE TechnologyLinear Accelerator TechnologyLow Enriched Uranium Aqueous Homogeneous ReactorNo-Action Land Use ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLVisual Resources ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLAir Quality ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLNoise ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLGeology, Soils, and Seismology ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLWater Resources ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLEcological Resources ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLHistorical and Cultural Resources ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLSocioeconomic ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLHuman Health ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLWaste Management ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLTransportation ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLPostulated Accident ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLEnvironmental Justice ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLEnvironmental Benefits - Jobs420 420 420 NoneEnvironmental Benefits - HealthNoneNoneNoneNoneProduction of Commercial ProductsNoneNoneNoneNoneProperty Tax Payments$635,000 per year$635,000 per year$635,000 per yearNone Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewComparison of the Potential Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-98Rev. 0Table 19.5.4-4 Comparison of Operation Impacts for the SHINE Technology and Alternative Technologiesa)The number of required operation workers and property tax payments are assumed to be the same for all technologies.CategorySHINE TechnologyLinear Accelerator TechnologyLow Enriched Uranium Aqueous Homogeneous ReactorNo-Action AlternativeLand Use ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLVisual Resources ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLAir Quality ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLNoise ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLGeology, Soils, and Seismology ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLWater Resources ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLEcological Resources ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLHistorical and Cultural Resources ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLSocioeconomic ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLHuman Health ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLWaste Management ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLTransportation ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLPostulated Accident ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLEnvironmental Justice ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLEnvironmental Benefits - Jobs150 150 150 NoneEnvironmental Benefits - HealthReliable source of diagnostic isotopesReliable source of diagnostic isotopesReliable source of diagnostic isotopesNoneProduction of Commercial ProductsMo-99, I-131, Xe-133Mo-99 Mo-99, I-131, Xe-133NoneProperty Tax Payments (a)$660,000 per year$660,000 per year$660,000 per yearNone Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTable of ContentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-iRev. 0SECTION
19.6CONCLUSION
STable of Contents SectionTitlePage
19.6CONCLUSION
S.................................................................................................19.6-119.6.1UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS............................19.6-119.6.2RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SHORT-TERM USES AND LONG-TERMPRODUCTIVITY OF THE ENVIRONMENT....................................................19.6-1319.6.3IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCES.................................................................................................19.6-15 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-iiRev. 0List of Tables NumberTitle19.6.1-1Construction-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts19.6.1-2Operations-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts19.6.3-1United States Inventories for Minerals Used in Construction Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of FiguresSHINE Medical Technologies 19.6-iiiRev. 0List of Figures NumberTitleNone Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.6-ivRev. 0Acronyms and AbbreviationsAcronym/Abbreviation Definition ac.acreBMPbest management practice hahectarekgkilogramLOSlevel of service NOxnitrogen oxidesOSHAOccupational Safety and Health AdministrationROIRegion of InfluenceSHState HighwaySHINESHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. SWPPPStorm Water Pollution Prevention PlanUSU.S. HighwayWDNRWisconsin Department of Natural ResourcesWHSWisconsin Historical Society Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.6-1Rev. 0CHAPTER 19
19.6CONCLUSION
S19.6.1UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTSUnavoidable adverse impacts are predicted adverse environmental impacts that cannot be avoided and for which there are no practical means of further mitigation. This section considers unavoidable adverse impacts from construction and operation of the proposed SHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. (SHINE) facility.19.6.1.1Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts of ConstructionConstruction impacts and measures and controls available to reduce or eliminate impacts are discussed in detail in Section 19.4. As described in the section, all impacts are SMALL, as they are either not detectable or are minor compared to the availability of the affected resources. Table 19.6.1-1 summarizes construction-related impacts that result in a measurable loss or permanent change in resources, the mitigation and control measures available to reduce those impacts, and the remaining unavoidable adverse impacts after mitigation and control measures are applied. For many of the impacts related to construction activities, the mitigation measures are referred to as best management practices (BMPs). Typically, these mitigation measures are based on the types of activities that are to be performed. The mitigation measures are implemented through permitting requirements, and plans and procedures developed for the construction activities.Unavoidable adverse impacts from construction of the SHINE facility include changing land use on 25.67 acres (ac.) (10.39 hectares [ha]) of agricultural/cultivated crop land to industrial facilities, the conversion of prime farmland and farmland of statewide importance to industrial land, and partial obstruction of views of the existing landscape. Since there are no streams, ponds, or water bodies present on the SHINE site, potential construction-related impacts to water resources are limited to off-site impacts associated with runoff and siltation. Impacts to agricultural/cultivated crop land from construction of the facility are mitigated by returning lands within the site boundary that surround the interior developed areas to either cultivated fields or restored native landscapes upon completion of construction. To minimize impacts to visual resources, landscaping of the site along U.S. Highway 51 (US 51) street frontage and bordering access road will be performed. Open spaces around the facility structures are vegetated with cool-season lawn and shrub borders. Impacts from stormwater runoff are mitigated with stormwater management plans and BMPs during construction. Construction activities also temporarily impact 14.54 ac. (5.88 ha) of agricultural lands used for the construction parking area, construction material staging or lay down area, and water and sewer line installation. Temporary impact areas are either returned to agriculture or restored with either cool-season grasses or native prairie.Construction activities result in unavoidable localized increases in air emissions and noise. Activities associated with the use of construction equipment may result in varying amounts of dust, air emissions, noise, and vibration that may potentially impact both on-site workers and off-site residents of the community. Potential noise impacts also include traffic noise associated with the construction workforce traveling to and from the SHINE site, particularly during shift Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.6-2Rev. 0changes. Emissions from construction activities and equipment are minimized through implementation of mitigation measures, including proper maintenance of construction equipment and vehicles. Posted speed limits, traffic control and administrative measures, such as staggered shift hours, will reduce traffic noise during the weekday business hours. By implementation of mitigation measures, emissions and noise impacts associated with construction activities are temporary and localized at and near the SHINE site.19.6.1.2Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts of OperationsOperational impacts and measures and controls available to reduce or eliminate impacts are discussed in detail in Section 19.4. As described in the section, all impacts are SMALL, as they are either not detectable or are minor compared to the availability of the affected resources. Table 19.6.1-2 summarizes operations-related impacts that result in a measurable loss or permanent change in resources, the mitigation and control measures available to reduce these impacts, and the remaining adverse impacts after mitigation and control measures are applied. As indicated in Table 19.6.1-2 most of the adverse impacts are either avoidable or negligible after mitigation and control measures are considered. Unavoidable adverse impacts from operation of the SHINE facility include a change to the viewshed, potential storm water runoff to the intermittent stream or Rock River, and infrequent bird collisions with buildings. Minor visual impacts to the viewshed will occur as a result of the main building and exhaust vent stack. However, the surrounding viewshed includes light industrial development, therefore impacts are minor. Stormwater runoff during plant operation is controlled through a vegetated on-site detention swale. Infrequent bird collisions with buildings at the SHINE facility and associated structures may result in some bird mortality. Most buildings on the SHINE site have a relatively low profile, therefore effects on bird populations from collisions with buildings is minimized.The operation of the SHINE facility will result in a slight degradation in the level of service (LOS) at the signalized intersection of US 51 and State Highway (SH) 11. Specifically, the westbound SH 11 to southbound US 51 left-turning movement is affected during the morning peak hour. This condition is easily mitigated by optimizing the signal timing for this turning movement, which will improve the LOS to its existing level. 19.6.1.3Summary of Adverse Environmental Impacts from Construction and OperationsTables 19.6.1-1 and 19.6.1-2 indicate that all of the adverse environmental impacts associated with the new facility construction and operation are SMALL and are further reduced through the application of mitigation and control measures. Most of the impacts from construction and operation are SMALL due to design features that result in lower levels of impacts, BMPs that control and mitigate emissions and discharges to air and water, use of agricultural/cultivated crop lands that were previously altered or disturbed, and applicable federal and state permitting requirements designed to protect humans and biota. These SMALL impacts generally have no detectable adverse impacts or only minor adverse impacts. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.6-3Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-1 Construction-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 1 of 6)ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsLand Use and Visual ResourcesConstruction of new facility will permanently impact 25.67 ac. (10.39 ha) of agricultural/cultivated crop land.Impacts include conversion of prime farmland and farmland of statewide importance to industrial land.Construction activities comply with all relevant federal, state, and local regulatory requirements, including BMPs and stormwater management plans to control erosion and runoff.Impacts to agricultural/cultivated crop land are mitigated by returning lands within the site boundary that surround the interior developed areas to cultivated fields or restored native landscapes or cool-season grasses upon construction completion.A total of 25.67 ac. (10.39 ha) of agricultural/cultivated crop land is lost.Amount of prime farmland or farmland of statewide importance lost is minor in context of region.Partial obstruction of views of the existing landscape.Visual impacts are minimized through landscaping of the site. Open spaces around the facility structures are vegetated with cool-season lawn and shrub borders.A minor change in existing landscape is expected.Temporary impact of 14.54 ac. (5.88ha) of agricultural lands used for construction parking area, construction material staging or lay down area, and water and sewer line installation.Temporary impact areas are either returned to agriculture or restored with either cool-season grasses or native prairie.Some localized short-term impacts to temporary impact areas are expected. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.6-4Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-1 Construction-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 2 of 6)ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsGeologic ResourcesPotential local adverse impacts due to excavation and other construction related activities.Geologic resources at the site are the same throughout the region and do not include any unique or rare geological resources.No mitigation measures beyond compliance with local building codes are anticipated as no significant impacts due to large scale or local hazards are identified.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Water UseAll public water supplies in Rock County are sourced from groundwater. Additional needs during construction are identified and are satisfied under existing system capacities.Water and sewer utility lines will be installed by the City of Janesville in support of the overall TIF development on the north side of the site. No additional upgrades or mitigation measures are expected.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Water QualityPotential impacts are limited to off-site areas and are associated with runoff and siltation into roadside swales. BMPs will be used in accordance with the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) as required by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) to prevent sediment runoff and subsequent siltation in off-site areas during construction.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Terrestrial EcologyWildlife potentially affected by construction, includes bird, mammal, and/or herpetofauna
species.Area is routinely disturbed for agriculture and there are no water resources on-site, therefore wildlife use of the site is low.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.6-5Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-1 Construction-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 3 of 6) ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsTerrestrial Ecology, cont'dThere is a potential for bird collisions with man-made structures such as cranes and buildings during construction.Based on findings of NUREG-1437, the effects of avian collisions with man-made structures occur at very low frequencies.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Artificial lighting could create or exacerbate an avian-collision hazard if tall cranes are illuminated during nighttime construction.For any nighttime construction, BMPs such as shielding and appropriate directional lighting are used to mitigate the hazards to wildlife associated with artificial nighttime illumination.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Potential impacts to state or federal threatened/endangered species or species of special concern identified within the region.Consultation identified state and federally listed species in the region, however none on the SHINE site. None of the listed species were observed on-site during field reconnaissance surveys.Sensitive species located in off-site riparian areas could be affected indirectly during construction via stormwater runoff from the site. The use of appropriate BMPs during construction combined with the distance to the nearest off-site areas minimizes impacts to any protected species.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Aquatic EcologyPotential impacts are limited to off-site areas associated with runoff and siltation into the small intermittent stream and Rock River.BMPs will be used in accordance with the SWPPP as required by the WDNR to prevent sediment runoff and subsequent siltation in receiving streams during construction.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.6-6Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-1 Construction-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 4 of 6)ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSocioeconomicsThere is a minor potential increase in the local population and associated increased demand for local public services, schooling, housing, and land.Estimated population increases are relatively small compared to the population in the ROI. Increases in local tax revenues support increased services. Specific measures and controls are not needed as impacts are minor.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Potential impacts in traffic infrastructure and patterns due to increased traffic from
construction-related vehicles.Construction-related traffic does not affect the level of service anywhere in the transportation infrastructure and no modifications to the infrastructure are necessary.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Human HealthPotential impacts to the general public and construction workforce include dust and other air emissions during construction.BMPs including dust control plans are implemented during construction to minimize fugitive dust.Minor localized increases in air emissions will occur, mostly at and near the SHINE site. Radiation ExposurePotential adverse impacts to the general public and construction workforce from the construction and handling of isotope production equipment and supplies.Exposure is minimized through safe handling procedures and robust Radiation Protection and ALARA Programs.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Air QualityActivities associated with the use of construction equipment may result in varying amounts of dust, air emissions, noise, and vibration and may potentially impact both on-site workers and off-site residents of the community.BMPs and dust control plans are used for controlling fugitive dust.Proper maintenance of construction equipment and vehicles is used to control air emissions.Minor localized increases in air emissions will occur, mostly at and near the SHINE site.Detectable changes to local meteorology are not anticipated. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.6-7Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-1 Construction-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 5 of 6)ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsAir Quality, cont'dPainting, coating and similar operations also generate emissions from the use of volatile organic compounds.Contractors, vendors, and subcontractors will adhere to appropriate federal and state occupational health and safety regulations. Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.On-site equipment use and traffic due to construction activities can result in local increases in emissions. Potential air quality impacts are limited as the project is in an attainment area and is largely surrounded by agricultural fields and other undeveloped areas.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated. NoisePotential impacts due to increase in noise levels from construction equipment, including to nearby residences, churches, and recreational areas.On-site noise level exposure is controlled through appropriate training, personnel protective equipment, periodic health and safety monitoring, and industry good practices. Noise levels from equipment are expected attenuate rapidly between the site and the nearest sensitive noise receptors.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Potential increase in traffic noise associated with construction workforce traveling to and from the SHINE site, particularly during shift changes.Posted speed limits, traffic control and administrative measures, such as staggered shift hours reduces traffic noise during weekday business hours.Potential noise impacts are intermittent and limited primarily to shift changes. Environmental
JusticeThere is potential for adverse impacts to low-income and minority populations.Populations classified as low income are distant from the site not impacted by the SHINE facility.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.6-8Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-1 Construction-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 6 of 6)ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsHistoric and Cultural ResourcesNo adverse impacts on cultural or historic resources have been identified.A Phase I study was performed and the Wisconsin Historical Society (WHS) reviewed the findings and indicated that no further consultation is needed.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.6-9Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-2 Operations-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 1 of 4)ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsLand Use and Visual ResourcesVisual impacts as a result of the main building and exhaust vent stack.The majority of the facility structures have a relatively low profile. The exhaust vent stack will extend to 96 feet (29 meters) above grade. No mitigation is required.Minor impacts to viewscape will occur, however the surrounding viewshed includes similar light industrial development, therefore impacts are small.Geologic ResourcesPotential impacts from sediment erosion at the site.The primary soils present at the site are classified as slightly erodible and the secondary soils are classified as moderately erodible. No mitigation is required.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Water UsePotential impact on water supply for the region based on demand from SHINE facility.The City of Janesville has determined the current system has more than enough capacity to support the increase in demand. No mitigation is required.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Water QualityPotential impacts from stormwater runoff to the intermittent stream or Rock River.A vegetated on-site detention swale is used to control stormwater runoff.Mitigation measures in combination with the distance to the water bodies will minimize runoff and siltation to off-site areas.Terrestrial EcologyPossible exposure of terrestrial fauna and flora to herbicides due to vegetation management practices may occur.Herbicides are applied per an integrated pest management plan and applicable permit/BMP requirements.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Infrequent bird collisions with buildings resulting in mortality can occur.Most buildings on the SHINE site have a relatively low profile, minimizing bird collisions.Effects on bird populations from collisions with buildings are minimized and are not anticipated to be significant. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-10Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-2 Operations-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 2 of 4)ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsAquatic EcologyPotential impacts from stormwater runoff to the off-site intermittent stream or Rock River.A vegetated on-site detention swale is used to control storm water runoff.Mitigation measures in combination with the distance to the water bodies will minimize runoff and siltation to off-site receiving streams.SocioeconomicsAn increase in the Region of Influence (ROI) population of 0.08 percent will occur to support the operations workforce, potentially impacting social services.Adequate housing, school capacity, water supply and water treatment capacities exist to accommodate minor population increase; therefore, mitigation is not required.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Potential beneficial impacts to tax revenues to Janesville and Rock County.There is an increase in tax revenues collected by county and regional taxing authorities which does have beneficial impacts.No mitigation is required.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated. Increased traffic along US 51 coming from the north, resulting in a slight decrease in LOS at the intersection of US 51 and SH 11 during morning peak hour.Traffic impacts are mitigated by optimizing the signal timing at the intersection to accommodate a greater turning movement from westbound SH11 to southbound US 51.By optimizing signal timing at the intersection, the LOS for the intersection is improved to its existing level.Human HealthPotential pathways of public exposure to chemicals include air, land, and water.Control systems to minimize potential exposure to the public include conveyance of all wastewater produced from the facility to the City of Janesville wastewater treatment facility, use of swales to control off-site runoff, erosion control measures, and air emission controls. Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-11Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-2 Operations-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 3 of 4)ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsRadiation ExposurePotential adverse impacts to the general public and operations workforce from isotope production and associated waste.Site shielding design of the buildings minimizes radiation exposure of the public outside the buildings. Exposure of the workforce is minimized through compliance with OSHA standards.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Air QualityIncreased vehicle emissions and dust from the commuting workforce and routine deliveries to/from the SHINE facility.The volume of traffic during operations is considerably lower than during construction. Vehicles are largely limited to paved areas, reducing the emissions of fugitive dust.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Emissions from the natural gas-fired boiler and heaters.Emissions of nitrogen oxides (NO x) from the boiler are controlled using low-NO x burners, which produces lower NO x emissions during the combustion process.Emissions from the heaters are controlled using combustion controls and properly designed and tuned burners.No impacts exceed the primary ambient air quality standards that are established to protect public health; therefore unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.NoiseNoise generated during operations relates primarily to vehicular movements associated with employees and deliveries.The number of work-related trips is minor relative to the existing traffic flow on US 51 and does not result in notable increased noise emissions.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.External noise emissions from the SHINE facility during operation may impact surrounding sensitive noise receptors.Operational noise from the facility is primarily limited by the walls and other physical barriers of the facility itself.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-12Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-2 Operations-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 4 of 4)ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsEnvironmental JusticeNo adverse impacts on minority or low-income populations have been identified.Level of impact is comparable for all populations and mitigation is not required.Impacts to low income and minority populations are not anticipated.Historic and Cultural
ResourcesNo adverse impacts on cultural or historic resources have been identified.A Phase I study was performed and the WHS reviewed the findings and indicated that no further consultation is needed.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewRelationship Between Short-Term Uses and Long-Term Productivity of the EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-13Rev. 019.6.2RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SHORT-TERM USES AND LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY OF THE ENVIRONMENTThis Environmental Report focuses on the analyses and resulting conclusions associated with the environmental impacts from activities during the new plant construction and operation at the SHINE site. These activities are considered short-term uses for purposes of this section. In this section, the long-term is considered to be initiated with the conclusion of new facility decommissioning at the SHINE site. This section includes an evaluation of the extent that the short-term uses preclude any options for future long-term use of the SHINE site.19.6.2.1Construction of the SHINE Facility and Long-Term ProductivitySubsection 19.6.1.1 summarizes the potential unavoidable adverse environmental impacts of construction and the measures proposed to reduce those impacts. Some SMALL adverse environmental impacts could remain after all practical measures to avoid or mitigate them are taken. However, none of these impacts represent long-term effects that preclude any options for future use of the SHINE site.The acreage disturbed during construction of the facility is larger than that required for the actual structures and other ancillary facilities because of the need for construction parking areas, and construction material staging and laydown areas. Preparation of these on-site areas coupled with noise from construction activities, may displace some wildlife and alter existing vegetation. Once the new facility is completed, the areas not needed for operations are returned to agricultural land or restored with either cool-season grasses or native prairie.Construction of the SHINE facility includes the installation of water and sewer lines that connect the facility to the City of Janesville water supply system. This additional infrastructure will be available and beneficial to any future use of the SHINE site after decommissioning.Noise emitted by some construction activities increases the ambient noise levels on-site and in adjacent off-site areas. During construction, the workforce is protected from excessive noise levels by adherence to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requirements within high noise environments. There are no effects on the long-term productivity of the SHINE site as a result of these impacts.Construction traffic increases the volume of traffic on local roads, but does not have an adverse impact on the LOS. Consequently, no modifications to the traffic infrastructure are necessary and there are no effects on long-term productivity.Facility construction has beneficial socioeconomic effects on the local area such as new construction-related jobs, local spending by the construction workforce, and payment of taxes within the area and region. The in-migration of the construction and operation workforce support the expansion of existing small businesses or locations for new small businesses that might serve SHINE and its employees. The beneficial impacts from the in-migration of the construction workforce and indirect economic output and employment resulting from construction expenditures to the communities within the region of influence (ROI) cease once construction is complete. However, the changes that are the result of increased tax revenues continue throughout the operational life of the facility. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewRelationship Between Short-Term Uses and Long-Term Productivity of the EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-14Rev. 0Construction of the SHINE facility will have no impacts on populations identified as minority or low-income as minority populations are lacking within the region around the SHINE site, and low income populations are limited to isolated areas in the center of Janesville. Therefore, there are no effects on the long-term productivity of the SHINE site as a result of impacts on environmental justice. 19.6.2.2Operation of the SHINE Facility and Long-Term Productivity Subsection 19.6.1.2 summarizes the potential unavoidable adverse environmental impacts of operation and the measures proposed to reduce or eliminate those impacts. Some SMALL adverse environmental impacts could remain after all practical measures to avoid or mitigate them are taken. However, none of these impacts represent long-term effects that preclude any options for future use of the SHINE site.The SHINE site is located in an area that has previously been disturbed for agricultural use and is currently zoned for industrial use as an amendment to the Tax Increment Financing No.35 Project Plan. Therefore, operation of the new facility represents a continuation of the planned land use. Once the facility is decommissioned to Nuclear Regulatory Commission standards, the land could be available for other industrial or non-industrial uses.During operation, noise levels are expected to decrease to ambient levels as facility-generated noise is limited by the walls and other physical barriers of the facility itself. Operation of the new facility will slightly increase air emissions from the boiler and stacks. The equipment is operated in accordance with applicable federal, state, and local regulations, and is not expected to result in any long-term decrease in regional air quality. Preliminary modeling shows that for all pollutants except for the 1-hour nitrogen oxides (NO x), the maximum concentrations are below the Significant Impact Level.Operation of the SHINE facility will have a comparable impact on all populations in the region around the site. No impacts are expected to either minority or low income populations as minority populations are lacking within the region around the SHINE site, and low income populations are limited to isolated areas in the center of Janesville. Therefore there are no long-term effects to environmental justice that preclude any options for future use of the SHINE site. 19.6.2.3Summary of the Relationship Between Short-Term Use and Long-Term ProductivityThe impacts resulting from the SHINE facility construction and operation result in both adverse and beneficial short-term impacts. The principal short-term adverse impacts are SMALL residual impacts (after mitigation measures are implemented) to land use, terrestrial ecology, local traffic, and air quality. There are no long-term impacts to the environment. The principal short-term benefits are the creation of additional jobs, additional tax revenues, and improvements to local infrastructure. The principal long-term benefit is the continued availability of the improved infrastructure and potential benefits from increased tax revenues after facility decommissioning. The short-term impacts and benefits and long-term benefits do not affect long-term productive use of the SHINE site. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIrreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-15Rev. 019.6.3IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIE VABLE COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCESThis subsection describes the expected irreversible and irretrievable environmental resource commitments used in the new facility construction and operation. The term irreversible commitments of resources describes environmental resources that are potentially changed by the new facility construction or operation and that could not be restored at some later time to the resource's state prior to construction or operation. Irretrievable commitments of resources are generally materials that are used for the new facility in such a way that they could not, by practical means, be recycled or restored for other uses.19.6.3.1Irreversible Environmental Commitments of ResourcesIrreversible environmental resource commitments resulting from the new facility, in addition to the materials used for radioisotope production are described in the following sections.19.6.3.1.1Land Use The land used for the SHINE facility is not irreversibly committed because once SHINE ceases operations and the facility is decommissioned in accordance with Nuclear Regulatory Commission requirements, the land supporting the facilities could be returned to other industrial or nonindustrial uses. There is no storage or disposal of radioactive and nonradioactive wastes at the site. Medical isotopes are not stored for any significant time period as these items are transported to clients as quickly as possible. Irradiated enriched uranium is not an issue as the facility cleans up and recycles this material rather than storing spent nuclear fuel. Approximately 26ac. (10.5ha) of prime farmland or farmland of statewide importance on the SHINE site could be irreversibly converted to developed land or experience surface soil damage during temporary use such that the soil properties responsible for the prime farmland designation would be irreversibly damaged.19.6.3.1.2Hydrologic ResourcesThe new facility requires water from the Janesville Water Utility to use for construction, isotope production, potable water, fire protection, and facility heating and cooling. The City of Janesville provides water supply for both public drinking and fire protection through groundwater wells. The average estimated water usage by the SHINE facility during operations is 6070 gallons (22,977 L) per day and a consumptive water use of 1560 gallons (5905 L) per week. According to the city of Janesville, the total pumping capacity of its eight groundwater wells is 29 Mgd (109.8 Mld). Average water usage is about 11 Mgd (41.6 Mld). Accordingly, the excess capacity of the Janesville water supply system is approximately 18 Mgd (68.1 Mld). Because there is excess capacity within the Janesville water supply system, there are no indirect effects associated with the demand from the SHINE facility. There are no direct impacts to water quality or hydrology from the SHINE facility; therefore there will be no irreversible impacts.19.6.3.1.3Ecological Resources Long-term irreversible losses of terrestrial biota are not anticipated. Subsequent to the completion of construction, floral and faunal resources are expected to recover in areas that are not affected by on-going operations. Floral resources at the site and in the region are limited to agricultural/cultivated crop plants. Losses of fauna due to operations are primarily attributable to Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIrreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-16Rev. 0bird collisions with buildings at the facility as wildlife occurrence on the site is relatively infrequent. There are no wetlands or water bodies located at the SHINE site.All water for the SHINE facility is provided by the Janesville Water Utility, therefore, water supply intake or cooling water intake structures on the Rock River are not needed. Thus, there are no operational impacts associated with impingement or entrainment of aquatic biota. Furthermore, the SHINE facility does not discharge directly into the Rock River or any other nearby water body thus, avoiding any impacts associated with pollutant or thermal discharges to aquatic resources. In addition, a vegetated on-site detention swale is used to control stormwater runoff which, when combined with the distance to the nearest off-site water bodies minimizes runoff and siltation to off-site receiving streams.19.6.3.1.4Socioeconomic Resources No irreversible commitments will be made to socioeconomic resources because they are reallocated for other purposes once the facility is decommissioned. 19.6.3.1.5Historic and Cultural ResourcesNo known historic or cultural resources are irreversibly altered due to the SHINE facility.19.6.3.1.6Air Quality Dust and other emissions, such as vehicle exhaust, are released to the air during construction activities. Implementation of controls and limits at the source of emissions on the construction site result in reduction of impacts off-site. The dust control program reduces dust due to construction activities to minimize dust reaching site boundaries. Specific mitigation measures are discussed in Subsection 19.4.2.1.1. During operations, emissions will be a product of vehicle exhaust, isotope production, and fuel combustion resulting in very low levels of gaseous pollutants and particulates released from the facility into the air. Contractors, vendors, and subcontractors are required to adhere to appropriate federal and state occupational health and safety regulations to protect workers from adverse conditions, including air emissions. Emissions during operations are in compliance with applicable Federal and State regulations, minimizing their impact on public health and the environment.19.6.3.1.7Irretrievable Commitments of ResourcesIrretrievable commitments of resources during new plant construction are generally similar to that of any small-scale medical facility construction project. Unlike previous industrial construction, asbestos and other materials considered hazardous are not used or are used sparingly and in accordance with safety regulations and practices. Materials consumed during the construction phase are shown in Table 19.2.0-1. These materials are irretrievable unless they are recycled at decommissioning. Additionally, approximately 24,587gallons of diesel fuel (as a bounding assumption all fuel is assumed to be diesel) is expected to be used on an average monthly basis (Subsection 19.2.0). Use of construction materials in the quantities associated with the facility has a SMALL impact with respect to the availability of such resources. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIrreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-17Rev. 0During operations, the main resource that is irreversibly and irretrievably committed is the uranium used as the source for the molybdenum isotope. The amount of uranium that SHINE will require on an annual basis and over the lifetime of the operating license (assuming a 30-year operating license) is very small when compared to the amount consumed by other users and the total global supply of uranium. The World Nuclear Association studies of supply and demand of uranium indicate that a total of 5,327,200 metric tons of uranium were available in 2011, representing an 80-year supply of uranium at current market prices based on known resources (World Nuclear Association, 2012). This could increase to a 200-year supply as market prices rise and other conventional sources of uranium are used. Therefore, the uranium that is used to generate the medical radioisotopes has a negligible impact with respect to the long-term availability of uranium worldwide. The inventories of minerals used in the construction of power plants, as tabulated by the U.S. Census Bureau for 2000, 2008, and 2009, are shown in Table 19.6.3-1. The table also provides estimated inventories for 2010. Aluminum supplies have dropped since 2000 from 3,688,000 metric tons in 2000 to 1,727,000 metric tons in 2009 and have remained reasonably stable from 2009 to 2010. The supply of most other minerals has remained reasonably stable since 2000, with only minor fluctuations in availability during 2008 to 2010. The reasonably stable supply of minerals suggests that they will continue to be available for the foreseeable future in response to demand. While a given quantity of material consumed during new facility construction and operation at the SHINE site is irretrievable, except for materials recycled during decommissioning, the impact on their availability is SMALL. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIrreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-18Rev. 0Table 19.6.3-1 United States Inventories for Minerals Used in Construction
Reference:
US Census Bureau, 2012 MineralsYear2000200820092010Inventory in 1000 Metric Tons by Year Aluminum3688265817271720Copper1450131011801120 Lead449399406385 Titanium300200200200 Zinc796748710699Inventory in Million Metric Tons by YearIron Ore61542850 Portland Cement84836261 Masonry Cement4322 Construction Sand and Gravel11201040844760 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTable of ContentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.7-iRev. 0SECTION
19.7REFERENCES
Table of Contents SectionTitlePage
19.7REFERENCES
................................................................................................19.7-119.
7.1INTRODUCTION
OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW............................19.7-119.7.2PROPOSED ACTION..................................................................................19.7-219.7.3DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT...............................19.7-219.7.4IMPACTS OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION, OPERATIONS, AND DECOMMISSIONING..................................................................................19.7-1919.7.5ALTERNATIVES..........................................................................................19.7-2319.
7.6CONCLUSION
S...........................................................................................19.7-28 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies19.7-iiRev. 0List of Tables NumberTitleNone Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of FiguresSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-iiiRev. 0List of Figures NumberTitleNone Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-1Rev. 0CHAPTER 19
19.7REFERENCES
19.
7.1INTRODUCTION
OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWBonet, 2005. Bonet, Henri, David Bernard, and Ponsard, Bernard, Production of Mo 99 in Europe: Status and Perspectives, April 2005.City of Janesville, 2012. Correspondence from Gale Price, Community Development Department, to Timothy Krause, Sargent & Lundy, January 13, 2012.
COE, 2010. Interim Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Northcentral and Northeast Region, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Regulatory Assistance Program, March 1, 2010.Fissile Material, 2010. HFR Reactor at Petten Resumed Operations, Fissile Material, September 9, 2010, Website: http://www.fissilematerials.org/blog/2010/09/hfr_reactor_ar_petten_res.html, Date accessed: November 22, 2011.MSNBC, 2010. Isotope Shortage Makes Vital Medical Scans Costlier, Riskier, MSNBC, Website: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38882222/ns/technology_and_science-science/t/isotope-shortage-makes-vital-medic al-scans-costlier-riskier, Date accessed: November, 22, 2011.NM, 2012. News Medical, website: http://www.news-medical.net/health/Iodine-131-Medical-Use.aspx, Date accessed: August 9, 2012. NRCL, 2009. Medical Isotope Production Highly Enriched Uranium, National Academies Press, 2009.OECD, 2010. The Supply of Medical Radioisotopes: Interim Report of the OECD/NEA High-level Group on Security of Supply of Medical Isotopes, Nuclear Energy Agency, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2010.RxList, 2012. RxList, The Internet Drug IndexState of Wisconsin, 2012. License, Permit and Registration Services, Website: http://ww2.wisconsin.gov/state/license/app?COMMAND=gov.wi.state.cpp.license.command.LoadLicenseHome, Date accessed: February 1, 2012.U.S. Government, 1992. Energy Policy Act of 1992, 1992.Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 2012. Small Business Assistance - Permit Primer, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/permitprimer/, Date accessed: February 3, 2012.WNN, 2009. Restart for Isotope Reactor, World Nuclear News, February 13, 2009, Website: http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/newsarticle.aspx?id=24658, Date accessed: November 22, 2011. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-2Rev. 019.7.2PROPOSED ACTION N/A19.7.3DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENTAASHTO, 2012. Census Transportation Planning Products (CTPP) 3-year Data Based on 2006 -2008 American Community Survey (ACS), American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Website: http://ctpp.transportation.org/Pages/3yrdas.aspx , Date accessed: May 16, 2012. AFCCC, 1999. Engineering Weather Data, 2000 Interactive Edition, Air Force Combat Climatology Center, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, 1999.American Society of Mammologists, 2012. Mammals of Wisconsin, American Society of Mammologists, Website: http://www.mammalogy.org/mammals-wisconsin, Date accessed: July 11, 2012.
ASCE, 2006. Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, ASCE Standard ASCE/SEI 7-05 Including Supplement No. 1, American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, Virginia, 2006.ASHRAE, 2009. 2009 ASHRAE Handbook - Fundamentals, American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc., IP edition. Chapter 14.6, American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc., Atlanta, Georgia, 2009.Bean, T., 2008. Noise on the Farm Can Cause Hearing Loss, University of Ohio, Agricultural Extension Fact Sheet AEX-590-08, Website: http://ohioline.osu.edu/aex-fact/pdf/AEX_590_08.pdf, Date accessed: August 13, 2012.Bird Nature, 2012. Migration Flyways: Mississippi Flyway, Bird Nature, Website: http://www.birdnature.com/mississippi.html, Date accessed: August 13, 2012.Bing Maps, 2012. Bing Maps Aerial, Microsoft Corporation and its Data Supplies, Website: http://www.esri.com/software/arcgis/arcgisonline/bing-maps.html, Date accessed: August 15, 2012.BLS, 2009. May 2009 Metropolitan and Nonmetropolitan Area Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Website: http://www.bls.gov/oes/2009/may/oes_27500.html, Date accessed: July 19, 2012.BLS, 2011. May 2009 Metropolitan and Nonmetropolitan Area Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Website: http://stat.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_27500.html, Date accessed: June 10, 2012.BLS, 2012a. Local Area Unemployment Statistics, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Website: http://www.bls.gov/data/#unemployment, Date accessed: June 8, 2012.BLS, 2012b. Consumer Price Index (CPI) Inflation Calculator, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Website: http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm, Date accessed: June 14, 2012. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-3Rev. 0BLS, 2012c. Injuries, Illnesses, and Fatalities, Bureau of Labor Statistics, OSHA Recordable Case Rates - Latest Incidence Rates, by Industry, for Nonfatal Work-Related Injuries and Illnesses, Website: http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/osh/os/ostb3191.pdf, Date accessed: February 14, 2013. BLS, 2012d. Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries (CFOI) - Current and Revised Data, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Hours-Based Fatal Injury Rates by Industry, Occupation, and Selected Demographic Characteristics, 2011, Website: http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfoi/cfoi_rates_2011hb.pdf, Date accessed: February 14, 2013.Buchwald, Cheryl A., 2011. Water Use in Wisconsin, 2005, U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2009-1076, Version 1.1, USGS, Wisconsin Water Science Center, November 2011.The CADMUS Group, Inc., 2011. Total Maximum Daily Loads for Total Phosphorus and Total Suspended Solids in the Rock River Basin. Columbia, Dane, Dodge, Fond du Lac, Green, Green Lake, Jefferson, Rock, Walworth, Washington, and Waukesha Counties, Wisconsin, Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/TMDLs/RockRiver/Final_Rock_River_TMDL_Report_with_Tables.pdf, Date accessed: June 11, 2012.California Department of Transportation, 1998. Technical Noise Supplement. http://i80.dot.ca.gov/hq/env/noise/pub/Technical%20Noise%20Supplement.pdf, Date accessed: August 3, 2012. CERI, 2012. Seismic Information. Center for Earthquake Research and Information, Website: http://folkworm.ceri.memphis.edu/recenteqs/Quakes/quakes0.html), Date accessed: July25, 2012.Chagnon et al., 2004. Changnon, S. A., J. R. Angel, K. E. Kunkel, C. M. B. Lehmann, Climate Atlas of Illinois, Illinois State Water Survey, Champaign Illinois, March, 2004.City of Janesville, 2010. Water Utility, Water Conservation Plan, Website: http://www.ci.janesville.wi.us/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=573, Date accessed: October 5, 2012.City of Janesville, 2011a. City Ordinance Book. http://www.ci.janesville.wi.us/index.aspx?page=359, Date accessed: January 4, 2013City of Janesville, 2011b. Janesville Wisconsin's Park Plac e, Development Guide, City of Janesville, Wisconsin, Community Development, Draft April 6, 2011.City of Janesville, 2012a. Water Utility, Summary of Services, Website: http://www.ci.janesville.wi.us /index.aspx?page=115, Date accessed: December 21, 2012.City of Janesville, 2012b. Bus Transit, Website, http://www.ci.jane sville.wi.us/index.aspx?page=124, Date accessed: June 29, 2012.City of Janesville, 2012c. Janesville Transit System Map and Route Guide, http://www.ci.janesville.wi.us/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=854 , Date accessed: July 26, 2012. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-4Rev. 0City of Janesville, 2012d. Economic Development, Business Climate, Taxes, Website: http://www.ci.janesville.wi.us /index.aspx?page=334 , Date accessed: June 29, 2012.City of Janesville, 2012e. Water Utility, Summary of Services, Website: http://www.ci.janesville.wi.us /index.aspx?page=115, Date accessed: August 1, 2012.City of Janesville, 2012f. Park Locations and Amenities, Website: http://www.ci.janesville.wi.us /index.aspx?page=218, Date accessed: May 22, 2012.Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe, 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States, U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, FWS/OBS-79/31, December 1979.Del Greco, 2006. S. A. Del Greco and collaborators, Surface Data Integration at NOAA's National Climatic Data Center: Data Format, Processing, QC and Product Generation, 86th AMS Annual Meeting, 29 January - 2 February 2006, Atlanta, Georgia.Design Perspectives Inc, 2009. Rock County, WI 2009-2014 Parks, Outdoor Recreation & Open Space Plan, Website: http://www.co.rock.wi.us/images/web_documents/departments/parks/poros_rock_county_2009_final.pdf .DOR, 2011. The WI Corporate Income and Franchise Taxes, Wisconsin Department of Revenue, Division of Research and Policy, November 16, 2011, Website: http://www.revenue.wi.gov/ra/ CorpIncFranchTax.pdf , Date accessed: June 12, 2012.DOR, 2012. Tax Rates, Wisconsin Department of Revenue, Website: http://www.dor.state.wi.us/faqs/pcs/taxrates.html, Date accessed: July 7, 2012.DPI, 2012. 2011-2012 Public Enrollment by County by District by School by Gender, Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction, Website: http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/lbstat/pubdata2.html, Date accessed: June 4, 2012.DWD, 2012. Local Area Unemployment Statistics and Current Employment Statistics programs, Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development, Website: http://dwd.WI.gov/oea/employment_by_industry/#employment_by_industry, Date accessed: June11, 2012.EDS, 1968. Climatic Atlas of the United States, Environmental Data Service, U. S. Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington D. C., 1968.Ellefson, B.R., G.D. Mueller, and C.A. Buchwald, 2002. Water Use in Wisconsin in 2000. U.S.Geological Survey Open-File Report 02-356, prepared by the USGS in Cooperation with the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. Exelon, 2012. Byron Generating Station, Exelon Corporation, Website: http://www.exeloncorp.com/powerplant s/byron/Pages/profile.aspx, Date accessed: April 4, 2012.FAA, 1992. Non-Federal Navigational Aids and Air Traffic Control Facilities, Federal Aviation Administration Order 6700.20A, December 11, 1992. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-5Rev. 0FAA, 2011. Automated Weather Observing Systems (AWOS) for Non-Federal Applications, Federal Aviation Administration Advisory Circular AC 150/5220-16D. April 28, 2011.FEMA, 2008. Flood Insurance Rate Map, Rock County, Wisconsin and Incorporated Areas, Map Number 55105C0316D, Federal Emergency Management Agency, August 19, 2008.Fenneman, Nevin Melancthon, 1946. Physical Divisions of the United States. Department of the Interior, Geological Survey.Find the Data, 2012. Unbiased, data-driven comparisons, Website: http://active-mines.findthedata.org/compare/2770-2771-2772-6438-6439-6440/Little-Limestone-Inc-vs-Custom-Ditching-Inc-vs-Frank-Bros-Inc-vs-Janesville-Sand-And-Gravel-Co-vs-Frank-Bros-Inc-vs-Paririe-Ave-Concrete-Inc, Date accessed: January 27, 2012.Flynn, Kathleen M., William H. Kirby, and Paul R. Hummel, 2006. User's Manual for Program PeakFQ, Annual Flood-Frequency Analysis Using Bulletin 17B Guidelines, Techniques and Methods 4-B4, U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey, Chapter 4 of Book4, Section B, Techniques and Methods 4-B4.Fry, J., Xian, G., Jin, S., Dewitz, J., Homer, C., Yang, L., Barnes, C., Herold, N., and Wickham, J., 2011. Completion of the 2006 National Land Cover Database for the Conterminous United States, PE&RS, Vol. 77(9):858-864. Google, 2012. Google Maps, Google, http://maps.google.com/, Date accessed: April 4, 2012.Higgins, J.J; G.E. Larson; and K.F. Higgins, 2001. Floristic Comparisons of Tallgrass Prairie Remnants Managed by Different Land Stewardships in Eastern South Dakota, Proceedings of the 17th North American Prairie Conference: 21-31, 2001, Proceedings of the 17 th North American Prairie Conference Website: http://images.library.wisc.edu/EcoNatRes/EFacs/NAPC/NAPC17/reference/econatres.napc17.jhiggins.pdf, Date accessed: August 15, 2012.Holzworth, G.C., 1972. "Mixing Heights, Wind Speeds, and Potential for Urban Air Pollution throughout the Contiguous United States", U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air Programs, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, January 1972. Hormel, 2013. Hormel Foods Corporation, Locations, Website: http://www.hormelfoods.com/About/DivisionsLocations/Locations.aspx, Date accessed: February 14, 2013.Huff, Floyd A. and James R. Angel, 1992. Rainfall Frequency Atlas of the Midwest, Midwestern Climate Analysis Center, National Weather Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and Illinois State Water Survey, A Division of the Illinois Department of Energy and Natural Resources, Bulletin 71, MCC Research Report 92-03, Midwestern Climate Center and Illinois State Water Survey, Champaign, Illinois.Hughes, Denis A., Pauline Hannart and Deidre Watkins, 2003. Continuous Baseflow Separation from Time Series of Daily and Monthly Streamflow Data, Institute for Water Research, Rhodes University, Water SA Vol. 29 No. 1, January 30, 2003. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-6Rev. 0IAEA, 1987. Siting of Research Reactors, Internati onal Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Report IAEA-TECDOC-403, Vienna, Austria. 1987.IHPA, 2013. Historic Architectural Resource Geographic Information System, Illinois Historic Preservation Agency, Website: http://gis.hpa.state.il.us/hargis/, Date accessed: February 14, 2013.Janesville School District, 2012. Welcome to the School District of Janesville, Contact Us, School/Principal Contacts, Website, http://www.janesville.k12.wi.us/default.aspx , Date accessed: July 26, 2012.Knopf, Chad and Kari Krause, 2012. A Phase I Archaeological Survey of the Proposed SHINE Medical Isotope Production Facility Near Janesville, Rock County, Wisconsin. AMEC, Louisville, Kentucky.Korshover, J., 1967. "Climatology of Stagnating Anticyclones East of the Rocky Mountains 1936-1965", U.S. Department of Health Education and Welfare Public Health Service (PHS), PHS Publication No. 999-AP-34, National Center for Air Pollution Control, Cincinnati, Ohio, 1967.LeRoux E.F., 1963. Geology and Ground-Water Resources of Rock County, Wisconsin, Geological Survey, Water-Supply Paper 1619-X, Prepared in cooperation with the Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey.MacFarlane Pheasants, Inc., 2012. MacFarlane Pheasants, Inc., Website: http://www.pheasant.com/Home/tabid/38/Default.aspx, Date accessed: June 22, 2012.MHS, 2012a. Mercy Clinic South, Mercy Health System, Website: http://www.mercyhealthsystem.org/body.cfm?xyzpdqabc=0&id=10&acti on=detail&ref=42 , Date accessed: April 4, 2012.
MHS, 2012b. Mercy Hospital and Trauma Center, Mercy Health System, Website: http://www.mercyhealthsystem.org/body.cfm?xyzpdqabc=0&id=10&acti on=detail&ref=54 , Date accessed: April 4, 2012.Moran, J. M. and E. J. Hopkins, 2002. Wisconsin's Weather and Climate, The University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, Wisconsin, 2002. NAIP, 2010a. USDA NAIP Imagery. Website: http://www.fsa.usda.gov/FSA/apfoapp?area=home&subject=prog&topic=nai, Date accessed: August 15, 2012.NAIP, 2010b. The National Map Seamless Server Viewer, U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agriculture Imagery Program. Website: http://seamless.usgs.gov/website/seamless/viewer.htm, Date accessed: April 6, 2012. NCDC, 1960. Storm Data, November 1960, Volume 2 No. 11, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-7Rev. 0NCDC, 1961. Storm Data, September 1961, Volume 3 No. 9, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 1967a. Storm Data, April 1967, Volume 9 No. 4, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. NCDC, 1967b. Storm Data, August 1967, Volume 9 No. 8, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 1970. Storm Data, October 1970, Volume 12 No. 10, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. NCDC, 1971. Storm Data, November 1971, Volume 13 No. 11, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 1975. Storm Data, June 1975 Volume 17 No. 6, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. NCDC, 1980. Storm Data, June 1980, Volume 22 No. 6, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 1988. Storm Data, May 1988, Volume 30 No. 5, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. NCDC, 1991. Storm Data, March 1991, Volume 33 No. 3, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 1992. Storm Data, June 1992, Volume 34 No. 6, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. NCDC, 1996a. Daily Weather Maps, Weekly Series, July 15-21, 1996, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: October, 2011.NCDC, 1996b. International Station Meteorological Climate Summary, Ver 4.0, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ .NCDC, 1997. Storm Data, July 1996, Volume 38 No. 7, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. NCDC, 1998. Storm Data, June 1998, Volume 40 No. 6, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-8Rev. 0NCDC, 1999. Daily Weather Maps, Weekly Series, December 28 1998 - January 3, 1999, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011. NCDC, 2000. Storm Data, January 1999, Volume 41 No. 1, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 2001a. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Arboretum Univ Wis, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011. NCDC, 2001b. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Arlington Univ Farm, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011. NCDC, 2001c. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Baraboo, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011.
NCDC, 2001d. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Beaver Dam, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011. NCDC, 2001e. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Beloit, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011.
NCDC, 2001f. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Brodhead, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011. NCDC, 2001g. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Charmany Farm, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011. NCDC, 2001h. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Dalton, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011.
NCDC, 2001i. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, DeKalb, IL, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 2001j. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Fond du Lac, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-9Rev. 0NCDC, 2001k. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Fort Atkinson, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011. NCDC, 2001l. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Hartford 2 W, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011. NCDC, 2001m. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Horicon, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011.
NCDC, 2001n. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Lake Geneva, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011. NCDC, 2001o. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Lake Mills, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011.
NCDC, 2001p. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Madison Dane Co AP, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. NCDC, 2001q. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Marengo, IL, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011. NCDC, 2001r. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Oconomowoc, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011. NCDC, 2001s. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Portage, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011. NCDC, 2001t. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Prairie du Sac 2 N, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011.
NCDC, 2001u. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Rockford, IL, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011. NCDC, 2001v. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Stoughton, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-10Rev. 0NCDC, 2001w. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Watertown, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011. NCDC, 2001x. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Wisconsin Dells, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 2002. Climate Atlas of the United States, Version 2.0 CD, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ .NCDC, 2005a. Data Documentation for Data Set 3280 (DSI-3280) Surface Airways Hourly, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, May 4, 2005. NCDC, 2005b. Storm Data, August 2005, Volume 47 No. 8, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 2006. Federal Climate Complex Data Documentation for Integrated Surface Data, National Climatic Data Center Air Force Combat Climatology Center Fleet Numerical Meteorology and Oceanography Detachment, Asheville, North Carolina, August 25, 2006. NCDC, 2008. Storm Data, January 2008 Volume 50 No. 1, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 2011a. 2010 Local Climatological Data, Annual Summary with Comparative Data, Madison, Wisconsin (KMSN), National Climatic Data Center, Asheville North Carolina, 2011. NCDC, 2011b. 2010 Local Climatological Data, Annual Summary with Comparative Data, Moline, Illinois (KMLI), National Climatic Data Center, Asheville North Carolina, 2011. NCDC, 2011c. 2010 Local Climatological Data, Annual Summary with Comparative Data, Rockford, Illinois (KRFD), National Climatic Data Center, Asheville North Carolina, 2011.
NCDC, 2011d. 2010 Local Climatological Data, Annual Summary with Comparative Data, Springfield, Illinois (KSPI), National Climatic Data Center, Asheville North Carolina, 2011. NCDC, 2011e. Climatological Data Annual Summary Illinois 2010, Volume 115, Number 13, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ .NCDC, 2011f. Climatological Data Annual Summary Wisconsin 2010, Volume 115 Number 13, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ .NCDC, 2011g. NCDC Storm Event Database, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www4.ncdc.noaa.gov/cgi-wi n/wwcgi.dll?wwEvent~Storms , Date accessed: November, 2011. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-11Rev. 0NCDC, 2011h. TD3280 - Airways Surface Observations, Surface weather observations in TD 3280 digital format from 1948-2009, for NWS-Madison, WI. National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), data purchased from NCDC, Asheville, NC. NCDC, 2011i. TD 3280 - Airways Surface Observations, Surface weather observations in TD 3280 digital format from 1973-2009, for NWS-Rockford, IL. National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), data purchased from NCDC, Asheville, NC. NCDC, 2011j. TD3505 - Airways Surface Observations, Surface weather observations in TD 3505 digital format from 2005-2010, for NWS-Madison, WI. National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), data purchased from NCDC, Asheville, NC. NCDC, 2011k. TD3505 - Airways Surface Observations, Surface weather observations in TD 3505 digital format from 2005-2010, for NWS-Rockford, IL. National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), data purchased from NCDC, Asheville, NC. NCDC, 2011l. TD3505 - Airways Surface Observations, Surface weather observations in TD 3505 digital format from 2005-2010, for Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, Janesville, WI. National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), data purchased from NCDC, Asheville, NC. NCDC, 2011m. TD3505 - archive data server. Accessed from: ftp://ftp3.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/noaa/. National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), data purchased from NCDC, Asheville, NC, Date accessed: December, 2011. NCDC, 2012a. Data file "anem_elev_inf" referenced in "Data Documentation for Data Set 6421 (DSI-6421) Enhanced hourly wind station data for the contiguous United States" National Climatic Data Center, Asheville North Carolina. Website: http://www.wcc.nrcs.usda.gov/ftpref/support/climate/wind_daily/td6421.pdf . NCDC, 2012b. Data file "ISH-HISTORY.TXT" Integrated Surface Database Station History, June 2012. National Climatic Data Center, Asheville North Carolina. Website: ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/inventories/ISH-HISTORY.TXT. Date accessed: July, 2012.NLSI, 2011. Vaisala 5-Year Flash Density Map - U. S. (1996-2000), National Lightning Safety Institute (NLSI), Website: http://www.lightningsafety.com/nlsi_info/lightningmaps/US_FD_Lightning.pdf, Date accessed: December, 2011.NOAA, 1999. Air Stagnation Climatology for the United States (1948-1998), Julian X.L. Wang and J.K. Angell. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Air Resources Laboratory, Environmental Research Laboratories, Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research Silver Spring, MD 20910, April 1999.NOAA, 2012. Summary of Monthly Normals, 1981-2010, Afton, Wisconsin.NPS, 2011. Class I Area Locations, National Park Service, U.S. Department of Interior (NPS). Available from: http://www.nature.nps.gov/air/Maps/classILoc.cfm, Date accessed: December, 2011.NRC, 2012a. Sources of Radiation, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Website: http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/radiat ion/around-us/sources.html, Date accessed: April 4, 2012. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-12Rev. 0NRC, 2012b. Natural Background Sources, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Website: http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/radiation/around-us/sources/nat-bg-sources.html, Date accessed: April 4, 2012.NRC, 2012c. Man-Made Sources, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Website: http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/radiation/around-us/sources/man-made-sources.html, Date accessed: April 4, 2012.Olcott, Perry G., 1968. A Summary of Geology and Mineral and Water Resources of Rock County, Open-File Report 68-4. University of Wisconsin-Extension, Geological and Natural History Survey, Madison, Wisconsin.Olcott, Perry G., 1992. Groundwater Atlas of the United States Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin. HA 730-J, United States Geologic Survey. Omernik, J.M, S.S. Chapman, R.A. Lillie, and R.T. Dumke, 2008. Ecoregions of Wisconsin. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. May 2008. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/org/water/swims/datasets/omernik_eco/index.htm, Dated accessed: July 24, 2012.Rand McNally, 1982. Goode's World Atlas, 16th edition, Rand McNally & Company, Skokie, Illinois, 1982. Rand McNally, 2005. Goode's World Atlas, 21st edition , Rand McNally & Company, Skokie, Illinois, 2005. Robertson, Ken, 2008. The Tallgrass Prairie in Illinois, Illinois Natural History Survey. Website: http://www.inhs.uiuc.edu/~kenr/tallgrass.html, Date accessed: August 6, 2012.Rock County, 2005. Rock County Floodplain Zoning, Chapter 32 of the Code of Ordinances, Adopted July 14, 2005, Resolution 05-6B-248, Amended June 26, 2008, Resolution 08-6A-024, and Amended August 28, 2008, Resolution 08-8A-060.Rock County, 2009. Rock County Comprehensive Plan 2035, Rock County, WI, http://www.co.rock.wi.us/images/w eb_documents/departments/pl anning_developm ent/plans/comprehensive_plan_2035/2035_final_II_1_issues_opportunities.pdf .Rock County, 2011. Rock County GIS Website. Website: http://199.233.45.152/Rock/, Date accessed: August 15, 2012. Rock County, 2012a. County Facts, Rock County, Wisconsin Website: http://www.co.rock.wi.us , Date accessed: January, 2012. Rock County, 2012b. Magnolia Bluff State Natural Area, Rock County, Wisconsin Website: http://www.co.rock.wi.us/, Date accessed: January, 2012.Rock County, 2012c. Rock County Parks-Happy Hollow Park. State of Wisconsin, Rock County, Website: http://www.co.rock.wi.us/images/web_documents/departments/parks/park_happy_hollow/happy_hollow_brochure.pdf, Date accessed: August 13, 2012 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-13Rev. 0Rock County Development Alliance, 2011. Rock County Bond Rating Data, Website: http://www.rockcountyalliance.com/Portals/1/Aug%202011%20Bond%20Rating%20ED%20Report.pdf , Date accessed: March 1, 2012.Rock County Planning, Economic & Community Development Agency, 2009 . Rock County Comprehensive Plan 2035, Map 3.2, Website: http://www.co.rock.wi.us/images/web_documents/departments/planning_development/plans/comprehensive_plan_2035/2035_final_table_of_contents.pdf, Adopted September 9, 2009.Sloto, Ronald A. and Michele Y. Crouse, 1996. HYSEP: A Computer Program for Streamflow Hydrograph Separation and Analysis, U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 96-4040.Smith, Daryl D., 1990. Tallgrass Prairie Settlement: Prelude to Demise of the Tallgrass Ecosystem, Proceedings of the 12th North American Prairie Conference: 195-200, 1990, Proceedings of the 12th North American Prairie Conference, Website: http://images.library.wisc.edu/EcoNatRes/EFacs/NAPC/NAPC12/reference/econatres.napc12.dsmith.pdf, Date accessed: August 15, 2012.Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, 2004. Noise Contour Map, Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, Land Use Drawing, prepared by Mead & Hunt. Latest revision date, August, 2004. Date accessed: July 3, 2012.Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, 2012a. Airport, Facilities and Facts, Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, Website: http://www.jvlairport.com/Air port/FacilitiesFacts.aspx , Date accessed: April 2, 2012.Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, 2012b. Airport Facilities and Facts, Website: http://www.jvlairport.com/Airport/FacilitiesFacts.aspx, Date accessed: July 12, 2012.Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, 2012c. General Aviation Terminal Project Advances, Website: http://www.jvlairport.com/NewsUpdates/CapitalImprovementPlans.aspx, Date accessed: July 20, 2012. SSURGO, 2010. Soil Survey Staff, NRCS,USDA, SSUR GO Database for Rock County, WI. Website: http://soildatamart.nrcs.usda.gov, Date accessed: August 15, 2012.Stern, A.C., 1973. "Fundamentals of Air Pollution", Academic Press, New York, New York, 1973.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.SWWDB, 2009. Rock County Profile, Website: http://www.swwdb.org/PDFs/Region/Rock%20County%20Profile%20-%20Revised%2011-23-09.pdf, Date accessed: June 7, 2012. TBEES, 2011. Byron Nuclear Generating Station Units 1 and 2: Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report, 1 January Through 31 December 2010, ADAMS Database Accession Number ML11137A061, Exelon Nuclear, May 13, 2011. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-14Rev. 0Trewartha, G. T., 1954. An Introduction to Climate, McGraw Hill Book Company, New York, New York, 1954.Trewartha, G. T., 1961. The Earth's Problem Climates, The University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, Wisconsin, 1961. Turner, D.B, 1964. A Diffusion Model for an Urban Area, Journal of Applied Meteorology, Vol. 3, pp 83-91. February, 1964. USACE, 2009. Interim Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Northcentral and Northeast Region, ERDC/EL TR-09-19, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, October 2009.USCB, 2000a. Summary File 1, American FactFinder, U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, Website: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml . Date accessed: June 7, 2012.USCB, 2000b. Summary File 3, American FactFinder, U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S.Census Bureau, Website: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml, Date accessed: June 7, 2012.USCB, 2008-2010. Three Year American Community Survey (ACS), American Factfinder, U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, Website: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml, Date accessed: June14, 2012.USCB, 2010a. 2010 Census TIGER/Line Shapefiles. U.S. Census Bureau, Geography Division, Geographic Productions Branch, Website: http://www.census.gov/geo/www/tiger/tgrshp2010/tgrshp2010.html, Date accessed: August 15, 2012.USCB, 2010b. 2010 Census TIGER/Line Shapefiles, United States Census Bureau, Geography Division, Geographic Productions Branch, Website: http://www.census.gov/geo/www/tiger/tgrshp2010/tgrshp2010.html Date Accessed: August 15, 2012.USCB, 2010c. Demographic Profile 1, American Factfinder http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml, Date accessed: April 25, 2012.USCB, 2010d. Summary File 1, American FactFinder, U.S. Department of Commerce, US Census Bureau, Website: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml , Date accessed: June 7, 2012.USCB, 2011. County and City Data Book: 2007, Website: http://www.census.gov/prod/www/abs/ccdb07.html, Date accessed: November, 2011.USCB, 2012. Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) System web page: http://www.census.gov/epcd/ec97brdg/E97B1325.HTM, Date accessed: December 20, 2012. USDA NRCS, 2012a. SSURGO Database for Rock County, WI, Soil Data Mart. Website: http://soildatamart.nrcs.usda.gov, Date accessed: August 15, 2012. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-15Rev. 0USDA NRCS, 2012b. Web Soil Survey. Website: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/HomePage.htm, Date accessed: August 13, 2012USDA, 1998. Rural Utilities Service Summary of Items of Engineering Interest, U. S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), August, 1998.USDA, 2011. Census of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Website: http://www.nass.usda.gov/Dataandstatistics/index.asp. Date accessed: June 24, 2012.USDA-SCS, 1974. Soil Survey of Rock County, Wisconsin. In cooperation with University of Wisconsin Department of Soil Science, Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey and the Wisconsin Agricultural Experiment Station, July 1974. USDOC, 1978. Probable Maximum Precipitation Estimates, United States East of the 105th Meridian, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of the Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Department of Commerce (USDOC), Hydrometeorological Report No. 51. Washington, D.C. 1978. USDOI-BIA, 2012. Agency Letter: Map of All Ho-Chunk Trust Lands within a 50-Mile Radius of the Proposed SHINE Isotope Facility of Janesville WI, U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Great Lakes Agency, March 2012. USDOI-BLM, 1984. Visual Resource Inventory Manual H-8410-1, U.S. Department of Land Management, Bureau of Land Management, January 1986.
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, 1999. PCRAMMET.FOR," FORTRAN program, version 99169. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Technology Transfer Networks Support Center for Regulatory Atmospheric Modeling. Computer code available from: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/metobsdata_procaccprogs.htm, June, 1999. USEPA. 2008. Clean Watersheds Needs Survey, 2008 Data and Reports, Detailed listing of Wastewater Treatment Plant Flows for State of Wisconsin, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Website: http://water.epa.gov/scitech/datait/databases/cwns/2008reportdata.cfm, Date accessed: July 19, 2012. USEPA, 2009. Environmental Radiation Data, Report 139, July - September 2009, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Radiation and Indoor Air.
USEPA, 2011. Non-Attainment Status for Each County by year in Wisconsin as of August 30, 2011. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), Website: http://www.epa.gov/oaqps001/greenbk/anay_wi.html, Date accessed: December, 2011. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-16Rev. 0USEPA, 2012a. Level III and IV Ecoregions of the Wisconsin U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Western Ecology Division, Level III and IV Ecoregions of the Continental United States, Website: http://www.epa.gov/wed/pages/ecoregions/level_iii_iv.htm, Date accessed: March 7, 2012.USEPA, 2012b. http://cfpub.epa.gov/surf/huc.cfm?huc_code=07090001. Date accessed: August 13, 2012.
USEPA, 2012c. Designated Sole Source Aqui fers in EPA Region V, Website:
(http://www.epa.gov/safewater/sourcewater/pubs/qrg_ssamap_reg5.pdf), Date accessed: October 5, 2012.
USEPA, 2012d. Ecoregion Maps and GIS Resources, USEPA Western Ecology Division, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Website: http://www.epa.gov/wed/pages/ ecoregions.htm, Date accessed: July 24, 2012. USEPA, 2012e. EnviroMapper for Envirofacts, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Website: http://www.epa.gov/emefdata/em4ef.html?ve=11,42.70109176635742,-89.08168029785156&pText=Janesville,%20WIUSFWS, 2012. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Resource Review and Input Response Letter from Peter J. Fasbender dated January 25, 2012.USGS, 1980. Rockford, Illinois; Wisconsin (Eastern U. S.) 1:250,000 Series (Topographic) Map, U. S. Geological Survey (USGS), Reston, Virginia 1980.USGS, 1981. U.S. Geological Survey Janesville quadrangle,Wisconsin [map].1:24,000. 7.5 Minute Series.Washington D.C.: USGS, 1981. USGS, 2007. Protecting Wisconsin's Groundwater Through Comprehensive Planning, Rock County, U.S. Geological Survey, Website: http://wi.water.usgs.gov/gwcomp/find/rock/ index_full.html, Date accessed: July 19,2012.USGS, 2012a. Volcano Environments, U.S. Geological Survey, Website: http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/volc/environments.html, Date accessed: September 11, 2012.USGS, 2012b. National Water Information System: Web Interface: http://waterdata.usgs.gov/wi/ nwis/sw, Date accessed: August 13, 2012.USGS, 2012c. Protecting Wisconsin's Groundwater Through Comprehensive Planning, Website: (http://wi.water.usgs.gov/gwcomp/find/rock/index_full.html), Date accessed: December 21, 2012.USGS, 2012d. North American Breeding Bird Survey-Route 91320 (Beloit), 1966-2007. United States Geological Survey, Website: http://www.mgr-pwrc.usgs.gov /cgi-bin.rtena226.pl?91320 , Date accessed: February 2, 2012.UWNR, 2011a. University of Wisconsin - Issuance of Renewed Facility License No. R-74 for the University of Wisconsin Nuclear Reactor (TAC. No. ME1585), ADAMS Database Accession Number ML102370104, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, March 25, 2011. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-17Rev. 0UWNR, 2011b. University of Wisconsin - Madison Nuclear Reactor Laboratory Ltr. Enclosing Copy of 2010-2011 Annual Report as Required by Technical Specification 6.7.1 (1), ADAMS Database Accession Number ML11216A303, University of Wisconsin Nuclear Reactor, August 1, 2011.Vandewalle & Associates, 2006. City of Beloit 2006-2010 Parks and Open Space Plan, Adopted: November 20, 2006. Website: http://www.ci.beloit.wi.us/vertical/sites/%7B4AECD64A-01FA-4C24-8F53-D3281732C6AB%7D/uploads/%7B6900F9BC-BC53-49B3-99F4-B0C1670991FA%7D.PDF, Date accessed: July 26, 2012.Vandewalle & Associates, 2009a. City of Janesville Comprehensive Plan, Volume 1: Existing Conditions Report , Adopted on March 9, 2009, Website: http://www.ci.janesvi lle.wi.us/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=1449, Date accessed: July 26, 2012.Vandewalle & Associates, 2009b. City of Janesville Comprehensive Plan, Volume 2: Policies and Recommendations, 2009, March 2009. Walker, J.F. and W.R. Krug, 2003. Flood-Frequency Characteristics of Wisconsin Streams, Water-Resources Investigations Report 03-4250. U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Wisconsin Department of Transportation. WBBA, 2012. Wisconsin Breeding Bird Atlas, Breeding Birds from the Janesville East Quad and the Janesville West Quad, 1995-2000. University of Wisconsin-Green Bay, Website: http://www.uwgb.edu/birds/wbba/quadlist.asp, Date accessed: February 2, 2012. WDNR, 2009. State Wildlife Areas, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/org/land/wildlife/wildlife_areas/ , Date accessed: June 14, 2012. WDNR, 2010a. DNR Managed Lands web mapping application. Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/Lands/DMLmap/, Date accessed: August 15, 2012. WDNR, 2010b. Regulated Terrestrial Invasive Plants in WI, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, DNR PUB-FR-464-2010, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/files/pdf/pubs/fr/FR0464.pdf, Date accessed: August 6, 2012. WDNR, 2011a. Air Monitoring Network Plan 2012, June 2011. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR), Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/air/pdf/2012_Network_Plan_FINAL.pdf , Date accessed: December, 2012 .WDNR, 2011b. Water Use Registration and Reporting, June 2011, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/WaterUse/documents/RegReportFactSheet.pdf, Date accessed: February 14, 2013. WDNR, 2012a. Ozone Non Attainment Areas, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR), Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/air/aq/ozone/nonattainment.htm#2007request, Date accessed: January, 2012. WDNR, 2012b. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Wisconsin Lakes web page - maps and inventory, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/lakes/, Date accessed: August 15, 2012. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-18Rev. 0WDNR, 2012c. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Endangered Resources Review (ERR#12-020), Proposed SHINE Medial Technologies Industrial Development, Town of Janesville, Rock County, WI. WDNR, 2012d. Rock River Prairie State Natural Area, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/org/land/er/sna/index.asp?SNA=289, Date accessed: August13, 2012 WDNR, 2012e. WDNR Fish Mapping Application. Search Criteria: >1980, Rock River, Rock County. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: http://infotrek.er.usgs.gov/ fishmap, Date accessed: July 11, 2012. WDNR, 2012f. Wisconsin Wildlife Primer: Reptiles and Amphibians. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/org/land/wildlife/PUBL/wildlifeprimam.pdf, Date accessed: August 15, 2012. WDNR, 2012g. Blanding's Turtle (Emydoidea blandingii). Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/EndangeredResources/Animals.asp?mode=detail&SpecCode=ARAAD04010. Date accessed: August 14, 2012. WDNR, 2012h. Invasives Rule - NR 40, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/invasives/classification.html, Date accessed: August 6, 2012.WHS, 2012a. Response to AMEC GIS Data Information Request for Properties within 10-mile Radius of SHINE Site, Wisconsin Historical Society.WHS, 2012b, Request for SHPO Comment and Consultation on a Federal Undertaking, Wisconsin Historical Society February 16, 2012.WHS, 2013. Wisconsin National Register of Historic Properties, Wisconsin Historical Society, Website: http://www.wisconsinhistory.org/hp/register/, Date accessed: February 13, 2013.Will-Wolf, S, and T.C. Montague, 1994. Landscape and Environmental Constraints on the Distribution of Presettlement Savannas and Prairies in Southern Wisconsin, Proceedings, North American Conference on Savannas and Barrens. Website: http://www.epa.gov/ecopage/upland/oak/oak94/Proceedings/Will-wolf.html, Date accessed: August 6, 2012.Wisconsin Department of Health Services, 2010. Rock County Environmental Health Profile, 2010, Website: http://www.dhs.wisconsin.gov/epht/CHP/Rock_profile.pdf .Wisconsin Department of Health Services, 2012. Rock County Environmental Health Profile, Website: http://www.dhs.wisconsin.gov/epht/CHP/Rock_profile.pdf, October 2010.Wisconsin Geological Survey, 2011. Educational Series 51, Available at: http://wisconsingeologicalsurvey.org/pdfs/espdf/ES51.pdf, Date accessed: November 8, 2012Wisconsin State Climatology Office, 2006. Monthly Historical State Climate Summaries, South Central Wisconsin Divisional Average Precipitation (inches), Website: http://www.aos.wisc.edu/~sco/clim-history/division/4708-R.html, Date accessed: August 15, 2012. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-19Rev. 0WisDOT, 2010. 2010, Lower Half, City of Janesville, Rock County, Daily Traffic Volume Map, Wisconsin Department of Transportation, Website: http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/travel/counts/docs/rock/janesville-2-2010.pdf , Date accessed: March 1, 2012.Woods, A.J., J.M. Omernik, C.L. Pederson, and B.C. Moran. 2006. Level III and IV Ecoregions of Illinois, September 2006.Zaporozec, Alexander, 1982. Ground-Water Quality of Rock County, Wisconsin, Information Circular Number 41, Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey in cooperation with Rock County Division Of Environmental Health, March 1982.19.7.4IMPACTS OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION, OPERATIONS, AND DECOMMISSIONINGAirNav, 2013. Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, Website: http://www.airnav.com/airport/KJVL, Date accessed: January 16, 2013.Beloit Daily News, 2011. High-tech firm picks Beloit for $194 million development, Website: http://www.beloitdailynews.com/news/top_news/high-tech-firm-picks-beloit-for-million-d/, Date accessed: August 21, 2012.BLS, 2009. May 2009 Metropolitan and Nonmetropolitan Area Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Website: http://www.bls.gov/oes/2009/may/oes_27500.html, Date accessed: July 19, 2012.BLS, 2011. May 2009 Metropolitan and Nonmetropolitan Area Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Website: http://stat.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_27500.html, Date accessed: June 10, 2012.Bureau of Indian Affairs, 2012. Indian Reservations in the Continental United States, Website: http://www.nps.gov/nagpra/DOCUMENTS/RESERV.PDF, Date accessed: August 30, 2012. California Energy Commission, 2009. Orange Grove Energy, L.P., Orange Grove Project, Application for Certification (08-AFC-4), San Diego County, Volume 3, Appendix 6.12 B, April 2009.Chepesiuk, Ron, 2009. Missing the Dark, Health Effects of Light Pollution, Environmental Health Perspectives, Volume 117, Number 1, January 2009.City of Janesville, 2012a. Tax Increment Finance District No. 35 Project Plan, Adopted August 22, 2011, Amendment No. 1, February 13, 2012.City of Janesville, 2012b. Tax Increment Finance District No. 35 Project Plan. Amendment No. 1, Website: http://www.ci.janesville.wi.us/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=1463, Date accessed: October 9, 2012. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies19.7-20Rev. 1CEQ, 1997. Considering Cumulative Effects Under the National Environmental Policy Act, Council on Environmental Quality, Executive Office of the President.DOE, 2012. Environmental Assessment for Northstar Medical Technologies LLC Commercial Domestic Production of the Medical Isotope Molybdenum-99 (DOE/EA-1929), U.S. Department of Energy, Website: http://energy.gov/sites/prod /files/EA-1929-FEA-2012.pdf , Date accessed: October 9, 2012. DOR, 2012. County and Municipal Revenues and Expenditures 2010, Bulletin No. 110, January 2012, Website: http://www.revenue.wi.gov/ slf/cotvc/cmreb10.pdf, Date accessed: August 19, 2012.DPI, 2012a. 2011-2012 Staff to Students Ratio, Website: http://data.dpi.state.wi.us/data/StaffPage.aspx?OrgLevel=st&GraphFile=BlankPageUrl&, Date accessed: October 22, 2012.DPI, 2012b. 2011-2012 Public Enrollment by County by District by School by Gender, Website: http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/lbstat/pubdata2.html, Date accessed: June 4, 2012.Fry, J., Xian, G., Jin, S., Dewitz, J., Homer, C., Yang, L., Barnes, C., Herold, N., and Wickham, J., 2011. National Land Cover Database 2006, Land Cover Change 2001/2006, National Land Cover Database for the Conterminous United States, PE&RS, Volume 77(9):858-864, September 2011.Hastings, 2011. Hastings HVAC Bulletin No. IRHS-1. Ha stings HVAC, Hastings, NE, December 2011, 20 pp, Website: http://www.hastingshvac.com/UserFiles/File/Bulletin%20IRHS-1%20December%202011.pdf , Date accessed: October 3, 2012.JSD, 2011a. Janesville School District Strategic Plan, Website: http://www.janesv ille.k12.wi.us/Portals/1/Strategic_Plan_Action_Steps_and_Dates_Final_w-o_Action_Steps%5B1%5D.pdf , Date accessed: October 18, 2012.JSD, 2011b. School District of Janesville, 2011-12 Budget, Website, http://www.janesville.k12.wi.us/Portals/1/Budget%202011-12.pdf,Date accessed: March 1, 2013.Karl, T. R., J.M. Melillo, and T.C. Peterson, eds., 2009. Global Climate Change Impacts, Cambridge University Press.Mercy Health System, 2012a. Mercy Clinic South, Website: http://www.mercyhealthsystem.org/body.cfm?xyzpdqabc=0&id=10&action=detail&ref=42 , Date accessed: October 16, 2012.Mercy Health System, 2012b. Mercy Hospital and Trauma Center, Website: http://www.mercyhealthsystem.org/body.cfm?xyz pdqabc=0&id=10&action=detail&ref=54, Date accessed: October 16, 2012. NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, 2012. NorthStar Medical Technologies, Hendricks Commercial Properties Sign Agreement for Beloit Facility Development, Website: http://www.northstarnm.com/index.php?module=cms&page=31, Date accessed: October 9, 2012. NRC, 1977. Methods for Estimating Atmospheric Transport and Dispersion of Gaseous Effluents in Routine Releases from Light-Water-Cooled Reactors, Regulatory Guide 1.111, Revision 1, U.S.Nuclear Regulatory Commission, July 1977. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies19.7-21Rev. 1NRC, 2004. Policy Statement on the Treatment of Environmental Justice Matters in NRC Regulatory and Licensing Actions (69 FR 52040), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, August 24, 2004. NRC, 2009. Office Instruction No. LIC 203, Revision 2, Procedural Guidance for Preparing Environmental Assessments and Considering Envi ronmental Issues, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, February 17, 2009.Ogden, L.J.E., 1996. Collision Course: The Hazards of Lighted Structures and Windows to Migrating Birds, Published by World Wildlife Fund Canada and the Fatal Light Awareness Program, September 1996.Olcott, Perry G., 1969. A Summary of Geology and Mineral and Water Resources of Rock County, Open-File Report 69-3, Geological and Natural History Survey.PNNL, 2012. GENII Version 2 Users' Guide, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, PNNL-14583, Revision4, September 2012.Reznor, 2002. The Reznor Gas-Fired Space Heating Handbook, Thomas & Betts Corp., 76 pp., Website: www.rezspec.com, Date accessed: October 3, 2012.State of Wisconsin Bureau of Migrant Labor Services, 2011. Migrant Population Report, Website: http://dwd.wisconsin.gov/migrants/pdf/migrantpoprep2011.pdf, Date accessed: September 4, 2012.Town of Rock, 2006. Official Zoning Map, Rock County Geographic Information Systems (GIS), Planning, Economic, and Community Development Agency, Website: http://199.233.45.158/images/web_documents/departments/planning_development/zoning_maps/trockzoning.pdf , Date accessed: October 03, 2012.Town of Rock, 2008. Zoning Ordinance Town of Rock, Rock County, Wisconsin, Website: http://www.tn.rock.wi.gov/docview.asp?docid=4000&locid=181, Date accessed: October 29, 2012.University of Wisconsin, 2009. Environmentally friendly upgrade planned for Charter Street plant, Website: http://www.news.wisc.edu/16755, Date accessed: October 9, 2012.USCB, 2006-2010. Table B17017, Poverty Status in the Past 12 Months by Household Type by Age of Householder, 2010 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, American Factfinder, Website: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml, Date accessed: August 20, 2012. USCB, 2010a. Demographic Profile 1, American Factfinder, Website: http://factfinder 2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml, Date accessed: April 25, 2012. USCB, 2010b. Summary File 1: Table P14, Sex by Age for the Population under 20 Years, American FactFinder, Website: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/js f/pages/index.xhtml, Date accessed: October 22, 2012. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-22Rev. 0USCB, 2010c. Demographic Profile 1, Profile of General Population and Housing Characteristics: 2010, American Factfinder, Website: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml. Date accessed: August 20, 2012. USEPA, 1995. Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors - Volume I: Stationary Point and Area Sources (AP-42), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Fifth Edition, January 1995. USEPA, 2012. U.S. Greenhouse Gas Inventory Report, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Website: http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/usinventoryreport.html , Date accessed: September 5, 2012.USFWS, 2012. Resource Review and Input Response Letter from Peter J. Fasbender dated January 25, 2012.USGS, 2012. The USGS Water Science School, Website: http://ga.water.usgs.gov/edu/qa-home-percapita.html, Date accessed: October 18, 2012. WDNR, 2010a. Air Pollution Control Operation Permit. West Campus Cogeneration Facility, Permit No. 113151500-P01, September 8, 2010.
WDNR, 2010b. Air Pollution Control Operation Permit, Generac Power Systems-Whitewater, Permit No. 128105230-P20, November 22, 2010.
WDNR, 2011a. PM2.5 Regional Background Concentrations (Draft) Memorandum from John Roth, dated April 15, 2011. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/AirPermits/documents/RegionalBackgroundConcentrationsIncDRAFTPM25.pdf, Date accessed: August 2012. WDNR, 2011b. Air Pollution Control Operation Permit, Alliant Energy- WP&L Turtle Generating Facility, Permit No. 154121880-P20, June 30, 2011. WDNR, 2011c. Air Pollution Control Operation Permit, University of Wisconsin Madison-Charter St., Permit No. 113008390-P04, November 8, 2011. WDNR, 2012a. Policy for Dispersion Modeling of Intermittent Operating Units, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Memorandum from Andrew Stewart dated March 6, 2012, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/AirPermits/documents/IntermittentSources2012.pdf , Date accessed: October 1, 2012. WDNR, 2012b. Endangered Resources Review (ERR #12-020), Proposed SHINE Medial Technologies Industrial Development, Town of Janesville, Rock County, WI. WDNR, 2012c. Air Pollution Control Construction Permit, University of Wisconsin Madison-Charter St., Permit No. 11-SDD-099, February 8, 2012. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-23Rev. 0WDNR, 2012d. Air Pollution Control Construction Permit, United Ethanol, LLC, Permit No. 11-DCF-056, May 2, 2012. WDNR, 2012e. Air Pollution Control Construction a nd Operation Permit, Kraft Foods Global, Inc.-Madison, Permit Nos. 09-SSS-127-R1 and 113004650-P13, June 27, 2012.WHS, 2012. Wisconsin Historical Society, Response Received from Mr. Dan Duchrow re "Request for SHPO Comment and Consultation on a Federal Undertaking," dated March 7, 2012.Wisconsin Golf Courses, 2013. Glen Erin Golf Course Janesville WI, Website: http://www.gleneringolf.com/index.shtml, Date accessed: January 16, 2013.19.7.5ALTERNATIVESAmerican Engineering Testing, Inc., 2011. Report of Subsurface Exploration.B&W TSG, 2009a. B&W and Covidien to develop U.S. source of key medical isotope, Babcock & Wilcox Technical Services Group Inc., January 26, 2009, Website: http://www.babcock.com/news_and_events/2009/20090126a.html, Date accessed: February 3, 2012.B&W TSG, 2009b. Medical Isotope Production System, Babcock & Wilcox Technical Services Group Inc., 2011, Website: http://www.babcock.com/library/pdf/PS-301-110.pdf, Date accessed: February 3, 2012.B&W TSG, 2009c. B&W Medical Isotope Production System, Meeting with USNRC, Babcock & Wilcox Technical Services Group Inc., July 2009, Obtained from NRC Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS), ML091900270.Broihahn, 2011. Historic and Archaeological Resource Identification, Correspondence from John Broihahn, Wisconsin State Archeologist, to Katrina Pitas, SHINE Medical Technologies, November 1, 2011. City of Chippewa Falls, 2011. Zoning Map, Chippewa Falls Website: http://www.chippewafalls-wi.gov/Maps/Zoning_map.pdf, Date accessed: December 2011.City of Stevens Point, 2011a. Comprehensive Plan, Stevens Point Website: http://www.co.portage.wi.us/Comprehensive%20Plan/Planning%20Program/Stevens%20Point/ Stevens%20Point.html, Date accessed: December 2011.City of Stevens Point, 2011b. Report of City Plan Commission, Website: http://stevenspoint.com/archives/47/minutesPlan20111205.pdf , Date accessed: December 2011.City of Stevens Point, 2012a. City Plan Commission, Website: http://stevenspoint.com/archives/36/agendaPlan20120103b.pdf , Date accessed: September 2012.City of Stevens Point, 2012b. Stevens Point receives $225,640 from Focus on Energy, Website: http://www.ci.stevens-point.wi.us/CivicAlerts.aspx?AID=799&ARC=1671 , Date accessed: September 2012. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-24Rev. 0City of Stevens Point, 2012c. Website: http://stevenspoint.com, Date accessed: September 2012. CLS, 2012. Canadian Light Source, Inc., Medical Isotopes Backgrounder: Producing medical isotopes using X-rays, January 19, 2012, Website: http://www.lightsource.ca/medicalisotopes/ , Date accessed: April 17, 2012. DOE, 2012. Environmental Assessment for NorthStar Medical Technologies LLC Commercial Domestic Production of Medical Isotope Molybdenum-99 (EA-1929), U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation/Global Threat Reduction Initiative, August 2012.EDI, 2011. New "aftermarket services" facility will increase EDI's flat dies rework capabilities and reduce lead times for customers, Website: http://www.extrusiondies.com/news_leterature.phtml#1, Date accessed: September 17, 2012.Environmental Leader, LLC, 2008. Neenah paper to use biomass at Whiting Mill, Website: http://www.environmentalleader.com/2008/08/20/neenah-paper-to-use-biomass-at-whiting-mill/ , Date accessed: September 17, 2012. EOG Resources, 2012. EOG resources reports first quarter 2012 results and raises 2012 liquids production growth target, Website: http://investor.shareholder.com/eogresources/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=671644, Date accessed: September 17, 2012. GEH, 2010. Moly-99 Project Update for the US NRC August 2011, GE Hitach i Nuclear Energy, Obtained from NRC ADAMS, ML112240806.Greenberg and Brown, 1986. Bedrock Geology of Portage County, Wisconsin, Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey (WGNHS) Map 86-3. HI, 2011. Health Imaging, Northstar chooses Wisconsin for isotope production, June 23, 2011, Website: http://www.healthimaging.com/index.php?option=com_articles&view=article&id=28423:northstar-chooses-wisconsin-for-isotope-production, Date accessed: April 17, 2012.iMakeSense, LLC, 2010. Revelations Architects/Builders Corporation News, Website: http://www.revarch.com/news.html, Date accessed: September 17, 2012.Jerde, 2011. Columbia Energy Center state's number 1 mercury emitter, Website: http://www.wiscnews.com/portagedailyregister /news/article_bdc dca56-11a5-11e1-886d-001cc4c03286.html, Date accessed: September 17, 2012. Knolls, 2002. Nuclides and Isotopes, 16th edition, Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory, 2002.McCarthy, 2011. United State EPA Memorandum: Implementation of the Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard, Website: http://www.4cleanair.org/Documents/ImplementationoftheOzoneNAAQS92211.pdf , Date accessed: September 17, 2012.Mudrey et al., 1982. Bedrock Geologic Map of Wisconsin, University of Wisconsin Extension, Geological and Natural History Survey. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-25Rev. 0NAIP, 2010a. USDA NAIP Imagery. Website: http://www.fsa.usda.gov/FSA/apfoapp?area=home&subject=prog&topic=nai, Date accessed: August 15, 2012.National Atlas of the United States, 2012. Wisconsin Federal Lands and Indian Reservations, Website: http://nationalatlas.gov/printable/fedlands.html, Date accessed: September 14, 2012.NM, 2010. Nuclear Monitor, Medical Radioisotopes Production without a Nuclear Reactor, No.710/711, June 4, 2010. NRC, 2004. Policy Statement on the Treatment of Environmental Justice Matters in NRC Regulatory and Licensing Actions, 69 FR 52040, August 24, 2004. NRC, 2011. NRC Background Information, Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors Annual Meeting, May 2011.
NRCS, 2012. Natural Resource Conservation Service Soil Survey Website: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/HomePage.htm, Date accessed: July 2012.Portage County, 2012a. Zoning Maps, Portage County Website: http://www.co.portage.wi.us/planningzoning/zoning_maps.htm, Date accessed: July 2012.Portage County, 2012b. Comprehensive Plan, Portage County Website: http://www.co.portage.wi.u s/Comprehensive%20Plan/Pl anning%20Program/Index.html, Date accessed: July 2012. Rubenzer, 2011. City of Chippewa Falls Board of Public Works Meeting Minutes, Website: http://www.chippewafalls-wi.gov/m eeting%20minutes/2011/B oard%20of%20Public%20Works/May%209%20%202011.pdf, Date accessed: September 17, 2012.The Chippewa Herald, 2009. County Loses $1.8 million on Wissota Green foreclosure, Website: http://chippewa.com/news/county-loses-million-on-wissota-green-foreclosure/article_08701daa-ea8f-54af-ad5b-f8dfbe1b7f97.html, Date accessed: September 17, 2012. The Chippewa Herald, 2012. EOG sand operation underway, Website: http://chippewa.com/news/local/eog-sand-operation-underway/article_8f360c64-398f-11e1-91cf-001871e3ce6c.html , Date accessed: September 17, 2012. ThinkResources, Inc. 2008. Wisconsin Power Plants, Website: http://www.powerplantjobs.com/ppj.nsf/powerplants1?openform&cat=wi&Count=500, Date accessed: September 17, 2012.UM, 2006a. Redacted - Safety Analysis Report for the University of Missouri-Columbia Application for License Renewal Application - (Volume 1 of 2), University of Missouri-Columbia, August 18, 2006. Obtained from NRC ADAMS, ML092110573.UM, 2006b. MURR Environmental Report for License Renewal, Facility License No. R-103, Docket No. 50-186, University of Missouri-Columbia, August 2006. Obtained from NRC ADAMS, ML062540121. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-26Rev. 0USCB, 2012a. Demographic Profile 1: Profile of General Population and Housing, American Factfinder, Website: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml , Date accessed: August 19, 2012.USCB, 2012b. Chippewa County Quick Facts , Website:http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/55/55017.html, Date accessed: September 6, 2012.USCB, 2012c. Five Year American Community Survey Estimates, Table 17017: Poverty Status in the Past 12 Months by Household Type by Age of Householder, Summary File Retrieval Tool, Website: http://www.census.gov/acs/www/data_documentation /summary_file/, Date accessed: August 22, 2012.USCB, 2012d. Summary File 1, P5: Hispanic or Latino Origin by Race, American Factfinder, Website: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml, Date accessed: August 19, 2012.USCB, 2012e. Portage County Quick Facts , Website:http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/55/55097.html, Date accessed: September 6, 2012. USEPA, 2012a. Non-Attainment Status for Each County by year in Wisconsin as of July 20 2012. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), Website: http://www.epa.gov/oaqps001/greenbk/anay_wi.html, Date accessed: July, 2012. USEPA, 2012b. Non-Attainment Status for Each County by year in Minnesota as of July 20, 2012. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), Website: http://www.epa.gov/oaqps001/greenbk/anay_mn.html, Date accessed: July, 2012. USEPA, 2012c. Cross-State Air Pollution Rule, Website: http://www.epa.gov/airtransport , Date accessed: September 17, 2012. USFWS, 2012a. Possible Industrial Development, City of Chippewa Falls, Chippewa County, Wisconsin, Correspondence from Jill Utrup, Field Supervisor of the USFWS, to Katrina Pitas, SHINE Medical Technologies, January 19, 2012. USFWS, 2012b. Possible Industrial Development Project Site and Vicinity Portage County, Wisconsin, Correspondence from Peter Fasbender, Field Supervisor of the USFWS, to Katrina Pitas, SHINE Medical Technologies, March 5, 2012. USGS, 2006. National Land Cover Dataset, Website: http://viewer.nationalmap.gov/viewer, Date accessed: July 2012. ESRI ArcGIS 9.3.1 software.USGS, 2012a. National Seismic Hazard Maps, Website: http://gldims.cr.usgs.gov/website/nshmp2008/viewer.htm, Date accessed: July 2012.USGS, 2012b. National Seismic Hazard Maps, Website: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/states/wisconsin/history.php, Date accessed: July 2012.USGS, 2012c. EHP Quaternary Faults, Website: http://geohazards.usgs.gov/qfaults/map.php , Date accessed: July 2012. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-27Rev. 0USGS, 2012d. Water Site: http://wi.water.usgs.gov/gwcomp/find/chippewa/brrts.html , Date accessed: July 2012.USGS, 2012e. Water Site: http://wi.water.usgs.gov/gwcomp/find/portage/brrts.html, Date accessed: July 2012. UW, 1964. Ice Age Deposits of Wisconsin, Univer sity of Wisconsin Extension Office. UW, 1983. Thickness of Unconsolidated Material in Wisconsin, University of Wisconsin Extension Office. UW, 1989. Groundwater Contamination Susceptibility in Wisconsin, University of Wisconsin Extension Office. U.S. Government, 1992. Energy Policy Act of 1992, 1992.Vetter, 2012. Designs proposed for Irvine park Zoo addition, Website: http://www.leadertelegram.com/news/front_page/article_e30b61d6-5799-11e1-8b33-0019bb2963f4.html , Date accessed: September 17, 2012. WBN, 2011. NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, LLC moving to Beloit, Wisconsin, Wisconsin BrokerNET, June 22, 2011, Website: http://www.wisconsinbroker net.com/2011/northstar-radiosotopes-llc-moving-to-beloit-wisconsin/, Date accessed: February 7, 2012. WDNR, 2011a. Endangered Resources Review (ERR Log # 11-491) Proposed Industrial Development Project in Chippewa County, WI, Correspondence from Emma Pelton, Endangered
Resources Program WDNR, to Timothy Krau se, Sargent & Lundy, December 12, 2011. WDNR, 2011b. Endangered Resources Review (ERR Log # 11-492) Proposed Industrial Development Project in Portage County, WI, Correspondence from Lori Steckervetz, Endangered Resources Program WDNR, to Timothy Krause, Sargent & Lundy, December 7, 2011.WDNR, 2012a. Air Monitoring Network Plan 2013, June 2012. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR), Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/AirQuality/documents/2013NetworkPlanProposed.pdf, Date accessed: July, 2012 .WDNR, 2012b. WisconsinDNRWebView, Website: http://dnrmaps.wi.gov/imf/imf.jsp?site=webview, Date accessed: September 14, 2012. WDNR, 2012c. Air Management Program, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/cias/am/amexternal/AM_PermitTracking.aspx?id=3001907, Date accessed: September 17, 2012. WDNR, 2012d. Air Management Program, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/cias/am/amexternal/AM_PermitTracking.aspx?id=10641 , Date accessed: September 17, 2012. WDNR, 2012e. Air Management Program, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/cias/am/amexternal/AM_PermitTracking.aspx?id=19054951 , Date accessed: September 17, 2012. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-28Rev. 0WDNR, 2012f. Air Management Program, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/cias/am/amexternal/AM_PermitTracking.aspx?id=17105222 , Date accessed: September 17, 2012. WDNR, 2012g. Air Management Program, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/cias/am/amexternal/AM_PermitTracking.aspx?id=3001987 , Date accessed: September 17, 2012. WDNR, 2012h. Air Management Program, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/cias/am/amexternal/AM_PermitTracking.aspx?id=3002320, Date accessed: September 17, 2012. WDNR, 2012i. Air Management Program, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/cias/am/amexternal/AM_PermitTracking.aspx?id=3002137 , Date accessed: September 17, 2012. WDNR, 2012j. Air Management Program, Websites: http://dnr.wi.gov/cias/am/amexternal/AM_PermitTracking.aspx?id=4003218 and http://dnr.wi.gov/cias/am/amexternal/AM_PermitTracking.aspx?id=13797133 , Date accessed: September 17, 2012.WDOR, 2012a. County and Municipal Revenues and Expenditures 2010, Bulletin No. 110, January 2012, Website: http://www.revenue.wi.gov/slf/cotvc/cmreb10.pdf, Date accessed: August 19, 2012.WDOT, 2011. Annual average hourly traffic counts, Website: http://transportal.cee.wisc.edu , Date accessed: August 2012, Wisconsin Hourly Traffic Data of The WisTransPortal Project. WDOT, 2012. US 10 (WIS 13 - I-39) expansion Marshfield to Stevens Point Portage and Wood counties, Website: http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/projects/us10/ , Date accessed: September 17, 2012. WDPI, 2012. 2011-2012 Enrollment by County by District by School by Gender, Website: http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/lbstat/pubdata2.html, Date accessed: August 19, 2012. WGNHS, 2004. Scanned Images of Wisconsin Well Constructor's Reports- Chippewa County 1936-1989, Open File Report 2001-02 CH. WGNHS, 2005. Scanned Images of Wisconsin Well Constructor's Reports- Portage County 1936-1989, Open File Report 2001-02 PT. WGNHS, 2012. Wisconsin Carbonate Bedrock Map Website; http://wisconsingeologicalsurvey.org/karstbedrock.htm, Date accessed: July 2012.WNN, 2011. Clinton moving into molybdenum production, September 14, 2011, World Nuclear News, Website: http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS-Clinton_moving_into_molybdenum_production-1409118.html, Date accessed: February 2, 2012.19.
7.6CONCLUSION
S US Census Bureau, 2012. The 2012 Statistical Abstract: Mining, Mineral Industries, Website, http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/cats/forestry_fishing_and_mining/mining_mineral_industries.html, Date accessed: January 18, 2013. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-29Rev. 0World Nuclear Association, 2012. Supply of Uranium-August 2012, Website: http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf75.html, Date accessed: December 28, 2012. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTable of ContentsSHINE Medical Technologies 19-iRev. 0CHAPTER 19ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWTable of Contents SectionTitlePage
19.1INTRODUCTION
OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT....................................19.1-119.1.1PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION.................................19.1-119.1.2REGULATORY PROVISIONS, PERMITS, AND REQUIREDCONSULTATIONS.............................................................................................19.1-319.2PROPOSED ACTION...........................................................................................19.2-119.2.1SITE LOCATION AND LAYOUT........................................................................19.2-619.2.2RADIOISOTOPE FACILITY DESCRIPTION......................................................19.2-1119.2.3WATER CONSUMPTION AND TREATMENT...................................................19.2-12 19.2.4COOLING AND HEATING DISSIPATION SYSTEMS........................................19.2-1319.2.5WASTE SYSTEMS............................................................................................19.2-14 19.2.6STORAGE, TREATMENT, AND TRANSPORTATION OF RADIOACTIVEAND NONRADIOACTIVE MATERIALS, INCLUDING LEU, WASTE, RADIOISOTOPES, AND ANY OTHER MATERIALS.........................................19.7-2119.3DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT........................................19.3-119.3.1LAND USE AND VISUAL RESOURCES...........................................................19.3-119.3.2AIR QUALITY AND NOISE................................................................................19.3-919.3.3GEOLOGIC ENVIRONMENT............................................................................19.3-65 19.3.4WATER RESOURCES.......................................................................................19.3-7119.3.5ECOLOGICAL RESOURCES............................................................................19.3-9619.3.6HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES......................................................19.3-12019.3.7SOCIOECONOMICS.........................................................................................19.3-13419.3.8HUMAN HEALTH...............................................................................................19.3-16419.4IMPACTS OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION, OPERATIONS, AND DECOMMISSIONING...........................................................................................19.4-119.4.1LAND USE AND VISUAL RESOURCES...........................................................19.4-119.4.2AIR QUALITY AND NOISE................................................................................19.4-619.4.3GEOLOGIC ENVIRONMENT............................................................................19.4-3119.4.4WATER RESOURCES.......................................................................................19.4-3419.4.5ECOLOGICAL RESOURCES............................................................................19.4-40 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTable of ContentsSHINE Medical Technologies 19-iiRev. 0Table of Contents (cont'd) SectionTitlePage19.4.6HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES......................................................19.4-4919.4.7SOCIOECONOMICS.........................................................................................19.4-5019.4.8HUMAN HEALTH...............................................................................................19.4-6119.4.9WASTE MANAGEMENT....................................................................................19.4-81 19.4.10TRANSPORTATION..........................................................................................19.4-8319.4.11POSTULATED ACCIDENTS.............................................................................19.4-9219.4.12ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE............................................................................19.4-105 19.4.13CUMULATIVE EFFECTS...................................................................................19.4-11219.5ALTERNATIVES...................................................................................................19.5-119.5.1NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE.............................................................................19.5-119.5.2REASONABLE ALTERNATIVES.......................................................................19.5-219.5.3COST-BENEFIT OF THE ALTERNATIVES.......................................................19.5-72 19.5.4COMPARISON OF THE POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS...............19.5-93
19.6CONCLUSION
S....................................................................................................19.6-119.6.1UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS...............................19.6-119.6.2RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SHORT-TERM USES AND LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY OF THE ENVIRONMENT.......................................................19.6-1319.6.3IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCES....................................................................................................19.6-15
19.7REFERENCES
......................................................................................................19.7-119.
7.1INTRODUCTION
OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW..................................19.7-119.7.2PROPOSED ACTION........................................................................................19.7-219.7.3DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT.....................................19.7-2 19.7.4IMPACTS OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION, OPERATIONS, AND DECOMMISSIONING........................................................................................19.7-2019.7.5ALTERNATIVES................................................................................................19.7-23 19.
7.6CONCLUSION
S.................................................................................................19.7-28 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTable of ContentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.1-iRev. 0SECTION
19.1INTRODUCTION
OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTTable of Contents SectionTitlePage
19.1INTRODUCTION
OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT...............................19.1-119.1.1PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION........................19.1-119.1.2REGULATORY PROVISIONS, PERMITS, AND REQUIREDCONSULTATIONS....................................................................................19.1-3 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies19.1-iiRev. 0List of Tables NumberTitle19.1.2-1Permits and Approvals Required for Construction and Operation19.1.2-2Consultations Required for Construction and Operation Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of FiguresSHINE Medical Technologies 19.1-iiiRev. 0List of Figures NumberTitleNone Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.1-ivRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations Acronym/AbbreviationDefinition CFRCode of Federal Regulations COEU.S. Army Corps of Engineers CPConstruction Permit DOEU.S. Department of Energy EAEnvironmental Assessment EREnvironmental Report ERREndangered Resources ReviewFAAFederal Aviation Administration FDAU.S. Food and Drug Administration FWSU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service HEUhighly enriched uranium HFRHigh Flux ReactorI-131iodine-131 IREInstitut National des Radioéléments LEUlow enriched uranium Mo-99molybdenum-99NEPANational Environmental Policy Act NRCU.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission NRCLNational Research Council NRUNational Research Universal NTPNuclear Technology Products Radioisotopes OLOperating License SHINESHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. SHPOState Historic Preservation Office SPCCSpill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.1-vRev. 0Tc-99mtechnetium-99m U-235uranium-235WNNWorld Nuclear NewsXe-133xenon-133Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd) Acronym/AbbreviationDefinition Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies 19.1-1Rev. 0CHAPTER 19
19.1INTRODUCTION
OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTIn accordance with the provisions of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 50 "Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities," and supporting guidance, SHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. (SHINE) is providing this Environmental Report (ER) in support of an application to construct and operate a radioisotope facility in Janesville, Wisconsin. SHINE is providing this comprehensive ER as required with its application. The ER provides information to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to facilitate preparation of an Environmental Assessment (EA) in accordance with the provisions of 10CFR 51 Subpart A, National Environmental Policy Act - Regulations Implementing Section102 (2). This chapter provides an introduction to the assessment of the environmental effects of construction, operation, and decommissioning of this facility on the site and surrounding areas.This ER follows the content and organization of the Final Interim Staff Guidance Augmenting NUREG-1537, Part 1, Chapter 19 (NRC, 2012). This ER supports the regulat ory review that is performed by the NRC under 10 CFR 51. This regulation requires that environmental impacts from the project be evaluated and described in a concise, clear, and analytical manner. This ER describes the project, potential alternatives, and the methods and sources used in the environmental impact analysis.This ER discusses the existing environment at the proposed Janesville, Wisconsin site (referred to throughout the ER as the SHINE site) and vicinity, and summarizes the environmental impacts of construction, operation, and decommissioning. In addition, this ER considers appropriate impact mitigation measures, and reviews alternative sites and technologies. The SHINE facility produces molybdenum-99 (Mo-99), iodine-131 (I-131), and xenon-133 (Xe-133). The decay product of Mo-99, technetium-99m (Tc-99m), is used for diagnostic nuclear medicine procedures. The purpose and need for the proposed action is provided in Section 19.1.1 and a description of the proposed action is provided in Section19.2.19.1.1PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTIONThe proposed federal action is the issuance of a Construction Permit (CP) and Operating License (OL), under the provisions of 10 CFR 50, that would allow SHINE to construct and operate a radioisotope facility to produce Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133. Further discussion of the proposed action is provided in Section 19.2.Molybdenum-99There is currently no domestic production of Mo-99 and its daughter isotope technetium-99m (Tc-99m). The U.S. is forced to import its entire supply of these isotopes, which are used in 80percent of nuclear medicine procedures. Tc-99m is an essential ingredient in diagnostic radiopharmaceuticals used for:*Bone scans*Lung perfusion imaging*Kidney scans and functional imaging*Liver scans Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies 19.1-2Rev. 0*Sentinel lymph node localization*Cardiac perfusion imaging*Brain perfusion imaging*Gall bladder function imaging
- Blood pool imaging*Thyroid and salivary gland imaging*Meckel's scansBetween 95 and 98 percent of the world's supply of Mo-99 is produced by just four organizations (NRCL, 2009):*MDS Nordion (Canada).
- Covidien (Netherlands).
- Institut National des Radioéléments (IRE) (Belgium).*Nuclear Technology Products Radioisotopes (Pty) Ltd. (NTP) (South Africa).Two of these companies (MDS Nordion [approximately 60 percent of the U.S. supply] and Covidien [approximately 40 percent of U.S. supply]) supply nearly all of the Mo-99 used in the U.S. These two companies obtain the vast majority of their Mo-99 from two reactors (NRCL, 2009):*National Research Universal (NRU) reactor in Chalk River, Ontario, Canada.*High Flux Reactor (HFR) in Petten, the Netherlands.The NRU reactor has been in operation since 1957 and HFR has been in operation since 1961.
Due to the age of these reactors, disruption of the supply of Mo-99 is an ongoing concern.The most recent disruptions of Mo-99 supply resulted from the shutdown of HFR from August 2008 to February 2009 and again from February 2010 to September 2010 for repairs. Concurrent with the HFR shutdown, the NRU reactor was also shut down for repairs from May 2009 to August 2010 (WNN, 2009; Fissile Material, 2010; MSNBC, 2010). While both reactors were shut down, there was an increase in production from other Mo-99 producers in Europe and South Africa; however, the U.S. experienced a shortage of Mo-99/Tc-99m, resulting in hospitals and clinics postponing or cancelling diagn ostic imaging procedures (NRCL, 2009).In addition to the age of the HFR and NRU reactors, there are three other supply reliability concerns:*Increasing demand, both domestically and globally, for Mo-99.*Increasing difficulty of transporting Mo-99 across international borders, especially by air, due to security concerns.*The short half-life of Mo-99 (2.75 days) and Tc-99m (6.01 hours).Because of these supply reliability concerns and national security concerns, U.S. government policy and law is to encourage the domestic production of Mo-99. The SHINE facility makes a significant contribution toward accomplishing these goals.Current U.S. demand for Mo-99 is between 5000 and 7000 6-day curies per week, and this demand is projected to grow in the range of 3 to 10 percent per year (NRCL, 2009). The SHINE facility can produce up to 8200 6-day curies of Mo-99 per week. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies 19.1-3Rev. 0The SHINE facility also helps achieve U.S. government nonproliferation objectives. Most of the world's production of Mo-99 is achieved by irradiating highly enriched uranium (HEU) targets in research and test reactors. The U.S. is the primary supplier of HEU for Mo-99 production. In 1992 Congress passed the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (U.S. Government, 1992). One of the nonproliferation objectives of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 was to create a strategy to phase out U.S. exports of HEU for radioisotope production. Based on this, the U.S. is encouraging Mo-99 producers to eliminate use of HEU in medical isotope production. The SHINE facility uses LEU (less than 20 percent enrichment) to produce Mo-99.Iodine-131There are two methods used to produce I-131: irradiation of tellerium-130 in a nuclear reactor, and generation as a by-product of the irradiation of uranium-235 (U-235) for Mo-99 production. Both methods are used to supply the U.S. I-131 is used for (NM, 2012):*Radiation therapy.
- Radioactive labeling for di agnostic radiopharmaceuticals.Currently, there is no commercial production of I-131 in the U.S. The U.S. supply of I-131 is provided by DRAXIMAGE (66 percent), Covidien (26 percent), and MDS Nordion (8 percent).
These companies obtain their I-131 for U.S. consumption from two reactors (OECD, 2010):*NRU reactor in Chalk River, Ontario, Canada.
- SAFARI-1, Pelindaba, South Africa.The SAFARI-1 reactor has been in operation since 1965 (OECD, 2010). As discussed above for Mo-99, due to the ages of the reactors, disruption of the supply of I-131 is an ongoing concern.Xenon-133Xe-133 gas is produced as a by-product of the irradiation of U-235 for Mo-99 production. Xe-133 is used for (RxList, 2012):*Lung imaging.
- Diagnostic evaluation of pulmonary function.
- Assessment of cerebral blood flow.19.1.2REGULATORY PROVISIONS, PERMITS, AND REQUIREDCONSULTATIONSThis section lists and summarizes the status of federal, state, local, and other permits and consultations required for the construction and operation of the proposed SHINE radioisotope facility. The applicable law, ordinance, or regulation that governs each permit and/or consultation is also identified.Table 19.1.2-1 lists the permits and other approvals required for construction and operation of the SHINE facility. The table provides the following information for each permit or approval, as applicable:*Name of the responsible regulatory agency*Applicable law, ordinance, or regulation Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies 19.1-4Rev. 0*Name of the permit or approval*Activity covered by the permit or approval*Current statusTable 19.1.2-2 lists the consultations required for construction and operation of the SHINE facility. The table provides the following information for each consultation, as applicable:*Name of the responsible regulatory agency
- Applicable law, ordinance, or regulation*Required consultation
- Summary of any surveys required to complete the consultation*Current statusIn addition to the formal consultations listed in Table 19.1.2-2, SHINE has made informal contacts with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the National Nuclear Security Administration, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Wisconsin Department of Health Services, and the City of Janesville Community Development Department. The purpose of these informal consultations was to inform the agencies about the project and to coordinate project planning.An on-site field delineation completed in accordance with U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) guidance (COE, 2010) found no jurisdictional wetlands or waters of the United States on the SHINE site. Therefore, no permitting or consultation with the COE is expected to be required.No potential administrative delays or other problems have been identified that would prevent any required agency consultations or approvals. The SHINE facility is designed and planned to comply with all applicable environmental quality standards and regulatory requirements. The facility also will comply with current Good Manufacturing Practices followed by the pharmaceutical industry.
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies 19.1-5Rev. 0Table 19.1.2-1 Permits and Approvals Required for Construction and Operation (Sheet 1 of 5)AgencyRegulatory AuthorityPermit or ApprovalActivity CoveredStatusU.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atomic Energy Act10 CFR 50.50Construction PermitConstruction of the SHINE facilityAddressed in this license application10 CFR 50.57Operating LicenseOperation of the SHINE facilityAddressed in this license application10 CFR 40Source Material LicensePossession, use, and transfer of radioactive source materialAddressed in this license application10 CFR 30By-Product Material LicenseProduction, possession, and transfer of radioactive by-product materialAddressed in this license application10 CFR 70Special Nuclear Material LicenseReceipt, possession, use, and transfer of special nuclear materialAddressed in this license applicationNational Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)10 CFR 51Environmental Assessment or Environmental Impact Statement in accordance with NEPASite approval for construction and operation of a radioisotope facilityAddressed in this license applicationFederal Aviation Administration (FAA)Federal Aviation Act14 CFR 77Construction NoticeConstruction of structures that potentially may impact air navigation SHINE submitted structure evaluation requests on October 26, 2011. The FAA issued Determinations of No Hazard to Air Navigation on November 9 and 15, 2011.U.S. Environmental Protection AgencyResource Conservation and
Recovery Act40 CFR 261 and 262Acknowledgement of Notification of Hazardous Waste ActivityGeneration of hazardous
wasteNotification not yet submittedClean Water Act40 CFR 112, Appendix FSpill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plans for Construction and OperationStorage of oil during construction and operationSPCC Plans not yet preparedU.S. Department of TransportationHazardous Material Transportation Act40 CFR 107Certificate of RegistrationTransportation of hazardous materialsRegistration application not yet submitted Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies 19.1-6Rev. 0Wisconsin Department of Natural ResourcesFederal Clean Air ActWisconsin Statutes Chapter 285Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapter NR 406Air Pollution Control Construction PermitConstruction of an air pollution emission source that is not specifically exemptedPermit application not yet
submittedFederal Clean Air ActWisconsin Statutes Chapter 285Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapter NR 407Air Pollution Control Operation PermitOperation of an air pollution emission source that is not specifically exemptedPermit application not yet submittedTable 19.1.2-1 Permits and Approvals Required for Construction and Operation (Sheet 2 of 5)AgencyRegulatory AuthorityPermit or ApprovalActivity CoveredStatus Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies 19.1-7Rev. 0Wisconsin Department of
Natural Resources, continuedFederal Clean Water ActWisconsin Statutes Chapter 283Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapter NR 216Construction Storm Water Discharge PermitDischarge of storm water runoff from the construction
siteNotice of Intent to be covered by general permit not yet
submittedFederal Clean Water ActWisconsin Statutes Chapter 283 Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapter NR 216Industrial Storm Water Discharge PermitDischarge of storm water runoff from the site during facility operationNotice of Intent to be covered by general permit not yet submitted. The facility may be eligible for an industrial Storm Water Discharge Permit exclusion under Wisconsin Admistrative Code NR 216.21(3)Wisconsin Statutes Chapters 280 ad 281Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapter NR 809Approval LettersConstruction by the City of Janesville of water and sanitary sewer extensions to the SHINE facilityPlans and specifications not yet submittedWisconsin Statutes Chapter 291Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapter NR 660, 662, and/or 666Compliance with hazardous waste notification, record keeping, and reporting requirementsGeneration of hazardous
waste Notification not yet submitted; other requirements become applicable during operation Wisconsin Department of Safety and Professional ServicesWisconsin Statutes Chapter 101Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapters SPS 361 and 362Building Plan ReviewCompliance with state building codes; required before a local building permit can be issued for a commercial buildingPlans not yet submitted Wisconsin Department of TransportationWisconsin Statutes Chapter 85Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapters Trans 231Permit for Connection to State Trunk HighwayConstruction of driveway connection to U.S. Route 51Permit application not yet
submittedTable 19.1.2-1 Permits and Approvals Required for Construction and Operation (Sheet 3 of 5)AgencyRegulatory AuthorityPermit or ApprovalActivity CoveredStatus Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies 19.1-8Rev. 0Wisconsin Department of Transportation continuedWisconsin Statutes Chapter 85Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapters Trans 231Right of Entry PermitConstruction by the City of Janesville of utility extensions
across U.S. Route 51Permit application not yet
submittedWisconsin Statutes Chapter 114Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapters Trans 56Variance from Height Limitation Zoning Ordinances Construction of structures that exceed height limitations established for Southern Wisconsin Regional AirportPlans not yet submitted for reviewCity of Janesville Community Development DepartmentCity of Janesville Ordinance 18.24.050.ASite Plan Approval (includes
Building Site Permit for the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport Overlay District)Administrative approval of the site layout and plans for parking, lighting, landscaping, etc.Plans not yet submitted for reviewCity of Janesville Ordinance 15.06.070Storm Water Plan Approval (may be included in Site Plan Approval)Administrative approval of grading and drainage plansPlans not yet submitted for
reviewCity of Janesville Ordinance 15.05.080Erosion Control Permit (may be included in Site Plan Approval)Administrative approval of erosion control plans Plans not yet submitted for
reviewCity of Janesville Ordinance 15.01.100.ABuilding PermitConstruction of buildingsPermit application not yet submittedCity of Janesville Ordinance 15.01.100.APlumbing Plan ApprovalInstallation of plumbing systemsPermit application not yet
submittedCity of Janesville Ordinance 15.04.010.AHVAC Plan ApprovalInstallation of heating, ventilation, and air conditioning systemsPermit application not yet submittedCity of Janesville Ordinance 8.32.010Fire Sprinkler and Alarm PermitInstallation of sprinkler and alarm systemsPermit application not yet
submittedCity of Janesville Ordinance 15.01.190.AOccupancy PermitOccupancy of completed buildings Permit application not yet
submittedTable 19.1.2-1 Permits and Approvals Required for Construction and Operation (Sheet 4 of 5)AgencyRegulatory AuthorityPermit or ApprovalActivity CoveredStatus Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies 19.1-9Rev. 0City of Janesville Community Development Department continuedCity of Janesville Ordinance 13.16Sanitary Sewer and Water Supply Facility ApprovalsAdministrative approval of construction, installation, and operation of connections to the municipal sewer and water supply systemsPermit application not yet
submittedCity of Janesville Plan CommissionCity of Janesville Ordinance 18.24.040Conditional Use Permit (when the site property is annexed by the City, the property will automatically be zoned for industrial use)Construction of multiple buildings on the same sitePermit application not yet
submitted Rock County Highway DepartmentWisconsin Statutes Chapter 84Rock County Utility Accommodation Policy 96.00Permit to Construct, Maintain, and Operate Utilities within Highway Right-of-WayConstruction by the City of Janesville of utility extensions across County Trunk Highway GPermit application not yet
submittedNote: No jurisdictional wetlands or waters of the United States have been identified on the SHINE site; therefore, authorization under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act is not expected to be required for construction or operation.Sources for identification of permit requirements: City of Janesville, 2012; State of Wisconsin, 2012; Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 2012.Table 19.1.2-1 Permits and Approvals Required for Construction and Operation (Sheet 5 of 5)AgencyRegulatory AuthorityPermit or ApprovalActivity CoveredStatus Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies19.1-10Rev. 0Table 19.1.2-2 Consultations Required for Construction and Operation (Sheet 1 of 2)AgencyRegulatory AuthorityRequired ConsultationSurveys RequiredStatusU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS)Endangered Species Act, 16 USC 1536Consultation regarding potential to adversely impact protected species; concurrence with no adverse impact or consultation on appropriate mitigation measuresNoneConsultation letter was submitted to the FWS on December 16, 2011; FWS issued a response on January 25, 2012, stating no further action required.Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, 16 USC 668-668cConsultation regarding potential to adversely impact eagles; concurrence with no adverse impact or consultation on appropriate mitigation measuresNoneConsultation letter and response as above.Wisconsin State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)National Historic Preservation Act, Section 106Consultation regarding potential to adversely impact historic resources; concurrence with no adverse impact or consultation on appropriate mitigation measuresPhase I archaeological
surveyPhase I survey was completed on December 15, 2011. Consultation letter was submitted to the SHPO on February 15, 2012; response was received on March 12, 2012 stating agreement with finding that no historic properties will be affected. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Wisconsin Statutes Chapter 29, Section 604Endangered Resources Review (ERR) to document recorded occurrence of protected species or rare natural habitatsNoneRequest for ERR was submitted on January 16, 2012; ERR response was issued on February 1, 2012, stating no further action required. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIntroduction of the Environmental ReportSHINE Medical Technologies19.1-11Rev. 0Native American Nations:-Citizen Potawatomi Nation, Oklahoma-Flandreau Santee Sioux Tribe of South Dakota-Forest County Potawatomi Community, Wisconsin-Hannahville Indian Community,
Michigan-Ho-Chunk Nation of Wisconsin-Lower Sioux Indian Community, Minnesota-Prairie Band of Potawatomi Nation,
Kansas-Prairie Island Indian Community, Minnesota-Santee Sioux Nation, Nebraska-Sisseton-Wahpeton Oyate, South Dakota-Spirit Lake Tribe, North Dakota-Upper Sioux Community, Minnesota-Winnebago Tribe of NebraskaNational Environmental Policy ActNational Historic Preservation ActNative American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act Consultation regarding protection of traditional Native American religious and cultural resourcesNoneConsultation letters were sent to the Native American tribes on July 26, 2012. The Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska responded on August 2, 2012, requesting notification if any burial sites are discovered. No other responses have been received.Table 19.1.2-2 Consultations Required for Construction and Operation (Sheet 2 of 2)AgencyRegulatory AuthorityRequired ConsultationSurveys RequiredStatus Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTable of ContentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.2-iRev. 0SECTION 19.2PROPOSED ACTIONTable of Contents SectionTitlePage19.2PROPOSED ACTION.....................................................................................19.2-119.2.1SITE LOCATION AND LAYOUT..................................................................19.2-619.2.2RADIOISOTOPE FACILITY DESCRIPTION................................................19.2-11 19.2.3WATER CONSUMPTION AND TREATMENT.............................................19.2-1219.2.4COOLING AND HEATING DISSIPATION SYSTEMS..................................19.2-1319.2.5WASTE SYSTEMS......................................................................................19.2-14 19.2.6STORAGE, TREATMENT, AND TRANSPORTATION OF RADIOACTIVEAND NONRADIOACTIVE MATERIALS, INCLUDING LEU, WASTE, RADIOISOTOPES, AND ANY OTHER MATERIALS...................................19.2-21 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies19.2-iiRev. 0List of Tables NumberTitle19.2.0-1Estimated Materials Consumed During Construction Phase19.2.0-2Proposed Construction/Demolition Equipment Used in the Construction, Preoperational, and Decommissioning Phases 19.2.1-1Sensitive Populations, Nearest Resident, and Landmarks within 5 Miles (8 km) of the Site19.2.5-1Estimated Type and Quantity of Radioactive Wastes Associated with the SHINE Facility Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of FiguresSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-iiiRev. 0List of Figures NumberTitle19.2.1-1SHINE Facility Site Layout19.2.2-1Isotope Production System High-Level Flow Diagram19.2.3-1Water Balance Diagram Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-ivRev. 2[Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]Acronyms and AbbreviationsAcronym/Abbreviation Definition °Fdegrees Fahrenheit °Cdegrees Celsius µS/cmmicro-Siemens per centimeter AEAAtomic Energy Act of 1954 ac.acreAHAacetohydroxamic acid[Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information]Btu/hrbritish thermal units per hour Btu/scfbritish thermal units per standard cubic feet CeCeriumcfmcubic feet per minute CFRCode of Federal Regulations CicuriesCO2carbon dioxideCPConstruction PermitCs-137cesium-137d or Ddeuterium D-Tdeuterium-tritium DSSIDiversified Scientific Services, Inc.EPAU.S. Environmental Protection Agency EREnvironmental Report ESEnergySolutions FDAU.S. Food and Drug Administrationft.feet Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.2-vRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition ft3cubic feetFPfission productg/Lgrams/liter gpmgallons per minute GTCCgreater than Class CgU/Lgrams of uranium per liter H2hydrogen4Heheliumhahectare HNO3nitric acidhrhourHVACheating, ventilation, and air conditioning IiodineI-129iodine-129I-131iodine-131 IUirradiation unit
keffeffective multiplication factorkgkilogramskmkilometerkVkilovolts lbspounds LELlower explosive limit LEUlow enriched uranium Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-viRev. 0[Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition LSAlow specific activity mmetersMmolarMBtu/hrmillion british thermal units per hour MeVmillion electron volts mi.mileMLLWmixed low level waste MomolybdenumMo-99 or 99Momolybdenum-99nneutronNOxnitrogen oxidesNRCU.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission O2oxygenOLOperating LicensePPEpersonal protective equipment PSARPreliminary Safety Analysis Report psigpound-force per square inch gaugePuplutoniumRCAradiologically controlled area RCRAResource Conservation and Recovery Act scfstandard cubic feet SHINESHINE Medical Technologies, Inc.sol'nsolution[Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information] t or Ttritium Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.2-viiRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition TBPtri-butyl phosphate Tctechnetium Tc-99mtechnetium-99m TCLPToxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure TDNthermal denitration TRCSTSV Reactivity Control System TRPSTSV Reactivity Protection System TStarget solution TSVtarget solution vessel UuraniumU-235uranium-235 U3O8triuranium octoxide (yellowcake) UO3uranium trioxide (yellowcake)UREXuranium extractionUSGSUnited States Geological SurveyWCSWaste Control Specialists WIWisconsin Xe-133xenon-133 yryear Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-1Rev. 0CHAPTER 1919.2PROPOSED ACTIONThe proposed federal action is issuance of a Construction Permit (CP) and Operating License (OL) to SHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. (SHINE) for a radioisotope production facility to produce molybdenum-99 (Mo-99), iodine 131 (I-131), and xenon-133 (Xe-133). The decay product of Mo-99, technetium-99m (Tc-99m), is used for diagnostic medical isotope procedures.The applicant for this CP and the OL and owner of the radioisotope facility is SHINE Medical Technologies, Inc., a Wisconsin corporation. SHINE has the necessary authority, control, and rights related to the construction and operation of the isotope production facility once the CP and the OL are approved.The projected schedule for the SHINE facility is as follows:*Start date of construction: January 2015.*End date of construction: December 2015.
- Date of commercial operation: June 2016.
- Date of decommissioning: June 2046.SHINE plans on performing activities in accordance with 10 CFR 50.10(a)(2) prior to receiving the CP. The construction phase of this project requires an average of 248 workers (421 at peak times) and a monthly average of 303 truck deliveries and 9 off-site waste shipments. Materials consumed are shown in Table 19.2.0-1 and also include approximately 24,587 gallons of diesel fuel (as a bounding assumption fuel is assumed to be diesel) on an average monthly basis. The different types of construction equipment used during the construction phase are shown in Table19.2.0-2. These construction activities affect 51.0 acres (ac.) (20.6 hectares [ha]) of land of which approximately 25.1 ac. (10.2 ha) of land are only temporarily affected.Prior to full commercial operation, the SHINE facility equipment undergoes a thorough commissioning phase involving a series of test operations designed to ensure the facility is functioning as designed. Once the equipment has been commissioned, it is used to produce and ship quantities of Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133 for customer qualification and input to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval process. This preoperational phase requires an average of 390 workers (451 at peak times) and a monthly average of 190 truck deliveries and 9 off-site waste shipments. Materials consumed include approximately 11,721 gallons of diesel fuel (as a bounding assumption fuel is assumed to be diesel) on a monthly basis. The different types of construction equipment used during the preoperational phase are shown in Table 19.2.0-2.After the FDA approves SHINE's customer's final products for commercial use, the facility produces and ships several batches of Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133 per week. Production devices are normally operated on a weekly basis and the operation schedules for the devices are normally staggered to accommodate customer requirements. Operational activities require an Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-2Rev. 0average of 150 workers and a monthly average of 36 truck deliveries and 1 off-site waste shipment. Materials to be stored on-site in small quantities include 55 gallon drums of lubricating oil and grease for fans, pumps, hoists, trolleys and rotating equipment and hydraulic oil for heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) dampers and hydraulically operated equipment.
Limited on-site storage of acid and caustic chemicals for regeneration of the water treatment demineralizer beds and processes are required. A bounding value of approximately 30,000 gallons (113,562 liters) of diesel fuel for the standby diesel generator are contained in an outside, underground storage tank. Approximately 25.9 acres (10.5 hectares) of land are permanently affected due to operational activities.Once the facility reaches the end of its useful life, it will be decommissioned. Any radioactive equipment and materials will be disposed of according to local and federal laws and regulations. Post-operational decommissioning activities require an average of 205 workers (257 at peak times) and a monthly average of 72 truck deliveries and 191 off-site waste shipments. Materials consumed include approximately 28,607 gallons (108,290 liters) of diesel fuel (as a bounding assumption fuel is assumed to be diesel) on a monthly basis. The different types of construction equipment used during the decommissioning phase are shown in Table 19.2.0-2. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-3Rev. 0Table 19.2.0-1 Estimated Materials Consumed During Construction PhaseMaterialAmountConcrete27,700 cubic yardsStructural Steel140 tonsMisc. Steel30 tonsSteel Liner100 tonsAsphalt2200 cubic yards Stone Granular Material16,000 cubic yards Roofing150 tons Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-4Rev. 0Table 19.2.0-2 Proposed Construction/Demolition Equipment Used in the Construction,Preoperational, and Decommissioning Phases (Sheet 1 of 2)EquipmentPresent During Construction (Y or N)Present During Preoperation (Y or N)Present During Decommissioning (Y or N)Asphalt Compactor, Cat CB434C, 107 HpYYNAsphalt Paver, Barber Greene AP-1000, 174 HpYYNBackhoe/Loader, Cat 430, 105 HpYYYBoom Lift, JLG 800AJ, 65 HpYYYConcrete Pump, Putzmeister 47Z-Meter, 300 HpYNNCrane, Lattice Boom, Manitowoc 8000, 80t, 205 HpYNYCrane, Picker, Grove RT530E-2 30t, 160 HpYNYCrane, Picker, Grove RT600E-2 50t, 173 HpYNYDump, Duel Axel (15 cy)
Mack, 350 HpYYYExcavator, Large, Cat 345D L, 380 HpYNYExcavator, Medium, Cat 321D LCR,148 HpYNYExtended Forklift, Lull 1044C-54, 115 HpYYYFuel Truck, Mack MP6, 150 HpYNYMaterial Truck, 21/2 ton, F-650, 270 HpYYYMechanic's Truck, 21/2 ton, F-650, 270 HpYYY Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-5Rev. 0Table 19.2.0-2 Proposed Construction/Demolition Equipment Used in the Construction,Preoperational, and Decommissioning Phases (Sheet 2 of 2)EquipmentPresent During Construction (Y or N)Present During Preoperation (Y or N)Present During Decommissioning (Y or N)Motor Grader, Cat 140M, 183 HpYYYPickup Truck, F-250, 300 HpYYYSemi Tractor & Trailer (20 cy), Mack MP8, 450 HpYNYSkidsteer Loader, Case SR200, 75 HpYYYTracked Dozer, Cat D6, 150 HpYYYTracked Dozer, Cat D7, 235 HpYYYTracked Dozer, Cat D8, 310 HpYNYTracked Loader, Cat 973C, 242 HpYYYVibratory Soil Compactor, Cat CS74, 156 HpYYYWater Truck, Mack MP6, 150 HpYYYPortable Air Compressors, <50 HpYYYPortable Generators, <50 HpYYYPortable Welders, <50
HpYYYWalk Behind Compactor, <50 HpYYY Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-6Rev. 019.2.1SITE LOCATION AND LAYOUT19.2.1.1Site LocationThe SHINE site is located approximately 4 miles (mi.) (6.4 kilometers [km]) south of Janesville, Rock County, Wisconsin. The SHINE facility is centered at approximately 42° 37' 26.9" N latitude, and 89° 1'29.5" W longitude.The sensitive populations (e.g., schools, daycare facilities, hospitals), nearest resident, and landmarks (including highways, transportation facilities, rivers and other bodies of water) within 5mi. (8 km) of the site are provided in Table 19.2.1-1. There are no daycare centers or retirement homes located within 5 mi. (8 km) of the SHINE facility.19.2.1.2Site LayoutFigure 19.2.1-1 shows the layout of major structures and the site boundary. The site boundaries cover approximately 91 ac. (36.8 ha). The following structures shown in Figure 19.2.1-1 are located on the site: *Production facility building*Support facility building*Waste staging and shipping building
- Diesel generator building
- Administration building*Security station19.2.1.2.1Chemical, Diesel Fuel, and Hazardous and Radioactive Material Receipt, Holding, and Storage AreasThe following buildings and areas receive, store, hold, retain or process chemicals used in the facility and support buildings on the site:*Production facility building-Rejected material -Receiving area
-Receipt inspection-Target solution preparation -Materials lab -Caustics room -Acids room-Hot cell -CO2-compressed gases room-Mechanical room -Boiler room-HVAC chiller room-Trade spaces -General storage Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-7Rev. 0-Fire brigade -Health physics (hot)-Health physics (cold)-Ion exchange assembly -FDA lab-Hot lab-Isolation pack room -Radioactive waste packaging-Product packing-Material shipping -High voltage breakers-Diesel generator room-Day tank room -Janitorial closet *Diesel generator building-Diesel room -Underground storage tank*Waste staging and shipping facility building*Support facility building-Receiving area -Chemicals room -General storage-Janitorial closet -Propane canister storage (for fork lifts)19.2.1.2.2Underground, Stormwater, and Sewage FeaturesAn underground storage tank near the diesel generator building provides storage for the diesel generator. A sanitary sewer pipeline carries wastewater from the SHINE facility to the city main sewage pipeline. A natural gas pipeline provides commercial natural gas to the SHINE facility. An underground electrical distribution line connecting to the electric transformers provides electricity to the SHINE site. A municipal water line lateral is accessed to provide the SHINE facility with water supply. Infrastructure improvements are discussed in Subsection 19.4.13.7.1.Per Figure 19.2.1-1, the SHINE facility buildings, storage, and miscellaneous structures/areas are surrounded by an exterior stormwater runon diversion berm with an interior and exterior ditch. The exterior ditch directs stormwater and farm field runoff to flow spreaders, which direct the excess water to the surrounding fields. The interior ditch directs excess water to the stormwater vegetated swale, which slopes towards an existing road side drainage. A stormwater overflow storage area is provided for beyond-design events. The stormwater systems are Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-8Rev. 0designed to address 1-year, 2-year, 24-hour storm events per state regulations, and are also designed to address 10-year and 100-year events, as required by the City of Janesville.19.2.1.2.3Monitoring StationsRefer to Figure 19.4.8-1 for environmental monitoring station locations. The need for monitoring stations is discussed in the following subsections: *Air monitoring - Subsection 19.4.2*Groundwater monitoring - Subsection 19.4.4*Surface water monitoring - Subsection 19.4.4
- Meteorological monitoring - Subsection 19.4.2*Ecological monitoring - Subsection 19.4.5*Radiological monitoring - Subsection 19.4.8.3 Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-9Rev. 0Table 19.2.1-1 Sensitive Populations, Nearest Resident, and Landmarks within 5 Miles (8 km) of the Site(Sheet 1 of 2)Facility Type Location of InterestDistance to Project Site BoundaryResidentialNearest Full-Time Resident0.33 mi. (0.53 km) northwest ParkAirport Park0.30 mi. (0.48 km) northwest Paw Print Park1.16 mi. (1.87 km) northwestMedicalFirst Choice Women's Health Center1.37 mi. (2.20 km) northMercy Clinic South1.58 mi. (2.54 km) northMercy Hospital4.21 mi. (6.78 km) northEducationalBlackhawk Technical College Aviation Center0.89 mi. (1.43 km) southwestRock County Christian School1.14 mi. (1.83 km) southJackson Elementary School1.28 mi. (2.06 km) southCommunity CenterCaravilla Education and Rehabilitation Comm Center1.62 mi. (2.61 km) southAnimal ProductionDairy Production0.51 mi. (0.82 km) eastHorse Pasture0.52 mi. (0.84 km) eastGoat Production0.69 mi. (1.11 km) northwestMacFarland Pheasants, Inc.0.86 mi. (1.38 km) northBeef Production Area0.97 mi. (1.56 km) southwest Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-10Rev. 0Table 19.2.1-1 Sensitive Populations, Nearest Resident, and Landmarks within 5 Miles (8 km) of the Site(Sheet 2 of 2)Facility Type Location of InterestDistance to Project Site BoundaryRivers/Creeks Rock River1.9 mi. (3.1 km) westSpring Brook3 mi. (4.8 km) northTurtle Creek4.5 mi. (7.2 km) southeastFisher Creek3 mi. (4.8 km) northwest Markham Creek2.5 mi. (4.0 km) northwestAirportsSouthern Wisconsin Regional Airport0.4 mi. (0.6 km) westRailroadUnion Pacific Railroad1.7 mi. (2.7 km) northwestHighwaysU.S. Highway 51Adjacent to the site boundaryU.S. Highway 143.75 mi. (6.0 km) northeastInterstate 39/902.1 mi. (3.4 km) east Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-11Rev. 0[Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]19.2.2RADIOISOTOPE FACILITY DESCRIPTIONSHINE proposes to build a radioisotope facility. This facility produces Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133. The SHINE facility consists of eight irradiation units (IUs) capable of producing up to 8200 6-day curies per week of Mo-99. Figure 19.2.2-1 provides a flow diagram of the isotope production process.[Proprietary Information]19.2.2.1General Description of the Isotope Production ProcessThe SHINE facility produces Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133 as fission products of uranium-235 (U-235) in a subcritical, low enriched uranium (LEU) target solution. The subcritical solution is located in an annular target solution vessel (TSV) and driven by an accelerator-based neutron source located on the center axis of the TSV annulus. The neutron source consists of a deuterium (d or D) beam impacting a tritium (t or T) gas target which produces energetic neutrons via the d(t, 4He)n reaction. The neutron source is supplied with tritium gas from a tritium purification system.The neutron population from the driver is increased as it travels through a neutron multiplier on its way to the TSV, and then further multiplied in the target solution itself via subcritical fission reactions. As the target solution is irradiated, radiolysis and fission will create off-gases that are handled by a system designed to recombine hydrogen and oxygen and trap certain volatile fission products.During normal operation, the IUs are operated on a weekly basis. At the end of each irradiation cycle, the target solution is removed from the TSV and transferred to a hot cell where isotopes are selectively extracted. Purified Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133 are tested by quality control, packaged, and shipped to customers.After the target solution passes through the extraction column, it is evaluated for re-use. In most cases, the solution is returned to the TSV with minimal adjustment. At some point, however, certain fission products that have built up over time may need to be removed from the solution, in which case the solution undergoes a clean-up process.Target solution preparation and clean-up, isotope extraction and purification, and any tanks containing target solution (besides the TSV) generate radioactive off-gases that are captured by a radioactive gas treatment system. The neutron generator, target solution preparation, tritium purification, TSV off-gas handling, radioactive gas treatment, target solution clean-up, isotope extraction, and isotope purification generate radioactive waste in various forms that is processed, packaged, (in some cases) staged, and disposed of according to its classification. Subsection 19.2.5 provides additional information on the radioactive waste treatment systems. Refer to Figure 19.2.2-1 for a flow diagram of the radioisotope production process.
Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-12Rev. 019.2.3WATER CONSUMPTION AND TREATMENT19.2.3.1Water ConsumptionThe Janesville municipal water system will supply the water needs of the SHINE facility. A water use diagram for the facility is provided in Figure 19.2.3-1. Water uses for the facility include the following:*Isotope production*Isotope processing
- Potable water*Fire protection*Facility heating and coolingFor isotope production, water is required for the preparation of the target solution. Water required for isotope production amounts to 175 gallons/day (gpd) (662 liters/day [lpd]). Processing including isotope extraction and purification, target solution clean-up, and waste processing requires 1051 gpd (3979 lpd) of water. There will be no liquid discharges from the radiologically controlled area (RCA) to the Janesville municipal sanitary system.Wastewater from outside the RCA will be discharged to the Janesville municipal sanitary system.Potable water demand is 3270 gpd (12,378 lpd) and blowdown and makeup to the facility heating water system is 2580 gpd (9766 lpd). The makeup requirement to the fire protection system is 5gallons per minute (gpm) (19 liters per minute [lpm]). The largest automatic fire suppression system demand in the event of a fire is 390 gpm (1476 lpm). The automatic fire suppression demand will be supplied by a fire water tank. The makeup water requirement for the facility chilled water supply and distribution system is 5 gpm (19 lpm). The makeup water requirement for the facility heating water system is 5 gpm (19 lpm).19.2.3.2Water TreatmentThe SHINE facility includes the following water treatment processes:*Demineralization (i.e., deionization).*Cooling water treatment.
- Facility heating water system treatment.19.2.3.2.1Water DemineralizationWithin the SHINE facility, most of the water used within the process is demineralized in order to control the addition of chemicals within the water to process streams. This is particularly important given the radiological nature of some parts of the process (and the resultant potential for the formation of activation products), and the necessity of a highly pure Mo-99 product.
Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-13Rev. 019.2.3.2.2Cooling Water TreatmentWater for use in the closed-loop cooling water system is typically treated prior to addition to the loop, and then dosed periodically. The dosing is determined by testing. The types of chemicals added to the water are:*Biocides - added to inhibit microbial growth in the water, which can lead to fouling.*Corrosion inhibitors - added to inhibit corrosion of piping and components the cooling water flows through. Often corrosion is inhibited by halogen-based biocides.*Scale inhibitors - added to reduce scale formation, particularly within heat exchangers. The specific inhibitor(s) is selected based on the chemistry of the makeup water for the cooling water system.19.2.3.2.3Facility Heating Water System TreatmentThe SHINE facility uses a closed-circuit heated water system for building heating. This is referred to as a boiler by HVAC engineers, but the water does not change phases. The feedwater for this system is treated to reduce corrosion and to reduce scaling.The magnitude of corrosion and scaling in any specific application is a function of the feedwater chemistry and the operating conditions of the boiler system. In some instances, feedwater is demineralized prior to being fed to the boiler.The boiler capacity is calculated based on 100 pound-force per square inch gauge (psig) steam, and using a combined 5 percent blowdown and losses (i.e., make-up water is 5 percent of steam flow). The peak annual facility HVAC heat load (Btu/hr) is used as the sizing criteria for the required steam flow rate with a 50 percent margin included for other facility heating usage. 19.2.4COOLING AND HEATING DISSIPATION SYSTEMS19.2.4.1Cooling SystemsWater used for SHINE facility cooling is produced at a central location by multiple air-cooled chillers. The chilled water is circulated in primary-secondary fashion, utilizing heat exchangers (shell and tube type) to isolate the process and HVAC loops from the central chilled water loop. This allows for temperature regulation of the water loops. Chillers have N+1 redundancy (i.e.,there will be one redundant unit). They shut down upon a loss of power event.*Cooling water is used in the SHINE facility for process cooling. A water supply temperature of 85 degrees Fahrenheit (°F) (29 degrees Celsius [°C]) with a return average temperature of 100°F (38°C) is assumed.*Chilled water may be used in the facility for process cooling and is used for HVAC cooling. A chilled water supply temperature of 40°F (4°C) with a 50°F (10°C) return temperature is assumed. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-14Rev. 0The air-cooled chillers operate year-round, rejecting heat directly to the atmosphere through a sensible heat transfer process (forced air blowing over coils). No water is consumed or lost by evaporation in this arrangement. The total estimated heat of rejection witnessed by the chillers:*Estimated peak process load: 2.64 x 10 6 british thermal units per hour (Btu/hr) (2.79 x 10 6 kilojoules per hr [kJ/hr]).*Estimated peak HVAC load: 4.66 x 10 6 Btu/hr (4.92 x 10 6 kJ/hr).*Estimated heat of compression: 1.83 x 10 6 Btu/hr (1.93 x 10 6 kJ/hr).*Estimated total heat rejection load: 9.13 x 10 7 Btu/hr (9.63 x 10 6 kJ/hr).For bounding purposes, the units are considered to run continuously (i.e., 24 hrs per day, 7 days per week).Being a closed-loop system, makeup water is periodic and minimal (less than 10 percent of the system capacity per year). Makeup water is treated. Water treatment is standard chemical treatment.The chillers contain non-chlorofluorocarbon refrigerant and are located outdoors. The SHINE facility does not use cooling towers.19.2.4.2Heating SystemMultiple natural gas fired boilers provide heating water to the HVAC air handlers. The peak boiler load is 6.6 MBtu/hr (6.3 kJ/hr), with a total annual natural gas consumption of 7.67 x 10 7 standard cubic feet (scf) (2.17 x 10 6 cubic meters [m 3]). Ultimately, all of this heat ends up in the environment.This assumes a natural gas heat content of 900 Btu/scf, an 80 percent efficient boiler, no recirculation, operation 24 hours per day and 7 days per week, supply air volume of 156,000 cubic feet per minute (4417 cubic meters per minute) at site altitude and a reheat capability up to 75°F (24°C).19.2.5WASTE SYSTEMS19.2.5.1Sources of Radioactive Liquid, Solid, and Gaseous Waste Material 19.2.5.1.1FacilityThe sources of radioactive liquid, solid, gaseous waste generated by the operation of the SHINE facility are as follows:*Neutron generators.*Waste generated by the TSV solution preparation process includes used cans in which new uranium metal is received, personnel protective equipment (PPE), and spent filters.*Waste generated by the operation of the TSV off-gas system includes spent zeolite beds. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-15Rev. 0[Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]*Waste generated by operation of the Mo-99 recovery system includes the spent extraction columns, spent wash solution, and rotovap condensate.*Waste generated by the target vessel solution cleanup process includes [Proprietary Information] UREX raffinate, non-RCRA (Res ource Conservation and Recovery Act) spent solvent when replaced infrequently, spent resin columns, and spent caustic scrubber solution.*Routine waste from maintenance activities.*The Mo-99 purification process produces waste consisting of glassware and liquid waste.19.2.5.1.2Nearby Operating FacilitiesFacilities that handle and store radioactive materials in the area of the SHINE facility are discussed in Subsection 19.3.8.5.19.2.5.2Type and Quantity of Radionuclides and Hazardous MaterialsThe type and quantity of radionuclides and hazardous materials is provided in Table 19.2.5-1.19.2.5.3Description of Waste Systems19.2.5.3.1Solid Radioactive Waste Handling SystemClass A solid waste consists of Class A trash (e.g., personal protective equipment [PPE], Mo-99 purification glassware, filters), extraction columns, and the neutron generators. The Class A trash is consolidated for low specific activity (LSA) shipment. Extraction columns are replaced after each TSV processing batch. After a two week decay period in the Mo extraction cell, the columns are stored within the facility for further decay and consolidated for LSA shipment. The neutron generators are planned to be replaced on an approximately yearly basis. After replacement, the neutron generators are size-reduced and consolidated for shipment as LSA. The Class A trash, extraction columns, and the neutron generators are shipped approximately yearly to EnergySolutions' (ES) disposal site.The zeolite beds are associated with the TSV off-gas system. The toxicity characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP) may or may not result in th e classification of zeolite beds as Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) waste; however, testing of untreated silver mordenite at Hanford indicated the material ex ceeds TCLP limits prior to solidification. The waste is also radioactive and would be a mixed low level waste (MLLW). Tritium, iodine, xenon, and krypton enters these beds. Only iodine is adsorbed in the zeolite beds. The waste classification for this material is a function of both the efficiency of the zeolite beds and the change out frequency of the beds. It is likely the beds, in terms of operational lifetime, could build up enough iodine-129 to be greater than Class C (GTCC) waste. The zeolite is shipped to an off-site processor. The shipment is a Type B shipment and occurs infrequently. The processor for the zeolite beds is Waste Control Specialists (WCS) in Andrews, Texas. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies19.2-16Rev. 2[Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]The ion exchange resin used for removal of cesium-137 (Cs-137) and cerium (Ce) has a high capacity for Cs-137 capture and will be changed out based on curie limits at the receiving facility and also based on shipping limits. The spent resins are solidified in a shielded waste processing hot cell. The used resin is classified as GTCC waste and is shipped as Type B to an off-site location for long-term storage at WCS.As discussed above, the target solution cleanup system uses an anion exchange column to remove technetium and iodine. When the anion exchange resin is replaced, the spent resin is solidified on-site and sent off-site for disposal (WCS in Andrews, Texas). There will be no solid waste disposal at the SHINE site.19.2.5.3.2Liquid Radioactive Waste System Liquid waste discharged from the various processes at the SHINE facility (other than spent solvent) are combined into one of two tanks. Two tanks are needed to allow liquid waste to decay and also so that a somewhat consistent radiological environment exists for waste processing. Once the first tank is filled the other tank will begin to fill. At this point the pH is adjusted so that the waste can be passed through an ion exchange resin for removal of Cs-137 and Ce-144/ Pr-144. This allows the majority of the liquid stream to become Class A waste. This cleaned-up material is then sent to an evaporator for volume reduction. The evaporator overheads are reused and the bottoms are solidified and shipped to ES for final disposal. The spent resin treatment is discussed in the section above. No liquid radioactive waste is discharged from the
SHINE facility.The spent solvent is not a RCRA waste and is replaced once per year. The solvent is sent to a processor (Diversified Scientific Services, Inc [DSSI], in Kingston, Tennessee) for thermal treatment.[Proprietary Information] This waste is classified as Class B waste and is shipped as Type B to WCS in Andrews, Texas. [Proprietary Information] The waste is solidified in a hot cell using Portland cement. Some additives may be required based on the final chemistry of incoming resin and precipitate. These shipments are Type B shipments. There will be no liquid waste disposal at the SHINE site.19.2.5.4Proposed Hazardous Material Disposal ActivityThe only hazardous (or potentially hazardous) materials are [Proprietary Information] and the zeolite beds. Although small quantities of [Proprietary Information] is expected to pass TCLP, and is not considered hazardous waste. Waste streams with a hazardous component are mixed low-level waste such as the zeolite beds and are handled as described in Subsection 19.2.5.3.1. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-17Rev. 019.2.5.5Direct Radiation Sources Stored On-Site or near the SHINE Facility19.2.5.5.1Direct Radiation Sources Stored On-SiteThe wastes listed in Table 19.2.5-1 are stored on-site for a period of time before they are shipped off-site. The frequency of shipment of each type of waste is provided in Table19.2.5-1.LEU metal is stored in the target solution preparation area. Medical isotopes will not be stored for any significant time period as they must be shipped to clients as quickly as possible.19.2.5.5.2Direct Radiation Sources Stored near the SHINE FacilityThere are no direct radiation sources stored near the SHINE facility. Facilities that handle and store radioactive materials in the area of the SHINE facility are discussed in Subsection 19.3.8.5.19.2.5.6Pollution Prevention and Waste Minimization 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 SHINE facility will have a program for pollution prevention and waste minimization that includes the following:*Waste minimization and recycling for the various phases of the SHINE facility 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. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewProposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies19.2-18Rev. 2 [Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]Table 19.2.5-1 Estimated Type and Quantity of Radioactive Wastes Associated with the SHINE Facility(Sheet 1 of 3)DescriptionMatrixClass as GeneratedContentsVolume Volume as shipped (ft 3)55-gallon drum equivalent as shippedShipmentTypeNumber of Shipments/yrDestinationNeutron GeneratorSolidAActivated metal parts4338ft3/yr4338590LSA3.00ESExtraction ColumnsSolidAStainless resin columnsClass A TrashSolidAPPE, Mo-99 purification glassware, filters, etcSpent SolventLiquid(a)An-dodecane, tributyl phosphate22 gallons/ yr--0.4LSA1.00DSSITc/I columnsResinCResin16 gallons/ yr233.1Type B0.3WCSZeolite BedsSolidGTCCSilver coated beds0.4 ft3/yr0.40.05Type B1.00WCSCs/Ce MediaResinGTCCResin16 gallons/ yr233.1Type B0.3WCS[Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information]B[Proprietary Information]295 gallons/yr 7911Type B1.00WCS Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewProposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies19.2-19Rev. 0 [Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]Table 19.2.5-1 Estimated Type and Quantity of Radioactive Wastes Associated with the SHINE Facility(Sheet 2 of 3)DescriptionMatrixClass as GeneratedContentsVolume Volume as shipped (ft 3)55-gallon drum equivalent as shipped Shipment TypeNumber of Shipments/yrDestinationSpent WashesLiquid(a)A[Proprietary Information]59,708 gallons/yr97381324LSA18ESRotvap CondensateLiquid(a)A[Proprietary Information]UREX RaffinateLiquid(a)B[Proprietary Information]Decontamination WasteLiquid(a)ADecon fluid unknownSpent Eluate SolutionLiquid(a)A[Proprietary Information] NOx Scrubber SolutionLiquid(a)A[Proprietary Information] Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewProposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies19.2-20Rev. 0Table 19.2.5-1 Estimated Type and Quantity of Radioactive Wastes Associated with the SHINE Facility(Sheet 3 of 3)a)Liquid waste discharged from the various processes at the SHINE facility is either solidified and then shipped to a waste depository or reused. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Proposed ActionSHINE Medical Technologies 19.2-21Rev. 019.2.6STORAGE, TREATMENT, AND TRANSPORTATION OF RADIOACTIVE AND NONRADIOACTIVE MATERIALS, INCLUDING LEU, WASTE, RADIOISOTOPES, AND ANY OTHER MATERIALSThere are no storage needs for enriched uranium fuel, irradiated enriched uranium, or medical isotope product. LEU metal (not fuel) is stored in the target solution preparation area. Medical isotopes will not be stored for any significant time period as these items will be transported to clients as quickly as possible. Irradiated enriched uranium is not stored, as the facility cleans up and recycles this material. The radiological wastes listed in Table 19.2.5-1 are stored on-site for a period of time before they are shipped off-site. The frequency of shipment of each type of waste is provided in Table 19.2.5-1. Enough storage capacity is provided on-site to accommodate the amount of waste between shipments to the off-site repositories. Subsections 19.2.5.3.1 and 19.2.5.3.2 discuss solid and liquid radioactive waste handling. Radioactive waste gases are discussed in Subsection 19.4.8.2.The treatment and packaging for shipment of radioactive and nonradioactive wastes and medical isotopes are controlled with SHINE facility procedures.The packaging systems used to transport enriched uranium, radioactive wastes, and medical isotopes are licensed for the class and type of material that is being transported.The target solution for the SHINE irradiation unit is made on-site at the SHINE facility from LEU metal purchased from Y-12, located in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Y-12 is approximately 650 miles by road from Janesville, Wisconsin.The radioactive wastes will be transported to the destinations listed on Table 19.2.5-1. The distances from the SHINE facility to these facilities are provided in Subsection 19.4.10.1.1.The medical isotopes produced by SHINE are shipped to three processing facilities, as discussed in Subsection 19.4.10.1.1. The distances from the SHINE facility to these facilities are provided in Subsection 19.4.10.1.1. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Site Location and Layout SHINE Medical Technologies Rev. 0 Figure 19.2.1 SHINE Facility Site Layout
Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Radioisotope Facility DescriptionSHINE Medical Technologies Rev. 1Figure 19.2.2 Isotope Production System High-Level Flow Diagram Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water Consumption and Treatment SHINE Medical Technologies Rev. 0 Figure 19.2.3 Water Balance Diagram
Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4) Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTable of ContentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-iRev. 0SECTION 19.3 DESCRIPTION OF THE A FFECTED ENVIRONMENTTable of Contents SectionTitlePage19.3DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT..................................19.3-119.3.1LAND USE AND VISUAL RESOURCES.....................................................19.3-119.3.2AIR QUALITY AND NOISE..........................................................................19.3-919.3.3GEOLOGIC ENVIRONMENT.......................................................................19.3-6519.3.4WATER RESOURCES.................................................................................19.3-7119.3.5ECOLOGICAL RESOURCES......................................................................19.3-9619.3.6HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES................................................19.3-12019.3.7SOCIOECONOMICS....................................................................................19.3-13419.3.8HUMAN HEALTH.........................................................................................19.3-164 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-iiRev. 0List of Tables NumberTitle19.3.1-1Summary of 2006 Land Use/Land Cover within SHINE Site and Region19.3.1-2Crop Production Estimates for SHINE Site and Rock County, Wisconsin19.3.1-3City of Janesville Land Use19.3.2-1Selected Characteristics of Wisconsin Physiographic Provinces19.3.2-2Madison, Wisconsin Climatic Means and Extremes19.3.2-3Rockford, Illinois Climatic Means and Extremes 19.3.2-4Madison, Wisconsin and Rockford, Illinois Additional Climatic Means and Extremes19.3.2-5List of NOAA ASOS Stations Located within the Site Climate Region19.3.2-6List of NOAA COOP Stations in the Site Climate Region for which Clim-20 Summaries are Available19.3.2-6List of NOAA COOP Stations in the Site Climate Region for which Clim-20 Summaries are Available19.3.2-7Nearest Federal Class I Areas to the SHINE Site 19.3.2-8Regional Tornadoes and Waterspouts 19.3.2-9Details of Strongest Tornadoes in Rock County, Wisconsin19.3.2-10 Details of Strongest Tornadoes in Surrounding Counties Adjacent to Rock County, Wisconsin19.3.2-11Precipitation Extremes at Local and Regional NOAA COOP Meteorological Monitoring Stations within the Site Climate Region19.3.2-12Mean Seasonal and Annual Hail or Sleet Frequencies at Rockford, Illinois and Madison, Wisconsin19.3.2-13Ice Storms that have Affected Rock County, Wisconsin19.3.2-14Mean Seasonal Thunderstorm Frequencies at Rockford, Illinois and Madison, Wisconsin Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-iiiRev. 0List of Tables(Continued) NumberTitle19.3.2-15Design Wet and Dry Bulb Temperatures19.3.2-16Estimated 100-Year Return Maximum and Minimum DBT, MCWB coincident with the 100-Year Return Maximum DBT, Historic Maximum WBT and Estimated 100-Year Annual Maximum Return WBT19.3.2-17Dry Bulb Temperature Extremes at Local and Regional NOAA COOP Meteorological Monitoring Stations within the Site Climate Region19.3.2-18FAA Specifications for Automated Weather Observing Stations19.3.2-19Annual Data Recovery Rates (in Percent) of Dry Bulb Temperatures, Relative Humidity, Wind Speed, and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport for 2005-201019.3.2-20Historical Dry Bulb Temperatures, Relative Humidity, and Wind Speed from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport for 2005-201019.3.2-21Annual Joint Data Recovery Rates of Wind Speed, Wind Direction, and Computed Pasquill Stability Class from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport19.3.2-22Pasquill Stability Class Frequency Distributions from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (Percent) 2005-201019.3.2-23Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class A)19.3.2-24Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class B)19.3.2-25Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class C)19.3.2-26Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class D)19.3.2-27Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class E)19.3.2-28Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class F) Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-ivRev. 0List of Tables(Continued) NumberTitle19.3.2-29Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class G)19.3.2-30Representative Environmental Noise Levels19.3.4-1Rockford, Illinois Climatic Means and Extremes19.3.4-2Rainfall Depth-Duration-Frequency Data for Janesville Vicinity19.3.4-3USGS Streamflow Monitoring Stations in Rock County, Wisconsin19.3.4-4Flood Discharge Frequency Data - Rock River at Afton, Wisconsin19.3.4-5Annual Minimum Low Flows - Rock River at Afton19.3.4-6Groundwater Monitoring Well Water Table Elevations19.3.4-7Surface Water Analytical Results19.3.4-8SHINE Medical Surface Water Field Data - Janesville19.3.4-9Groundwater Analytical Results for Monitoring Wells19.3.4-10SHINE Medical Groundwater Field Data - Janesville19.3.5-1Fish Potentially Occurring near the SHINE Site 19.3.5-2Benthic Macroinvertebrates Collected in an Unnamed Stream (Tributaryof the Rock River) near the SHINE Site19.3.5-3Terrestrial Plants Observed on or near the SHINE Site19.3.5-4Mammals Potentially Occurring on or near the SHINE Site19.3.5-5Avifaunal Species Potentially Occurring on or near the SHINE Site 19.3.5-6Reptiles and Amphibians Potentially Occurring on or near the SHINE Site19.3.5-7Protected Species near the SHINE Site19.3.6-1Previously Recorded Cultural Resources Surveys within 1-mi. (1.6-km) of the Site Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-vRev. 0List of Tables(Continued) NumberTitle19.3.6-2Eligible or Listed Archaeological Sites within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site, Rock County, Wisconsin19.3.6-3Historic Structures and Districts Listed on the NRHP within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site19.3.7-1Rock County Labor Force Distribution by County of Employee Residence19.3.7-2Comparison of Estimated Major SHINE Labor Force Needs with Estimated Rock County Available Work Force19.3.7-3Population and Growth Rates of Municipalities within Rock County19.3.7-4Resident Population Distribution, Growth Rates, and Projections for Rock County 19.3.7-5Estimated Transient Population within 5 mi. (8 km) of the SHINE Site (2010)19.3.7-6Demographic (Race and Ethnicity) Characteristics of Rock County19.3.7-7Median Household and Per Capita Income Levels within RockCounty 19.3.7-8Civilian Labor Force and Unemployment Rates within Rock County, 2002-201219.3.7-9Employment by Industry within Rock County 19.3.7-10Top 10 Employers within the ROI (Rock County), City of Janesville 19.3.7-11Percent of Individuals and Families Living Below the Census PovertyThreshold within Rock County19.3.7-12Housing Unit Characteristics within Rock County19.3.7-13Tax Rates in Rock County and State of Wisconsin 19.3.7-14Major Municipal Water Suppliers in Rock County 19.3.7-15Rock County Community Water Supply Characteristics (2010)19.3.7-16Public Wastewater Treat ment Systems in Rock County 19.3.7-17Public School Enrollment (2012) within Rock County Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-viRev. 0List of Tables(Continued) NumberTitle19.3.7-18Recreation Facilities within Rock County 19.3.8-1Distance to Nearest Agricultural and Urban Facilities19.3.8-2Chemicals Used/Stored Within Five Miles of the Site Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of FiguresSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-viiRev. 0List of Figures NumberTitle19.3.1-1Aerial View of the SHINE Site19.3.1-2Major Land Uses within the Region19.3.1-3Janesville Site Region19.3.1-4Special Land Use Classifications within the Region 19.3.1-5Prime Farmland within the Site19.3.1-6Prime Farmland within the Region19.3.1-7Other Land Use Features near the SHINE Site19.3.1-8Major Population Centers and Infrastructure19.3.1-9Site Visual Setting 19.3.2-1Principle Tracks of Winter Synoptic Cyclones that Potentially Affect Wisconsin Weather19.3.2-2Physiographic Provinces of Wisconsin19.3.2-3Mean Wisconsin Winter Month Temperatures19.3.2-4Mean Wisconsin Spring Month Temperatures 19.3.2-5Mean Wisconsin Summer Month Temperatures19.3.2-6Mean Wisconsin Autumn Month Temperatures19.3.2-7Mean Wisconsin Winter Month Precipitation 19.3.2-8Mean Wisconsin Spring Month Precipitation19.3.2-9Mean Wisconsin Summer Month Precipitation19.3.2-10Mean Wisconsin Autumn Month Precipitation 19.3.2-11NOAA COOP Network Climate Divisions of Wisconsin19.3.2-12Outline of Climate Region Representative of the Site19.3.2-13Illinois Annual Mean Water Equivalent Precipitation Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of FiguresSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-viii Rev. 0List of Figures(Continued) NumberTitle19.3.2-14Illinois Annual Mean Snowfall19.3.2-15Illinois Annual Mean Dry Bulb Temperatures19.3.2-16NOAA ASOS Stations Located within the Site Climate Region19.3.2-17NOAA COOP Stations Located within the Site Climate Region 19.3.2-18Wisconsin and Illinois Counties within Site Climate Region Selected for Investigation of Severe Weather Phenomena19.3.2-19Annual Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-20January Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-21February Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-22March Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-23April Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010) 19.3.2-24May Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-25June Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-26July Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010) 19.3.2-27August Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-28September Wind Rose Souther n Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-29October Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-30November Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-31December Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-32Winter Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010) 19.3.2-33Spring Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-34Summer Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010) Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of FiguresSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-ixRev. 0List of Figures(Continued) NumberTitle19.3.2-35Autumn Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010)19.3.2-36Annual Wind Roses Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (Janesville, WI) and Regional Stations19.3.3-1Geotechnical Investigation Boring Locations19.3.3-2Generalized Geologic Cross Section of Rock County, West-East19.3.3-3Wisconsin Stratigraphic Column19.3.3-4Regional Structural Geology19.3.3-5Site Cross Section19.3.3-6Seismic Hazard Map19.3.3-7Capable Fault Zones19.3.4-1Project Area Watershed - Tributary to Rock River 19.3.4-2Project Area Local Drainage19.3.4-3Long-Term Annual Streamflows and Precipitation in Rock County19.3.4-4Project Water Monitoring Locations 19.3.4-5Groundwater Elevation Isopleth, Fourth Quarter, 201119.3.4-6Groundwater Elevation Isopleth, First Quarter, 201219.3.4-7Groundwater Elevation Isopleth, Second Quarter, 2012 19.3.4-8Groundwater Elevation Isopleth, Third Quarter, 201219.3.5-1Ecoregions within a 50-Mi. (80 Km) Radius of the SHINE Site19.3.5-2Ecological Resource Entities of Special Interest in Rock County 19.3.5-3Ecology Sampling Locations19.3.6-1Historic Properties Listed on the National Register of Historic Places Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of FiguresSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-xRev. 0List of Figures(Continued) NumberTitle19.3.7-1Population Centers within Rock County19.3.7-2Existing Transportation Network within Rock County19.3.7-3Existing Transportation Network in Proximity to the SHINE Site19.3.7-4Major Recreation Facilities within Rock County 19.3.8-1Janesville Features and Distances from Site Boundary (1-6Mile Range)19.3.8-2Janesville Features and Distances from Site Boundary (0-1Mile Range) Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-xiRev. 0Acronyms and AbbreviationsAcronym/Abbreviation Definition °Cdegrees Celsius °Fdegrees Fahrenheit µS/cmmicro-Siemens per centimeter/Qrelative atmospheric concentration AASHTOAmerican Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials ac.acreAFCCCAir Force Combat Climatology Center ASCEAmerican Society of Civil Engineers ASHRAEAmerican Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc.ASOS Stationautomated surface observing station AWOSautomated weather observing station BIABureau of Indian Affairs BLMBureau of Land Management BLSBureau of Labor Statistics BTOCbelow top of casing Bu.bushelCCelciusC-14carbon-14 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-xiiRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition CFRCode of Federal Regulations cfscubic feet per second CFUcolony-forming units Clim-20Climatography of the United States No. 20 cmcentimeter cm/scentimeters per second cm/hrcentimeters per hour cm/yr.centimeters per year cmscubic meters per second COOP(National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) cooperative observing station dBAA-weighted decibels DBTdry bulb temperaturedegdegreesDORDepartment of Revenue DPIDepartment of Public Instruction DWDDepartment of Workforce Development EeastE[M]expected moment magnitude E-coliEscherichia coli Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-xiii Rev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition EDSEnvironmental Data Service ENEeast-northeast EPRIElectric Power Research Institute ESEeast-southeast FFahrenheit FAAFederal Aviation Administration FEMAFederal Emergency Management Agency fpsfeet per second ft.feetgthe acceleration of an object due to the force of gravityGISgeographical information system GMGeneral Motorsgpdgallons per daygpd/ftgallons per day per foot GHGgreenhouse gases Hhighhahectarehr.hourHSGHydrologic Soil Group Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-xivRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition HUCHydrologic Unit CodeI-39Interstate Highway 39I-43Interstate Highway 43I-90Interstate Highway 90I-131iodine-131 IAEAInternational Atomic Energy Agency IDOAIllinois Department of Agriculture IHPAIllinois Historic Preservation Agency ILIllinoisin.inch(es)in. Hginches of mercury in/hrinches per hour in/yrinches per year ISMCSinternational station meteorological climate summaryJFDjoint frequency distribution K-40potassium-40 kg/m2kilograms per square meterKJVLmeteorological station identifier for Janesville, Wisconsin Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-xvRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition kmkilometer(s) KMSNmeteorological station identifier for Madison, Wisconsin KRFDmeteorological station identifier for Rockford, IllinoisKYKentuckyLlowlb/ft2pounds per square foot LCDlocal climatological dataLdnday night average sound level lpdliters per day lpmliters per minute LU/LCland use/land cover MmoderateMmoment magnitude mmeter(s)m/smeters per secondmax.maximumMCWBmean coincident wet bulb temperature Mgdmillion gallons per day mg/Lmilligrams per liter Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-xviRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition mg/m3milligrams per cubic meterMHSMercy Health SystemMIMichigan mi.mile(s) mi.2square milesminminutesmin.minimum mLmilliliters Mldmillion liters per dayMNMinnesotaMOMissouri mphmiles per hour MPNmost probable number mrem/yrmillirem per yearMSAMSA Professional Services, Inc.MSLabove mean sea level mSV/yrmillisievert per year mVmillivoltMWemegawatt electric Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-xviiRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition MWtmegawatt thermal NnorthNAICSNorth American Industry Classification System NAIPNational Agricultural Imagery Program NAVD 88North American Vertical Datum of 1988 NCDCNational Climatic Data Center NDnot detected above the detection limit NEnortheast NHINational Heritage Inventory NLCD2006National Land Cover Database 2006 NLSINational Lightning Safety Institute NNEnorth-northeast NNWnorth-northwest NOAANational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NPDESNational Pollutant Discharge Elimination SystemNPSNational Park Service NRNatural Resources NRCU.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-xviii Rev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition NRCSNatural Resources Conservation Service NRHPNational Register of Historic Properties NTUnephelometric turbidity unit NWnorthwest NWSNational Weather Service NWSFONational Weather Service Forecast Office PCBpolychlorinated biphenyl PMPprobable maximum precipitation PWRpressurized water reactor remroentgen equivalent man RMSEroot mean square error ROIregion of influence SEsoutheast secsecondsSHstate highway SHINESHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. SICStandard Industrial Classification sq. kmsquare kilometer sq. mi.square mile SSEsouth-southeast Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-xixRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition SSURGOSoil Survey Geographic Database SSWsouth-southwest Sv/yrsievert per year SWsouthwest SWRASouthern Wisconsin Regional Airport (Janesville, Wisconsin) SWWDBSouthwest Wisconsin Workforce Development BoardTBEESTeledyne Brown Engineering Environmental ServicesTMDLtotal maximum daily load TOCtop of casing USU.S. Highway USACEU.S. Army Corps of Engineers USAFU.S. Air Force USCBU.S. Census Bureau USDAU.S. Department of Agriculture USDOCU.S. Department of Commerce USDOIU.S. Department of the Interior USEPAU.S. Environmental Protection Agency USFWSU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-xxRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition USGSU.S. Geological Survey UTCUniversal Time, Coordinated UWNRUniversity of Wisconsin Nuclear Reactor vpdvehicles per day WBANWeather Bureau Army Navy WBBAWisconsin Breeding Bird Atlas WBTwet bulb temperature WDNRWisconsin Department of Natural Resources WHSWisconsin Historical Society WIWisconsin WISCLANDWisconsin Initiative for Statewide Cooperation on Landscape Analysis and Data WisDOTWisconsin Department of Transportation WNWwest-northwest WPDESWisconsin Pollutant Discharge Elimination SystemWSWwest-southwest yd.yardyryear Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-1Rev. 0CHAPTER 1919.3DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT19.3.1LAND USE AND VISUAL RESOURCESThis subsection describes the characteristics of the land use of the SHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. (SHINE) site and the region. In addition, a description of the visual resources of the site is provided. The land use for the site and region is analyzed using the National Land Cover Database 2006 (NLCD2006) (Fry, et al., 2011) land use/land cover (LU/LC) database. This provides a more recent and unified database than use of both the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) Wisconsin Initiative for Statewide Cooperation on Landscape Analysis and Data (WISCLAND) database and the Illinois Department of Agriculture (IDOA) Land Cover of Illinois database. The visual resources are rated using the U.S. Department of the Interior (USDOI) - Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Visual Resource Management System.19.3.1.1Land Use19.3.1.1.1SiteThe SHINE site consists of a 91.27-acre (ac.) (36.9hectare [ha]) parcel located south of the City of Janesville in Rock County, Wisconsin (Figure19.3.1-1). Given the undeveloped nature of the site, there are no existing structures or infrastructure located within the site boundary. The approximate limits of the proposed restricted area are located near the center of the site as shown on Figure 19.3.1-1. Due to the nature of the facility, there are no exclusion areas on either the proposed site or adjacent properties. Facilities proposed to be located on the developed SHINE site are described in Section 19.2 and illustrated in Figure19.2.1-1LU/LC as mapped by the National Land Cover Database (Fry, et al., 2011) within the property site consists almost entirely of undeveloped cultivated crop lands (Figure 19.3.1-2). Table 19.3.1-1 presents the acreage and percent coverage of the 15 mapped land uses within the site and region. LU/LC on-site consists of 99.8percent cultivated agricultural land and 0.2 percent developed/open space. U.S. Highway(US) 51 borders the western boundary of the SHINE site, and the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (SWRA) is located immediately to the west of US51 (Figure19.3.1-1). 19.3.1.1.2RegionThe "region" of the SHINE site is defined as the area within a 5-mile (mi.) (8-kilometer[km]) radius of the site centerpoint (Figure 19.3.1-3). The entire region is contained within Rock County, Wisconsin. Major land uses within the region are listed in Table 19.3.1-1 and depicted in Figure 19.3.1-2. The dominant land use in the region is agricultural/crops (50.2percent). Pasture/hay fields (11.7percent), low intensity developed lands (11.7percent), deciduous forest areas (6.6percent), and open space developed lands (6.1percent) make up the other major land uses. The remaining land uses within the region include open water, medium intensity developed lands, high intensity developed lands, barren lands, evergreen forest, mixed forest, shrub/scrub, grassland, woody wetlands, and emergent herbaceous wetlands. The City of Janesville is located directly to the north and is within the region. The northern limits of the City of Beloit are located approximately 3.7 mi. (6.0km) to the south of the site. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-2Rev. 019.3.1.1.3Special Land UsesFederal and State special land use classification areas within the region are shown in Figure 19.3.1-4. According to the USDOI-Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) (2012) there is no federal land held in trust for an American Indian tribe within the 5 mi. (8 km) region. The WDNR manages two parcels of land in the region, both located southwest of the site. Located south of the airport and 1.9 mi. (3.0 km) from the site is a 112 ac. (45.3 ha) parcel that was gifted to the WDNR, but has no designated use. Rock River Prairie is a 37 ac. (15.0 ha) State Natural Area located 3.5 mi. (5.6 km) from the SHINE site and is accessed from US 51. There are no military reservations, federal designated wild and scenic rivers, national parks, national forests or federal designated coastal zone areas within the region.19.3.1.1.4Agricultural Resources and Facilities As is illustrated in Figure 19.3.1-5, both prime farmland and farmland of statewide importance occur within the site boundaries. Warsaw silt loam is the prime farmland soil type, whereas Lorenzo loam is the soil type of state-wide importance. Prime farmland and farmland of state-wide importance located within the region are shown in Figure 19.3.1-6. Approximately 41,950ac. (16,977ha) of the area within the region are lands having soils classified as prime farmland or farmland of statewide importance. The principal agricultural products produced within the area, as estimated by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), consist of corn, oats, winter wheat, soybeans, and corn silage (USDA, 2011). The potential relative value of the 91.27 ac. (36.9ha) of farmland acquired for the site would be 13,771 bushels (Bu.) of grain corn or 3947 bushels (Bu.) of soybeans annually (Table 19.3.1-2). These values are based on the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) crop production estimates for Rock County, WI during the period from 2001-2010.Other agricultural resources in the immediate area of the SHINE site include farms that are used for dairy production, beef production, and other livestock production (Figure 19.3.1-7). There are also commercial game harvest farms in the region of the site, which are owned by MacFarlane Pheasants, Inc. MacFarlane Pheasants Inc. is the largest pheasant farm in North America and has been in operation since 1929. The company specializes in the production of a variety of game birds including pheasants and Hungarian partridge (MacFarlane Pheasants, Inc., 2012). Hormel Foods has a food processing plant located in Beloit, WI, just outside of the region (Hormel, 2013).19.3.1.1.5Mineral ResourcesAccording to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Western Ecology Division's Ecoregions of Wisconsin (USEPA, 201 2a), the SHINE site is part of the Rock River Drift Plain Level IV ecoregion, which is located within the Southeastern Wisconsin Till Plains Level III ecoregion. The Rock River Drift Plain has generally steeper topography than surrounding ecoregions, with broad glacial drift outwash plains characterized by loamy deposits over sandy and gravelly soils with moderate to very rapid permeability. The most important mineral resources in this ecoregion are sand, gravel, and crushed stone (Zaporozec, Alexander, 1982). There are no gravel or sand mining operations on-site, however two sand and gravel operations occur within the region (Find the Data, 2012). No other mineral resources are known to be present in the region. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-3Rev. 019.3.1.1.6Major Population Centers and InfrastructurePopulation centers and the major infrastructure of Rock County are shown on Figure19.3.1-8. The only major population centers (> 25,000 residents) located within Rock County are Janesville and Beloit. Subsection 19.3.7 provides a description of the demographics of these centers and their community characteristics. The major transportation corridors within Rock County include Interstate Highways 39 (I-39) and 90 (I-90), US 14 and 51, and State Highway (SH) 11. Major rail lines or rail systems within the county are owned by Chicago and Northwestern Railroad and Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul, and Pacific Railroad. The only public airport located within the county is the SWRA in Janesville, Wisconsin. No major transportation waterways occur within the region.19.3.1.1.7Land Use PlansCurrent and future land use plans for the area immediately adjacent to the SHINE site and region are represented by the comprehensive plans for the City of Janesville (Vandewalle & Associates, 2009a and 2009b.) Land uses within the City of Janesville are characterized in the City's comprehensive plan (Vandewalle & Associates, 2009a). Land use categories included in the Janesville Comprehensive Plan include the following:
- Residential, Exurban - generally single-family residential development on private well and on-site waste treatment systems, generally at densities between one dwelling unit per acre (0.4 ha) and one dwelling unit per 35 ac. (14.2ha).
- Residential, Single-Family Urban - publicly sewered singl e family residential development.
- Residential, Two-Family/Townhouse - attached single family, two-family, and walk-up townhouse residential development.
- Residential, Multi-Family - a variety of residential units focused in particular on multiple family housing (3+ units per building).
- Office - Office, institutional, research, and office-support land uses.
- Commercial - indoor commercial, retail, institutional and service uses with moderate landscaping and signage.
- Light Industrial - indoor industrial land uses and controlled outdoor storage areas with moderate landscaping and signage.
- Heavy Industrial - carefully controlled heavy industrial, storage, and disposal land uses, with limited landscaping and signage.
- Community Facilities - large-scale public buildings, hospitals, youth and elderly service facilities, and special-care facilities. Small community facilities uses may be located in lands designated as other land use categories.
- Parks and Open Space - park and public open space facilities devoted to playgrounds, play fields, trails, picnic areas, and related recreational activities, and conservation areas.
- Extraction - quarries, gravel pits, clay extraction, peat extraction, and extraction-related land uses.
- Vacant - undeveloped land within the City limits.
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-4Rev. 0*Agriculture - agricultural and related uses, including cropland, farmsteads, operations, and single family residential development with maximum development densities of one dwelling unit per 35 ac. (14.2 ha).
- Surface Water - lakes, rivers, creeks, and perennial streams.
- Rights-of-Way - publicly owned land for roads, highways, and railroads.The total acreage of lands within the 2007 city limits that are classified in each of the land use categories are summarized in Table 19.3.1-3. Dominant land use categories include single family residential (24percent), rights of way (17percent), vacant lands (16percent), community facilities (11percent), and parks and open space (11percent) (Vandewalle & Associates, 2009a). Subsection 19.3.7.2 provides additional information regarding major employers (including industrial and commercial) in Janesville.The lands containing the SHINE site and its immediate environs to the east and south are listed as being agricultural lands on the existing land use map (Vandewalle & Associates, 2009a). The adjacent airport and associated lands west of US 51 are identified as "community facilities," and lands immediately to the northeast of the site are listed as "vacant." These "vacant" lands correspond to the parcels included as part of a Tax Increment Financing district proposed for development. However, according to the future land use plan of the City of Janesville, the site and its environs east of US 51 are proposed for development as light industrial land uses (Vandewalle & Associates, 2009b).19.3.1.2Visual Resources The visual setting of the area affected by the construction of the new SHINE facility is represented by agricultural viewsheds to the north and east that consist of predominately flat or a slightly rolling terrain dominated by cultivated fields (Figure 19.3.1-9). The site itself is composed completely of land used for agricultural purposes and has no established structures. The viewshed to the south of the SHINE site consists of both agricultural fields with some light development. Immediately adjacent to the southern border of the site are two large warehouses that support local agricultural operations and provide storage for large farming equipment. The viewshed to the west of the site is a light industrial development landscape that consists of the SWRA and its associated facilities. Specific elements of this landscape include the airport control tower, associated runways, and several large warehouses and hangers. The SWRA supports approximately 50,000 flight operations annually, and the site is in view of the persons utilizing the airport and visitors traveling to the area (Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, 2012a). The new SHINE facility is described and illustrated in Section 19.4.1.2 and is visible to motorists traveling to and from Janesville, WI, on US 51. The new facility is also visible from Airport Park, which is located northwest of the site across US 51. Residential neighborhoods are located north and northwest of the site, but presently there are trees and other vegetation bordering these neighborhoods that obstruct the view of the site.The visual resources and scenic quality of the existing site are rated using the USDOI-BLM Visual Resource Management System (USDOI-BLM, 1984). The Scenic Quality Classification is the rating of the visual appeal of the land designated for the site and is based on an evaluation of seven key factors: landform, vegetation, water, color, adjacent scenery, scarcity, and cultural modifications. The Scenic Quality is classified as either an "A," "B," or "C," with "A" as a high quality visual classification and "C" as a low quality visual rating. The site rates as a "C" classification for low Scenic Quality due to a lack of notable features, uniform landform, low vegetation diversity, an absence of water, mute colors, cultural modifications to adjacent Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-5Rev. 0scenery, and a commonality within the physiographic province. The Sensitivity Level, a measurement of the public concern for scenic quality, was also analyzed using six different indicators of public concern: types of users, amount of use, public interest, adjacent land uses, special areas, and other factors. The Sensitivity Level of the public concern for scenic quality is rated on a High (H), Moderate (M), or Low (L) scale. The site has an L sensitivity rating, as an area with low scenic values resulting from a low sensitivity to changes in visual quality by the type of users in the area, a low amount of use by viewers, low public interest in changes to the visual quality of the site, and a lack of special natural and wilderness areas.
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-6Rev. 0Table 19.3.1-1 Summary of 2006 Land Use/Land Cover within SHINE Site and Regiona) Total may add up to more or less than 100 percent due to rounding.
Reference:
Fry, et al., 2011. NLCD2006 Land Cover Class SHINE Site Regionac.haPercentac.haPercentOpen Water7963221.6%Developed, Open Space0.180.070.2%304312316.1%Developed, Low Intensity5858237111.7%Developed, Medium Intensity19687963.9%Developed, High Intensity9924012.0% Barren43170.1%Deciduous Forest329813356.6%Evergreen Forest68280.1%Mixed Forest100.0%Shrub/Scrub5052041.0% Grassland10494252.1%Pasture/Hay5896238611.7%Cultivated Crops91.0936.8699.8%25,23610,21350.2% Woody Wetlands7222921.4%Emergent Herbaceous Wetland7873181.6% Total(a)91.2736.94100.0%50,26220,339100.0% Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-7Rev. 0Table 19.3.1-2 Crop Production Estimates for SHINE Site and Rock County, Wisconsin YearPlantedHarvestedProductionYieldac.haac.haBu.Bu./ac. Corn2001140,60056,901128,00051,80217,920,0001402002160,50064,954149,70060,58417,664,6001182003151,50061,312140,80056,98219,571,2001392004155,00062,729141,00057,06323,124,0001642005166,00067,180150,00060,70522,200,0001482006152,00061,514141,00057,06322,419,0001592007174,00070,418165,00066,77625,740,0001562008161,00065,157152,00061,51422,192,0001462009162,00065,561153,00061,91925,245,0001652010158,50064,145142,00057,46724,679,600173.8Ten Year Avg., Rock County, WI158,11063,987146,25059,18722,075,540150.9Site Avg.91.2736.9491.2736.9413,771150.9Soybeans2001106,30043,020104,30042,2104,484,90043200299,20040,14697,90039,6203,524,400362003101,70041,158101,40041,0372,535,00025200487,60035,45286,90035,1683,736,70043200588,60035,85687,40035,3714,020,40046200689,20036,09989,00036,0184,539,00051200771,90029,09871,70029,0173,369,90047200881,10032,82181,00032,7812,956,50036.5200980,00032,37679,90032,3363,875,15048.5201086,00034,80485,50034,6024,822,20056.4Ten Year Avg., Rock County, WI89,16036,08388,50035,8163,786,41543.2Site Avg.91.2736.9491.2736.94394743.2
Reference:
USDA, 2011 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-8Rev. 0Table 19.3.1-3 City of Janesville Land UseLand Use CategoryPercentResidential-Single Family Urban24% Residential-Two-Family/Townhouse2%Residential-Multi-Family2%Office1% Commercial4%Office1%Light Industrial4% Heavy Industrial4%Community Facilities11%Parks and Open Space11% Extraction2% Vacant16%Agricultural0%Surface Water2% Right of Way17% Total(a)100%a) Total may add up to more or less than 100 percent due to rounding.
Reference:
Vandewalle & Associates, 2009a. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-9Rev. 019.3.2 AIR QUALITY AND NOISE19.3.2.1Regional Climatology19.3.2.1.1IntroductionClimate is a statistical description of the weather conditions that occur during a long period of time, usually several decades. Weather refers to short-term variations (minutes to months) in the atmosphere.Sources of data typically used to analyze the climate at a site include weather maps (depictions of areal weather phenomena at one instant of time), atlas maps summarizing long-term climate, records of weather at specific monitoring stations at single instants of time, and long-term climatic statistics at specific monitoring stations.The purpose of analysis of regional climate is to understand the local climate at the SHINE site in the context of the climate of the surrounding area. Climate phenomena are then analyzed at progressively smaller scales and within progressively smaller areas. As the area being analyzed decreases, some monitoring stations that are considered initially in the broad analysis are excluded because these stations are found to be unrepresentative of the site climate. The end result is a documented, systematic approach that defines local climate within a context that includes a broad surrounding region.19.3.2.1.2Regional ClimateThe SHINE site is located in south-central Wisconsin. The following discussion summarizes a variety of information that describes the general region in which the SHINE site is located. Because the information is derived from a variety of sources, the geographic area implied by the term "region" is somewhat variable in this introductory discussion. Subsection 19.3.2.1.3 defines a more specific region considered to have a climate representative of the SHINE site, and the subsequent subsections present detailed climatological data for that specific region. The SHINE site is located in a region with the Kppen classification "Daf", which is a humid continental climate with warm summers, snowy winters, and humid conditions (Trewartha, 1954). The climate features a large annual temperature range and frequent short duration temperature changes (NCDC, 2011a). Although there are no pronounced dry seasons, most precipitation occurs during the warmer months. During the autumn, winter, and spring, strong synoptic-scale surface cyclones and anticyclones frequently move across the site region. During the summer, synoptic-scale cyclones are usually weaker and pass north of the site region. Most air masses that affect the site region are generally of polar origin. However, air masses occasionally originate from arctic regions, or the Gulf of Mexico. Air masses originating from the Gulf of Mexico generally do not reach the site region during winter months. There are occasional episodes of extreme heat or high humidity during the summer. The windiest months generally occur during the spring and autumn. The annual average number of days with thunderstorms varies from approximately 45 at the southwest corner of the state of Wisconsin, to approximately 35 at the northeast corner of the state (Moran, J.M. and E.J. Hopkins, 2002). Hail is most frequent in the southwestern and west-central portions of the state, and is most common during summer months, peaking in late July. Tornadoes are relatively infrequent. Winter storms that affect the region generally follow one of three tracks shown in Figure19.3.2-1: Alberta, Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-10Rev. 0Panhandle, and Gulf Coast tracks. During an average winter, the ground is covered with snow about 60 percent of the time (NCDC, 2011a). Regional land use is primarily cropland (corn and beans) and dairy (Rand McNally, 1982 and 2005). The natural vegetation includes broadleaf deciduous trees (oak and hickory), evergreen trees, and medium height prairie grass. There are also several urban areas. The soil at the SHINE site is well-drained silt loam.The landforms of Wisconsin are described by the five physiographic provinces plotted on the map in Figure 19.3.2-2. Details of vegetation, topography, and elevations for those provinces are described in Table19.3.2-1 (Moran, J.M. and E.J. Hopkins, 2002). Most of the surface water impoundments in Wisconsin are located in the Northern Highland and Eastern Ridges and Lowlands physiographic provinces. Water also flows through extensive wetlands in the form of marshes and swamps. The Northern Highland province has the highest elevations, from which water drains northward to Lake Superior; eastward to Lake Michigan via the Menominee and Wolf Rivers; and westward to the Mississippi River via the St. Croix, Chippewa, Black, and Wisconsin Rivers. The Western Uplands province, which comprises most of the western border of the state with Minnesota, escaped recent glaciation. This allowed streams and rivers to form deeply incised valleys over geologic time. Portions of the uplands are referred to as the "driftless area" due to the lack of glacial debris, or "drift".Lake breeze phenomena occur near the shorelines of large bodies of water, such as Lake Michigan, which borders Wisconsin on the east (Moran, J.M. and E.J. Hopkins, 2002). These phenomena feature a circulation system in which air rises over the land and descends over the water, flows from the water toward the land near the ground surface, and flows from land toward the lake aloft. At the surface, the lake breeze appears as a relatively cool and humid wind that sweeps inland. The leading edge of a lake breeze is a miniature cold front and is referred to as the lake breeze front. As the lake breeze front moves inland, it lifts warmer air upward, sometimes causing clouds, or showers. The inland penetration of the lake breeze front varies from a few hundred yards to as much as 25 mi. (40.2 km) (Moran, J.M. and E.J. Hopkins, 2002). Since the SHINE site is located approximately 60 mi. (96.6 km) west of Lake Michigan, it is located too far from the lake be affected by lake breezes. Inland lakes that are located in the SHINE site region are too small to be associated with lake breeze circulations. Therefore, lake breeze circulations are not expected to affect the SHINE site.The local radiation balance and winds determine temperatures across the state. Movement of air masses, synoptic-scale fronts, and synoptic-scale cyclones and anticyclones strongly influence local temperature and precipitation. Seasonal changes in the intensity and movements of air masses and synoptic-scale weather systems, plus changes in radiation exposure at the ground bring about seasonal changes in temperature and precipitation. North and northwest winds generally bring cold, dry air. South and southeast winds typically bring warm, humid air. Calm wind conditions allow pooling of colder, denser air at locations with lower elevations such as valleys. Unequal rates of diurnal heating of the ground cause some local valley and hillside
airflows.Maps of monthly mean dry bulb temperatures in Wisconsin are presented in Figures19.3.2-3 through 19.3.2-6 (Moran, J.M. and E.J. Hopkins, 2002). Mean monthly temperatures for winter (Figure19.3.2-3) show cooler temperatures at the northern end of the state, warmer temperatures near Lake Michigan, and slightly warmer temperatures near Lake Superior. Figure19.3.2-4 presents mean monthly temperatures in the spring. The springtime monthly Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-11Rev. 0temperature pattern in Figure19.3.2-4 is similar to the wintertime temperature pattern in Figure19.3.2-3, with colder temperatures in the north. The counties that border the Great Lakes have cooler temperatures during spring, since the water warms at a slower rate than the land and thereby cools the air near the shorelines.Mean monthly temperatures for summer (Figure 19.3.2-5) show a pattern similar to springtime monthly mean temperatures in Figure 19.3.2-4, with warmer interior temperatures in the south. Counties adjacent to Lakes Michigan and Superior are slightly cooler because the lake surfaces are relatively cooler than the land during the summer.Mean monthly temperatures for autumn (Figure 19.3.2-6) show warmer conditions in the southern interior. The temperatures show a pattern similar to those in the winter, with warmer temperatures at counties near the lake, since the land cools more quickly than the water.Wisconsin counties that border Lakes Michigan and Superior experience somewhat cooler summers, milder winters, and longer agricultural growing seasons than those counties at greater distances from the lakes. The lakes also occasionally produce lake effect snow during late autumn through winter.Maps of monthly mean water-equivalent precipitation in Wisconsin are presented in Figures 19.3.2-7 through 19.3.2-10 (Moran, J.M. and E.J. Hopkins, 2002). Generally, the average annual precipitation is higher in southern portions of the Midwest due to the proximity of the Gulf of Mexico, which is a major source of moisture (EDS, 1968). That same general pattern is observed over the state of Wisconsin. Superimposed over that general pattern is a local pattern of periodic lake-effect precipitation. During lake-effect precipitation events, Lakes Superior and Michigan are local sources of moisture that can cause precipitation adjacent to and downwind of the lake shorelines. Those periods of precipitation enhancement tend to occur when the lake water is warmer than the air, which generally occurs during winter. For example, the winter month precipitation in Figure 19.3.2-7 shows higher monthly water equivalent precipitation totals (approximately 1.2 to 2.2 inches [in.]) (3.0 to 5.6 centimeters [cm]) near the north and east boundary counties, caused by lake-effect snow from Lakes Michigan and Superior.The Madison, Wisconsin and Rockford, Illinois National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) weather observing stations (NCDC, 201 1a, NCDC, 2011c) are th e closest first-order weather stations, and are located approximately 40 mi. (64.4 km) north-northwest and 30 mi. (48.3 km) south-southwest of the SHINE site, respectively. "First-order" stations are defined as those on a 24-hour per day, year-round observing schedule with trained, certified observers.Climatic statistics for Madison presented in Table19.3.2-2 (NCDC, 2011a) show that monthly mean wind speeds range from 6.7 miles per hour (mph) (3.0 meters per second [m/s]) during the month of August to 10.1 mph (4.5 m/s) during the month of April. Annual mean wind speed is 8.5mph (3.8 m/s). Monthly prevailing wind directions are from the s outh-southwest during all months except the winter months of December through February, when the monthly prevailing winds are all from the northwest. Annual prevailing wind is from the south-southwest.Climatic statistics for Rockford presented in Table19.3.2-3 (NCDC, 2011c) show that monthly mean wind speeds are similar to those for Madison, and range from 7.0 mph (3.1 m/s) during the month of August, to 11.3 mph (5.1 m/s) during the month of April. Annual mean wind speed is 9.3mph (4.2 m/s). Monthly prevailing wind directions are similar to Madison, and blow from the south-southwest direction during all months except the period January through March, when the Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-12Rev. 0monthly prevailing winds are all from the northwest. Annual prevailing wind is from the south-southwest.Monthly mean relative humidities for Madison range from 66 percent during April and May, to 78percent during December (Table19.3.2-2). Rockford monthly mean relative humidities presented are similar to those from Madison, ranging from 66 percent during April and May, to 80percent during December (Table19.3.2-3).Mean monthly water equivalent precipitation and snowfall for Madison and Rockford (Table19.3.2-2 and Table19.3.2-3) are similar. Water equivalent precipitation ranges from minima of 1.25 in. (3.18 cm) during January in Madison and 1.34 in. (3.40 cm) during February in Rockford, to maxima during August of 4.33 in. (11.00 cm) at Madison, and during June of 4.80in. (12.19 cm) in Rockford. Mean monthly snowfall is limited to the months October through May, and ranges from a minimum of 0.1 in. (0.25 cm) at Madison and Rockford to a maximum of 12.9in. (32.77 cm) during January at Madison. Annual snowfall is 49.9 in. (126.75 cm) at Madison and 38.7 in. (98.30 cm) at Rockford.Table19.3.2-4 presents the mean numbers of days per month and per year of rain or drizzle, freezing rain or drizzle, snow, and hail or sleet at Madison and Rockford. Those parameters have very similar values for the two stations.Annual values of rain or drizzle days are 138 and 139 days for Madison and Rockford. For both Madison and Rockford, rain and drizzle days range from a minimum of 5 or 6 days during January, to a maximum of 16 days during May.Annual values of freezing rain or drizzle days are two for both Madison and Rockford. For both Madison and Rockford, freezing rain and drizzle days are zero during the months of May through September, and are a maximum of 1 day during the months of December and January.Snow typically occurs during 75 days per year at Madison, and 68 days per year at Rockford. Hail or sleet typically occurs during 2 days per year at both Madison and Rockford. Freezing rain or drizzle typically occurs during 2 days per year at both Madison and Rockford.19.3.2.1.3Identification of Region with Climate Representative of the SHINE SiteThe process of comparison of local (site) and regional climates requires a determination of which region is considered "representative" of climate at the SHINE site. That determination is described in this subsection.The SHINE site is located in central Rock County, Wisconsin which is at the south central edge of the state. It is located near the boundary of two Wisconsin physiographic provinces as presented in Figure 19.3.2-2, the Western Uplands and the Eastern Ridges and Lowlands. It is located in NOAA Cooperative Observer Network (COOP) Climate Division 8 South Central (Figure 19.3.2-11). The finished site grade elevation is approximately 827 feet (ft.) (252meters[m]) North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88). The land use in the site area is rural. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-13Rev. 0Summarizing, the site location is defined by the followi ng characteristics: a.Located in south-central Wisconsin, on rural prairie silt-loam soil.b.Located within till plains glacial deposits on the Central Lowland Province of the Interior Plains Division of the United States. It is on the border between the state of Wisconsin Eastern Ridge/Lowland and Western Upland Terrain, and most like the ridge/lowland to the east because the local topography is relatively gently rolling.c.Located outside the zone of influence of Lake Michigan lake breeze circulation systems.d.Located within the zone of influence of Lake Michigan effects on temperature and precipitation, including the following: added local warmth during winter and autumn, cooling during summer and spring, and additional local precipitation during winter, spring, and autumn.Based on the above summary characteristics, the perimeter of a surrounding geographic region, which is characterized as having the same climate as the site, is plotted on the regional map in Figure 19.3.2-12. That perimeter is bounded as follows:a.Bounded on the east by the 25-mi. (40.2 km) distance of maximum inland penetration of lake breeze circulations from Lake Michigan.b.Bounded on the south by the approximate southward limit of Lake Michigan's effects on the local climate of north-central Illinois, as presented in the mean precipitation and snowfall patterns in Figure 19.3.2-13 and Figure 19.3.2-14 and as described by local climatological data summaries for major Illinois monitoring stations. Annual isohyets and lines of equal snowfall are oriented northwest to southeast at the northeast corner of Illinois as shown in Figure 19.3.2-13 and Figure 19.3.2-14, illustrating the effects of Lake Michigan (Figure 19.3.2-15) on northern Illinois precipitation. Increased clouds and cooling effects due to Lake Michigan are des cribed in the climatological summary for Rockford, Illinois (NCDC, 2011c), but are not des cribed in the climat ological summaries for Springfield, Illinois farther to the south (NCDC, 2011d), or Mo line, Illinois farther to the southwest (NCDC, 2011b).c.Bounded on the west by the approximate westward limit of Lake Michigan's effects on the local climate of southern Wisconsin, as presented in the mean monthly temperature and precipitation, maps in Figure 19.3.2-3 through Figure 19.3.2-10.d.Bounded on the north by the approximate northward limit of Lake Michigan's effects on the local climate of central Wisconsin, as presented in the mean temperature and precipitation maps in Figure 19.3.2-3 through Figure 19.3.2-10. e.Bounded on the north by the approximate mean southern boundary of the Wisconsin Central Plain, as presented in Figure 19.3.2-2.This site climate region is then used to identify regional weather monitoring stations and Wisconsin and Illinois counties that can be used for comparisons in the analysis of local and regional climate. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-14Rev. 019.3.2.1.4Regional Data Sources The site climate region is identified in Subsection 19.3.2.1.3. Meteorological parameters from weather stations in the site climate region are available from a number of published data sources. Those data sources are described below.*Climatography of the United States No. 20 (Clim-20) statistical summaries from the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC).Clim-20 publications are typically available for COOP daily weather monitoring stations located within the site climate region. Those publications are of particular interest to agriculture, industry, and engineering applications. The publications include a variety of climate statistics useful for regional climate analysis. Those parameters include dry bulb temperature, daily precipitation, and snow fall. Descriptive statistics of those parameters include: mean, extremes, and mean number of days exceeding threshold values.COOP stations do not generally record humidity-related parameters, such as relative humidity, dew point or wet bulb temperatures. Therefore, wet bulb temperatures that are coincident with extreme dry bulb temperatures - which are of interest in regional climate analysis - are generally not available for COOP stations. Therefore, for COOP stations, it is often necessary to estimate coincident wet bulb temperatures using wet bulb temperatures recorded at other stations.*Climatological statistics available from Local Climatological Data (LCD) summaries published by NCDC. LCD annual summaries are typically available for meteorological stations located at major airports. Those summaries include climatic normals, averages and extremes. Thirty-year monthly histories are provided for the following parameters: mean temperature, total precipitation, total snowfall, and heating/cooling degree days. The summaries also include a narrative description of the local climate.*Statistical summaries available from the International Station Meteorological Climate Summary (ISMCS) (NCDC, 1996b).Those summaries are available for many domestic and international airports and military installations. The summaries include tabulations of statistics for several parameters of interest in regional climate analysis. The summaries also include a narrative description of local climate. Particularly useful and unique statistics available in the ISMCS are joint-frequency tables of dry bulb, and wet bulb temperature depression, and single-parameter frequency distributions of dry bulb and wet bulb temperatures.*Statistical summaries published by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc. (ASHRAE) (ASHRAE, 2009).ASHRAE climatic percentile information is available for worldwide locations including many U.S. airports with hourly surface weather observing stations. Parameters include dry bulb, wet bulb and dew point temperatures. Also included are: statistical design Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-15Rev. 0values of dry bulb with mean coincident wet bulb temperature, design wet bulb temperature with mean coincident dry bulb temperature, and design dew point with mean coincident dry bulb temperature.*Statistical summaries published by the U.S. Air Force Combat Climatology Center (AFCCC) (AFCCC, 1999). The AFCCC statisti cal summaries include values for dry and wet bulb temperatures.*American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) structural design standards for the site climate region (ASCE, 2006).The ASCE standards provide minimum load requirements for the design of buildings and other structures that are subject to building code requirements. Particularly useful and unique statistics of interest for climate analysis are values of basic wind speed on a map of the U.S. The basic speed is required by standards for determination of design wind loads. Also included are various adjustments and supplementary information dependent on site and structure characteristics. ASCE also provides maps of 50-year return interval snow pack and a methodology for converting 50-year values extracted from the maps to other return intervals (ASCE, 2006).*48-hour probable maximum precipitation (PMP).The 48-hour PMP is available from a study published by the U.S. Department of Commerce (USDOC) (USDOC, 1978). USDOC contains maps of estimated maximum probable precipitation amounts for a number of time periods (USDOC, 1978).*Tornado, waterspout, and other weather event statistics for counties in the site climate region from the NCDC online Storm Events Database (NCDC, 2011g) and "Storm Data" publications.The Storm Events Database contains a chronological listing, by state, of climate statistics of interest for climate analysis. Those statistics include: tornadoes, thunderstorms, hail, lightning, high winds, snow, temperature extremes, and other weather phenomena. Also included are statistics on personal injuries and property damage estimates.The "Storm Data" publications are monthly summaries of severe weather events published by NCDC. These publications provide supplemental information about specific severe weather events.*Maps of climatological parameters from the Climate Atlas of the United States (NCDC, 2002).This digital atlas provides color maps of climatic elements for the U.S., such as: temperature, precipitation, snow, wind, and pressure. The period of record for most maps is 1961-1990. The user extracts data from the atlas by selecting a parameter (e.g., dry bulb temperature), a statistical measure (e.g., mean), and a state.*Hourly meteorological data files in digital TD3505 (NCDC, 2006; NCDC, 2011j; NCDC, 2011k) and TD3280 (NCDC, 2005a; NCDC, 2011h; NCDC, 2011i) formats. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-16Rev. 0TD3280 is an older data file format that has recently been replaced by the TD3505 format. Hourly meteorological data files are available in TD3280 format through December, 2009. Data files for 2010 and 2011 are available in TD3505 format. Digital data files are available for worldwide locations from NCDC. These data sets contain hourly values of dry bulb temperature, humidity, wind speed/direction, and cloud cover. These data sets allow analysis of coincident meteorological conditions.19.3.2.1.5Identification and Selection for Analysis of Weather Monitoring Stations Located within the Site Climate RegionFigure 19.3.2-16 and Figure 19.3.2-17 present maps of the site climate region (identified in Figure 19.3.2-12), with additional annotations of locations within that region of NOAA Automated Surface Observing Stations (ASOS stations) (Figure 19.3.2-16), and NOAA COOP stations (Figure 19.3.2-17) for which NOAA "Clim-20" summaries have been published by NCDC. Table19.3.2-5 and Table19.3.2-6 present lists of the ASOS and COOP stations that are identified in Figure 19.3.2-16 and Figure 19.3.2-17. It should be noted that the ground elevations shown in Table19.3.2-5 and Table19.3.2-6 are given in ft. MSL (above Mean Sea Level) because that is the terminology used by NOAA in describing the ASOS and COOP stations (NCDC, 2001a; NCDC, 2001b; NCDC, 2001c; NCD C, 2001d; NCDC, 2001e; NCDC, 2001f; NCDC, 2001g; NCDC, 2001h; NCDC, 2001i; NCDC, 2001j; NCDC, 2001k; NCDC, 2001l; NCDC, 2001m; NCDC, 2001n; NCDC, 2001o; NCDC, 2001p; NCDC, 2001q; NCDC, 2001r; NCDC, 2001s; NCDC, 2001t; NCDC, 2001u; NCDC, 2001v; NCDC, 2001w; NCDC, 2001x; NCDC, 2012b). However, the MSL elevations are functionally equivalent to the NAVD 88 elevations used elsewhere in this subsection.A subset of the ASOS stations presented in Figure 19.3.2-16 is selected for analysis. The following criteria were used to select that subset of stations. The two first order stations Rockford and Madison are selected because of the extra statistical summaries in the form of NOAA annual summary LCD publications available for them. They also represent the geographical center of the site climate region. Four additional stations located approximately near the four corners of the site climate region are also selected to geographically bracket that region and avoid duplicate representation of similar areas. Those four additional stations are: Baraboo (at the northwest corner of the region), Fond du Lac (at the northeast corner of the region), Freeport (at the southwest corner of the region), and DuPage County (at the southeast corner of the region).All of the COOP stations presented in Figure 19.3.2-17 and Table19.3.2-6 are analyzed. Input information for that analysis includes statistics in the NOAA Clim-20 document for each station, that summarize climatic conditions during the 30 year period 1971 through 2000, and ten annual climatological data summaries for each of the states Wisconsin and Illinois, which summarize climatic conditions for each of the 10 years 2001 through 2010. Total years summarized for each of the COOP stations is, therefore, 40 years.19.3.2.2Regional Air QualityThe SHINE site is located in Rock County, Wisconsin which is part of the Rockford-Janesville- Beloit Interstate Air Quality Control Region (WDNR, 2011a). This air quality control region combines agricultural activities with the Beloit-Janesville, Wisconsin and Rockford, Illinois urban-industrial areas. The Wisconsin portion of the air quality control region, Rock County, is mostly flat to gently rolling farmland. Industry in the region includes manufacturing, foundry operations and electrical power plants (WDNR, 2011a). Rock County is currently in attainment for all criteria Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-17Rev. 0pollutants (ozone, particulate matter, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, and lead) (WDNR, 2011a, USEPA, 2011).Maintenance areas are those geographic areas that have a history of non-attainment but are currently in compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. In April 2004, the USEPA designated the following 10 counties in eastern Wisconsin as being in non-attainment with the 8-hour ozone air quality standard: Door, Kewaunee, Manitowoc, Sheyboygan, Washington, Ozaukee, Waukesha, Milwaukee, Racine, and Kenosha. However, in 2007, eight of the ten counties (Kewuanee, Manitowoc, Washington, Ozaukee, Waukesha, Milwaukee, Racine, and Kenosha) were re-designated as being in attainment with the 8-hour ozone standard
(WDNR, 2012a). The resulting eight-county maintenance area and the two counties currently out of attainment with the 8-hour ozone air quality standard (Door and Sheyboygan counties) are situated to the northeast of the Rockford-Janesville-Beloit Interstate Air Quality Control Region, along the western shore of Lake Michigan. These are the closest non-attainment areas to the SHINE site.USEPA guidance (USEPA, 1990) states that a Class I visibility impact analysis is necessary for a major source locating within 100 km (160.9 mi.) of a Class I area. Class I areas are national parks and wilderness areas that are potentially sensitive to visibility impairment. Table19.3.2-7 lists the nearest Federal Class I areas to the SHINE site (NPS, 2011). The table shows that the closest Federal Class I area is the Rainbow Lake Wilderness Area, which is located approximately 455 km (approximately 283 miles) northwest of the SHINE site in far northern
Wisconsin.Causes of regional air quality problems are generally due to a combination of factors. Typically, major factors include the following (Korshover, J., 1967): stagnating surface high pressure systems characterized by low surface wind speeds that linger over a region for several days, concentration of heavy industries and their air pollution emissions in relatively congested areas, and atmospheric mixing depths that limit the volume of air within which pollutants dilute (Holzworth, G.C., 1972). Additional factors can be involved for specific pollutants. For example, ozone air pollution is affected by not only the factors of stagnation, low wind speed, and limited mixing, but also requires the presence of additional factors that support the photochemical reactions in the atmosphere, including: intense sunlight, high temperature, and the presence of precursor chemical pollutants (Stern, A.C., 1973).19.3.2.3Severe Weather19.3.2.3.1Extreme Wind A statistic known as the "basic" wind speed is used for design and operating bases. Basic wind speeds are 50 year recurrence interval "nominal design 3-second gust wind speeds (mph) at 33ft. (10.1 m) above ground for Exposure C category", as defined in Figures 6-1 and 6-1C of ASCE, 2006.Several sources are considered to determine the wind speeds for the SHINE site. The basic wind speed for the SHINE site is 90 mph (40.2 m/s), based on the plot of basic wind speeds in Figure6-1C of ASCE, 2006. Basic wind speeds reported in AFCCC, 1999 for hourly weather stations in the site climate region are as follows: 90 mph (40.2 m/s) for Madison, Wisconsin, and 90 mph (40.2 m/s) for DuPage County Airport, West Chicago, Illinois. Consistency of the three values is the basis for selecting a value of 90 mph (40.2 m/s) for the SHINE site. That value Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-18Rev. 0applies to a recurrence interval of 50 years. Section C6.5.5 of ASCE, 2006 provides a method to calculate wind speeds for other recurrence intervals. Based on that method, a 100-year return-period value is calculated by multiplying the 50-year return-period value by a factor of 1.07. That approach produces a 100-year return-period three second gust wind speed for the SHINE site area of 96.3 mph (43.0 m/s).19.3.2.3.2Tornadoes and Waterspouts The NCDC Storm Events Database (NCDC, 2011g) provides information on historic storm events on a county basis. To use that database, 28 regional counties that are at least partially included within the site climate region are selected and presented on the map in Figure 19.3.2-18. Those counties approximate the representative climate region defined above in Subsection 19.3.2.1.3. The 28 counties are listed in Table19.3.2-8 (USCB, 2011). The NCDC Storm Events Database (NCDC, 2011g) was accessed to extract statistics on regional tornadoes and waterspouts. Information is extracted for the 28 regional counties. Those tornado and waterspout statistics, for the 62-year period May 1950 through July 2011, are presented in Table19.3.2-8. Strongest tornadoes in the database for Rock County (in which the SHINE site is located) are reviewed and are found to be of intensity F2. Table19.3.2-9 provides additional details on the most intense Rock County tornadoes. The strongest tornadoes found in the database for the seven counties adjacent to Rock County: Dane, Jefferson, Walworth, Boone, Winnebago, Stephenson, and Green counties, were reviewed and found to be F3 and F4 storms in Boone County, Illinois, and F3 storms in Dane County and Jefferson County, Wisconsin. Table19.3.2-10 presents additional details on the strongest tornadoes in counties adjacent to Rock County. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) guidance for siting research reactors (IAEA, 1987) was reviewed. This guidance requires design tornado information to be based on the maximum historical intensity within a radius of about 100 km (62 mi.) from the SHINE site. For the SHINE site, a 100 km (62 mi.) radius partially extends outside of the representative site climate region included within the 28 county region described above. An F5 intensity tornado was recorded on 8 June 1984 in Iowa County, Wisconsin, at the town of Barneveld, which is located approximately 49.7 mi. (80 km) in a west-northwest direction from the SHINE site.Regulatory Guide 1.76 specifies design-basis tornado characteristics for nuclear power reactors. Therefore, this guidance is not specifically applicable to an isotope production facility and Regulatory Guide 1.76 is used as a technical reference only. Wisconsin is located in Region I in Regulatory Guide 1.76 Figure 1. The design-basis tornado characteristics applicable to Region I are listed below: a.Maximum wind speed: 230 mph (103 m/s) b.Translational speed: 46 mph (21 m/s) c.Maximum rotational speed: 184 mph (82 m/s)d.Radius of maximum rotational speed: 150 ft (45.7 m/s)e.Pressure drop: 1.2 psi (83 millibars) f.Rate of pressure drop: 0.5 psi/s (37 millibars) Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-19Rev. 019.3.2.3.3Water Equivalent Precipitation Extremes This subsection examines and compares water equivalent precipitation extremes within the site climate region, and locally near the SHINE site. Daily total water equivalent precipitation is measured at the local NOAA COOP monitoring station at Beloit, Wisconsin, and several regional COOP stations within the site climate region.A PMP value for the SHINE site is presented in Subsection 19.3.2.3.6.Table19.3.2-11 presents maximum recorded 24-hour and monthly water equivalent precipitation values for the local COOP station at Beloit, and for the 18 regional COOP stations located within the site climate region defined in the map in Figure 19.3.2-17.Overall historic maximum recorded 24-hour water-equivalent precipitation from records for either the local Beloit station or for regional stations is 8.09 in. (20.55 cm) at DeKalb, Illinois. That event occurred on 18 July 1996. It was due to thunderstorms in a warm, moist tropical air mass streaming north from the Gulf of Mexico and into the warm sector southeast of a synoptic low pressure center located over northern Minnesota (NCDC, 1996a). Flash flooding was widespread over north-central and northeast Illinois due to record breaking rainfall during the 17-18 July period (NCDC, 1997).Overall historic maximum monthly water-equivalent precipitation from records for either the local Beloit station or for regional stations is 16.09 in. (40.87 cm) at Portage, Wisconsin. That month was August, 1980 (NCDC, 2001s).19.3.2.3.4Hail, Snowstorms and Ice Storms The mean hail or sleet frequencies during winter, spring, summer, autumn, and annual periods for Rockford and Madison are listed in Table19.3.2-12. Mean hail frequencies are less than one day per season at both stations. Statistics are very similar at Rockford and Madison, verifying some consistency across the site climate region.Hail events that are either severe (with hail size exceeding 0.75 in. (1.91 cm) in diameter) or large (with hail exceeding one inch in diameter) are reported to have occurred in Rock County, Wisconsin on 11 occasions during the period 1961-1990, or with a frequency of approximately 0.37 occurrences per year (NCDC, 2002). The largest hailstones t hat Rock County has experienced are as follows: of diameter 3.00 in. (7.62 cm) on one occasion during June 1930, of diameter 2.50 in. (6.35 cm) on one occasion during August 2006, and of diameter 2.00 in. (5.08cm) on one occasion during June 1975 and one occasion during June 1998 (NCDC,2011g).Daily total snowfall amounts are measured at the local NOAA COOP monitoring station at Beloit, Wisconsin, as well as at several regional COOP stations within the site climate region.Maximum recorded 24-hour snowfall from records for either the local Beloit station or for regional stations is 21.0 in. (53.34 cm) at Dalton, Wisconsin. That event occurred on 2 January 1999. It was due to a major winter synoptic cyclone (the "Blizzard of 1999") that developed in Colorado, curved northeast through the Great Lakes, then entered Canada (NCDC, 1999 and NCDC,2000). On 2 January 1999 the synoptic surf ace low was centered at the south tip of Illinois. A warm maritime tropical air mass with temperatures in the 80s°F was present to the Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-20Rev. 0south, and a continental arctic air mass with temperatures primarily in the teens °F was present to the north. An area of heavy snow covered the site climate region. This blizzard paralyzed south central and southeast Wisconsin. Ten to 21 in. (25.40 to 53.34 cm) of snow were deposited and wind gusts of 45 to 63 mph (20.1 to 28.2 m/s) occurred. Nearly all cities and villages declared snow emergencies, and airports were closed. Visibility in blowing snow was typically 0.5mi. (0.8 km). Structural damage to buildings and power lines was reported.Overall historic maximum monthly snowfall from records for either the local Beloit station, or for regional stations, is 50.4 in. (128.0 cm) at Watertown, Wisconsin. That month was January, 1979 (NCDC, 2001w). Overall, extreme snowfall conditions recorded at the local station at Beloit, Wisconsin are bracketed by conditions recorded at stations within the site climate region, supporting conclusions regarding climate region representativeness. A snow pack value for the SHINE site is presented in Subsection 19.3.2.3.6. The mean number of days with freezing rain or drizzle is 2 days per year at both Madison, Wisconsin and Rockford, Illinois (Table19.3.2-4). A summary of 14 ice storms that affected Rock County, Wisconsin during the period 1995-2011 is presented in Table19.3.2-13 (NCDC, 2011g). That summary indicates the following.a.Several ice storms, as many as two or three, can occur per year. b.Ice can accumulate periodically or during a consecutive period of anywhere from approximately two hours to 11 hours.c.Ice accumulations typically range from one-tenth to one-quarter inch, but can reach one-half inch.d.Hazardous driving conditions are a typical result of the storms.A 50-year return-interval atmospheric ice load due to freezing rain is estimated to be 0.75in. (1.91cm) for the SHINE site area (ASCE, 2006). Concurrent three second wind gust is estimated to be 40 mph (17.9 m/s). This ice load is intended for use in assessment of ice accumulation on free objects, such as wires.19.3.2.3.5Thunderstorms and Lightning Thunderstorm statistics for the regional NOAA first order weather stations at Rockford, Illinois and Madison, Wisconsin are p ublished and available for the site climate region (NCDC, 1996b; NCDC, 2011a and NCDC, 2011c). Thunderstorms occur during an average of 43.0 days per year at Rockford, and 39.6 days per year at Madison. Mean seasonal thunderstorm frequencies for Rockford and Madison are listed in Table 19.3.2-14. Thunderstorms are most frequent in summer and least frequent in winter at both stations. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-21Rev. 0The mean frequency of lightning strikes to earth is calculated via a method from the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), per the U. S. Department of Agriculture Rural Utilities Service (USDA, 1998). The method assumes a relationship between the average number of thunderstorm days per year (T), and the number of lightning strikes to earth per square mile per year (N). The mathematical relationship is as follows:N = [0.31][T](Equation 19.3.2-1)Based on the average number of thunderstorm days per year at Rockford during the 55 year period 1955-2010 (43.0, which is slightly higher than the value of 39.6 days for Madison and is therefore used here), the frequency of lightning strikes to earth per sq. mi. per year is 13.3 (5.1strikes per sq. km per year) for the SHINE site and surrounding area. For comparison, based on a five year period of record (NLSI, 2011), indicates 2 to 4 flashes per sq. km per year for the site region, which corresponds to 5.2 to 10.4 flashes per sq. mi. per year. The EPRI value therefore is shown to be a reasonable indicator.19.3.2.3.6Snowpack and Probable Maximum Precipitation (PMP) A 100-year return-period snowpack for the SHINE site vicinity was derived by multiplying the 50-year return interval snowpack from Figure 7.1 of ASCE, 2006 by a factor which converts the 50-year return interval snowpack to a 100-year return-interval snowpack. Table C7-3 of ASCE, 2006 suggests that an appropriate factor is 1.22 (i.e., the 50-year value divided by the factor of 0.82 listed in Table C7-3). The estimated 50-year interval snowpack for the SHINE site from Figure 7.1 of (ASCE, 2006) is 25 in. (63.5 cm). The resulting estimated 100-year return interval snow pack for the SHINE site is 30.5 in. (30.5 in. = 1.22 x 25 in.) (77.5 cm).The weight of the 48-hour PMP for the SHINE site vicinity was derived by multiplying the 48-hour PMP (in inches) from Figure 21 of USDOC, 1978 by the weight of one inch of water (one inch of water covering one square foot weighs 5.2 lb [2.4 kg]). The estimated 48-hour PMP for the SHINE site from Figure 21 of USDOC, 1978 is 34in.(86.4cm). The resulting estimated weight of the 48-hour PMP for the SHINE site is 176.8pounds per square feet (lb/ft
- 2) (863.2 kilograms per square meter [kg/m 2]) (176.8 lb/ft 2 =34 in.x5.2lb/ft 2).19.3.2.3.7Design Dry Bulb and Wet Bulb Temperatures Site design basis dry bulb temperatures (DBTs) and wet bulb temperatures (WBTs) are defined for the SHINE site and its climate area. Those include the following statistics. a.Maximum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 0.4 percentb.Mean coincident wet bulb temperature (MCWB) at the 0.4 percent DBTc.Maximum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 2.0 percent d.MCWB at the 2.0 percent DBT e.Minimum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 0.4 percentf.Minimum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 1.0 percentg.Maximum WBT with annual exceedance probability of 0.4 percent Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-22Rev. 0h.Maximum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 5 percenti.Minimum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 5 percentj.100-year return maximum annual DBT k.MCWB at the 100-year return maximum annual DBT l.100-year return maximum annual WBTm.100-year return minimum annual DBT Statistics for (a)-(g) are readily available from (ASHRAE, 2009). Since those statistics are available from a well-known reference, no additional data analysis is required. ASHRAE, 2009 includes values for the following stations in the SHINE site climate region: Fond du Lac, Wisconsin; Madison, Wisconsin; Rockford, Illinois; and DuPage County Airport, Illinois. These stations represent climatic conditions in the northern, central and southern portions of the site climate region, respectively (Figure 19.3.2-16). Worst-case (bounding) values for (a)-(g) are selected from those four stations. To maintain thermodynamic consistency between DBT and coincident WBTs, DBT/MCWB pairs are retained for a single station. The resulting statistics are listed in Table 19.3.2-15.Statistics for the maximum and minimum DBT with an annual exceedance probability of 5percent (items [h] and [i] above) are not available from ASHRAE, 2009. In lieu of values from ASHRAE, 2009, values are extracted from published DBT and wet-bulb depression joint
frequency tables in NCDC, 1996b. Joint-frequency tabl es are available only for Madison and Rockford. The extracted statistics for Madison and Rockford are listed in Table 19.3.2-15.The 100-year return interval maximum annual DBTs and WBTs (items [j], [l] and [m] above) are estimated using a technique described on page 14.6 of Chapter 14 of ASHRAE, 2009. The technique estimates the n-year return-interval extreme temperature from a series of annual maximum and minimum temperatures. The ASHRAE technique uses the following equation: (Equation 19.3.2-2) wheren-year return period value of the extreme temperature computed, in yearsmean annual extreme maximum or minimum temperature +1 if the maximum temperature is computed; -1 if the minimum temperature is computedstandard deviation of the annual extreme maximum or minimum temperaturesreturn period in years (=100 for a 100-year return interval). (Equation 19.3.2-3)sFIMTnnTMIsnn)1nnln(ln5772.0 6F Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-23Rev. 0whereF is a function that converts the standard deviation of annual extreme temperature parameter (such as the annual extreme temperature in °F) to a new variable that is linearly related to the n-year return-interval extreme temperature .Since the MCWB coincident with the 100-year return interval maximum DBT is required (item [k] above), this technique is only applied at meteorological stations in the climate region which had: (1) digital records of hourly DBT and coincident WBT and (2) published annual extreme DBTs (i.e., NOAA annual summary LCD publications, such as NCDC, 2011a). The published annual extreme DBTs are required to check annual extreme DBTs extracted from the digital records. There were only two stations in the climate region which meet these requirements: Rockford, Illinois and Madison, Wisconsin. The ASHRAE technique is applied to hourly TD3280 and TD3505 digital datasets (NCDC, 2011h-k) for each of these two stations. The extreme DBT and WBT are first identified for each year which has at least 90 percent of possible hourly coverage of DBT and WBT. This produces a time-series of annual maximum and minimum DBTs and WBTs for 53 years for Madison and 30 years for Rockford. Each time-series is then input into the ASHRAE technique. The resulting estimated 100-year return period annual DBTs and WBTs (items [j], [l] and [m] above) are listed in Table19.3.2-16.The estimated 100-year return maximum annual DBT at Rockford (104.8°F (40.4 ºC); Table19.3.2-16) is only 0.8°F (0.44 ºC) above the record maximum DBT at Rockford (104°F [40.0 ºC]) (NCDC, 2011c). Instead of attempting to derive a statistical relationship between the DBT and WBT useful over the short DBT interval of 104°F (40.0 ºC) to 104.8°F (40.4 ºC), the MCWB coincident with the estimated 100-year return maximum annual DBT at Rockford (104.8°F [40.4 ºC]) are taken to be the WBT coincident with the record maximum DBT at Rockford (104°F [40.0 ºC]). The WBT coincident with the record maximum DBT at Rockford is 80°F (26.7 ºC) (NCDC, 2011i and NCDC, 2011k). Therefore, the estimated MCWB coincident with the 100-year return maximum annual DBT at Rockford is 80°F (26.7 ºC).A similar approach is taken for the 100-year return maximum annual DBT for Madison. The 100-year return maximum annual DBT for Madison (104.3°F (40.2 ºC); Table19.3.2-16) is only 0.3°F (0.17 ºC) above the record maximum DBT for Madison (104°F [40.0 ºC]) (NCDC, 2011a). Therefore, the MCWB coincident with the estimated 100-year return maximum annual DBT is the WBT coincident with the record maximum DBT for Madison. The WBT coincident with the record maximum DBT at Madison is 75°F (23.9 ºC) (NCDC, 2011h and NCDC, 2011j). Therefore, the estimated MCWB coincident with the 100-year return maximum annual DBT for Madison is 75°F (23.9 ºC). The 100-year maximum annual DBT and MCWB pairs (items [j] and [k] above) for Rockford and Madison are listed in Table19.3.2-16.19.3.2.3.8Extreme Dry Bulb Temperatures An additional review of regional extreme DBTs is done using NOAA COOP climate monitoring stations in the SHINE site climate region. The locations of those stations are shown in Figure19.3.2-17. The COOP climate monitoring stations do not measure WBT and do not record hourly DBTs. Those stations only record maximum and minimum daily DBTs and daily snT Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-24Rev. 0precipitation totals. Therefore, it is not possible to identify WBTs coincident with the extreme DBTs recorded at those stations.Table19.3.2-17 presents extreme DBTs recorded at the COOP climate monitoring stations. For completeness, Table 19.3.2-17 also includes the extreme DBTs recorded at the two first order stations in the SHINE site climate region (Madison, Wisconsin and Rockford, Illinois). The overall extreme DBTs for the climate region are: a maximum of 109°F (42.8 ºC) recorded on 14 July 1936 at Marengo in Boone County, Illinois, and a minimum of -45°F (-42.8 ºC) recorded on 30 January 1951 at Baraboo in Sauk County, Wisconsin. Since Marengo is a COOP station, the WBT coincident with the extreme DBT at Marengo (109°F[42.8 ºC]) is not available. Furthermore, DBT and coincident WBT data in digital format that are available for stations in the climate region do not extend as far back as 1936 (Table19.3.2-5). Therefore, it is necessary to estimate a WBT coincident with the overall extreme DBT. A graphical extrapolation method is used to estimate the WBT coincident with the overall extreme DBT of 109°F (42.8 ºC). A simple graphical approach is appropriate for several reasons, as follows:a.A simple graphical approach is appropriate because at the extreme high end of the DBT range there are only a small number of observations. Use of an objective numerical technique to project larger DBT values using a small population as input is unjustified because it is effectively no less subjective than a graphical approach.b.The requirement is only for a mean coincident WBT value. A mean WBT value is simply identified for any DBT value on the graph, therefore a set of such means is easily plotted, and form the basis of an extrapolation line. c.Published DBT/WBT depression joint frequency distribution (JFD) tables are available for Madison and Rockford (NCDC, 1996 b). The tables are suitabl e for use in sketching the graphical relationship between regional DBT and WBT during conditions of the peak DBT. The closest first-order station to Marengo is Rockford, Illinois, which is located approximately 25mi. (40.2 km) west of Marengo (Figure 19.3.2-17). Therefore, the DBT/WBT depression JFD table from Rockford is used to estimate the WBT coincident with an overall extreme DBT of 109°F (42.8 ºC) recorded at Marengo. The upper DBT limit of the DBT/WBT depression JFD table from Rockford is 103°F (39.4 ºC). Therefore, it is necessary to extrapolate the upper end of the JFD table to the observed DBT of 109°F (42.8 ºC). Graphical extrapolation of the DBT/WBT depression relationship to a DBT of 109°F (42.8 ºC) results in an estimated WBT depression of 30°F (16.7 ºC), which corresponds to a MCWB of 79°F (26.1 ºC) (109°F - 30°F = 79°F). Therefore, the estimated MCWB coincident with the overall extreme DBT of 109°F (42.8ºC) at Marengo is 79°F (26.1 ºC).19.3.2.3.9Restrictive Dispersion Conditions Major air pollution episodes are typically a result of persistent surface high pressure weather systems that cause light and variable surface winds and stagnant meteorological conditions for four or more consecutive days. Estimates of the stagnation frequency are provided in (NOAA, Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-25Rev. 01999; Figures 1 and 2). Those estimates indicate that, on average, the SHINE site location experiences less than two stagnation cases per year and the average length of a case is less than five days.19.3.2.4Local MeteorologyThe purpose of this local climate analysis is to understand dispersion conditions in the vicinity of the SHINE site. That characterization is input to and provides a context for assessment of atmospheric impact of the facility on the environment. Local dispersion climatology includes consideration of airflow and atmospheric turbulence. The following subsections address local topography, the source of local meteorological data, wind roses, and atmospheric stability distribution.19.3.2.4.1TopographyThe SHINE site is located approximately at the center of Rock County, Wisconsin, about 13mi.(20.9 km) north of the Illinois/Wisconsin border, and 2.5 mi. (4.0 km) east of the Rock River. The SHINE site is located within till plains glacial deposits on the Central Lowland Province of the Interior Plains Division of the United States. Within a radial distance from the site of approximately 10 mi. (16.1 km), additional ground surface features include the following:a.There is terminal kettle-moraine topography in the central, north, and east sections, which represent effects of the last advance of the continental glacier, including uneven hills and ridges, varying drainage patterns, and gently rolling terrain (Rock County, 2012a).b.There is dissected upland with isolated bluffs in the west and southwest sections, part of the "driftless area" (Subsection 19.3.2.1.2) which was not overrun by ice during the last continental glaciation (Moran, J.M. and E.J. Hopkins, 2002; Rock County, 2012b).c.The Rock River watershed, the main waterway, bisects the county from north to south (Rock County, 2012a). The Rock River valley is typically less than 1 mi. (1.6 km) wide, with minor slopes at the edges of the river floodplain with heights of approximately 50 ft. (15.2 m).d.Most land is used for agriculture, including corn and soybean farming (Rand McNally, 1982 and 2005).e.The main urban centers of Janesville and Beloit are located along the Rock River.f.The finished site grade elevation is approximately 827 ft. (252 m) NAVD 88. The SHINE site and adjacent ground within a radius of approximately 1 mi. (1.6 km) is flat farmland. Within a 10 mi. (16.1 km) radius from the SHINE site, topographic elevations range from approximately 755 ft. (230 m) NAVD 88 along the Rock River, to approximately 1033 ft. (315 m) NAVD 88 at the highest bluffs (USGS, 1980). Therefore, the topography within a 10 mi. (16.1 km) radius ranges from approximately 72 ft. (21.9 m) below the SHINE site elevation, to 206 ft. (62.8 m) above the SHINE site elevation. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-26Rev. 019.3.2.4.2Local Data SourcesSurface meteorological data were available from the SWRA in Janesville, Wisconsin (NOAA station identifier KJVL). That airport is located approximately 0.25 mi. (0.40 km) west of the SHINE site. The station elevation is 808 ft. (246.3 m) NAVD 88 (Table 19.3.2-5). The SWRA meteorological monitoring station is an automated weather observation station (AWOS) with precipitation sensors installed (AWOS-IIIP). The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) describes the specifications of an AWOS system in an Advisory Circular (FAA, 2011). Specifications from this Advisory Circular are listed in Table19.3.2-18. The AWOS anemometer height at SWRA for the period of interest in this study (2005-2010) is 26 ft. (7.9 m) above ground level (NCDC,2012a).The FAA Advisory Circular (FAA, 2011) describes the FAA standard for procurement, construction, installation, activation, and maintenance of non-Federal AWOS systems. That standard is provided in an FAA Order (FAA, 1992), which requires inspections that meet specified technical standards and tolerances. On-site instrument calibration is required annually unless more frequent calibration is specified by the FAA region. Calibrations are required to be done by a qualified technician with FAA verification authority and witnessed by a qualified FAA non-Federal inspector. Facilities Maintenance Log and Technical Performance Record forms are maintained. In addition, NCDC subjects surface meteorological data collected at AWOS stations such as SWRA to documented quality assurance and analysis procedures (Del Greco et al., 2006). Raw meteorological data from SWRA are obta ined from NCDC (NCDC, 2011l). Hourly dry bulb temperature, humidity, wind speed, and wind direction data are extracted from the raw data. Table19.3.2-19 shows the annual data recovery rates for dry bulb temperature, humidity, wind speed, and wind direction. The table shows that the annual data recovery rate for each variable exceeded 90 percent for 2005, 2006, 2008-2010, and that the recovery rate was approximately 87 percent for each variable in 2007. Data from 2005 through 2010 are chosen for analysis in order to produce a data set with the most recent contiguous 5 years of data, and with 5 years of data having recovery rates better than 90 percent. The period of record requirements comply with the Final Interim Staff Guidance Augmenting NUREG-1537, Part 1, Section 19, to provide meteorological data collected as near as possible to the SHINE site for the most recent 5-year period. Table19.3.2-20 presents a summary of meteorological parameter statistics from the SWRA during the 2005-2010 period.Published, tabular values of average daily maximum and minimum dry bulb temperatures are not available from SWRA. However, these values are available for Madison, Wisconsin and Rockford, Illinois from Table 19.3.2-2 and Table 19.3.2-3, respectively. These values are expected to be sufficiently representative of the local climate. Published tabular values of annual fog frequencies are also not available for SWRA. However, these values are available for Madison, Wisconsin and Rockford, Illinois from Table 19.3.2-2 and Table 19.3.2-3, respectively. Heavy fog (defined as fog occurring with visibilities less than or equal to 0.25 miles (0.40 km) occur an average of 21.5 days per year at Madison, Wisconsin and 20.1 days per year at Rockford, Illinois. These values are expected to be sufficiently representative of the local climate. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-27Rev. 019.3.2.4.3Plans to Access Local Meteorological Data dur ing License Period Meteorological measurements will be available for use in responding to accidental radiological releases or other emergencies, and other routine purposes that require access to meteorological information during the licensing period. That meteorological information will be obtained for local government weather monitoring stations that observe wind and other surface meteorological parameters on an hourly basis.When needed during an emergency, real-time hourly surface meteorological measurements of wind direction, wind speed, air temperature, and weather type will be accessed by SHINE through government data sources. Access will be attempted during the emergency in the following sequence, until reliable data are obtained, as follows:a.Internet access to hourly surface weather observations recorded at the SWRA AWOS, at URL: http://www.weather.gov/data/obhistory/KJVL.htmlb.Telephone access to an automated synthesized voice recording of the most recent hourly surface observations recorded at the SWRA AWOS, at number: (608) 758-1723.c.If weather observations are not available from the SWRA AWOS, then weather information from another station with hourly meteorological data in the Site Climate Region will be used. The following stations will be used, in the order listed below. The stations are listed in order of increasing distance from Ja nesville, Wisconsin:1. Rockford, Illinois: http://www.weather.gov/data/obhistory/KRFD.html2. Monroe, Wisconsin: http://www.weather.gov/data/obhistory/KEFT.html3. Burlington, Wisconsin: http://www.weather.gov/data/obhistory/KBUU.html4. Madison, Wisconsin: http://www.weather.gov/data/obhistory/KMSN.htmlDuring normal operations, hourly data will be obtained by internet access to hourly surface weather observations recorded at the SWRA AWOS, at URL: http://www.weather.gov/data/obhistory/KJVL.html .19.3.2.4.4Comparison of Local and Regional Wind Roses Subsection 19.3.2.4.2 describes the meteorological monitoring system at the SWRA in Janesville, Wisconsin. As described in that subsection, wind speed and direction measurements are collected at the 26 ft. (7.9 m) level. Wind speed and direction from the 26 ft. (7.9 m) level are used to determine JFDs that are input to relative atmospheric concentration (/Q) and radiological dose assessments in this report (see Subsection 19.4.8.2).Figures 19.3.2-19 through 19.3.2-35 show the annual, monthly and seasonal wind roses from SWRA. The period of record on which those plots are based is the six years from January 1, 2005 through December 31, 2010 (NCDC, 2011). That period of record is also used for JFD input to /Q and radiological dose assessments in this report.An annual wind rose (Figure 19.3.2-19) shows dominant wind frequencies from the west (approximately 8 percent of the period) and from the south (approximately 7.5 percent of the period). The remaining directions include a group (N, E, SSW, SW, WNW, and NW) with frequencies of occurrence that range from approximately 5 to 7 percent of the period, and Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-28Rev. 0another group (NNE, NE, ENE, ESE, SE, SSE, WSW, and NNW) with frequencies of occurrence that range from approximately 3.5 to 5 percent of the period. The multi-modal nature of the annual wind rose reflects airflows associated with seasonal shifts of mean North American surface pressure belts and centers, seasonal changes in paths and frequencies of synoptic-scale surface cyclones and anticyclones that move across the area, and seasonal changes in frequency of development of synoptic surface fronts (Trewartha, G.T., 1954; Trewartha, G.T.,1961; Rand McNally, 2005; and EDS, 1968).The winter season wind rose (Figure 19.3.2-32) shows most frequent wind directions during that season from the west, northwest and north. This is a reflection of polar and arctic air masses that flow from Canada that are dominant during the winter. The large Icelandic low pressure center that intensifies during Northern Hemisphere winter causes a pressure gradient pattern that is oriented in a northwest-to-southeast direction over Canada and the U.S. that guides surface high pressure systems that contain the polar and arctic air masses in a southeast direction from Canada to the Midwest and eastern U.S. Upper-air meridional flow (relatively parallel to lines of longitude) is more prevalent than zonal flow (relatively parallel to lines of latitude), and surface cyclonic storms more frequently occupy the Alberta storm track that extends from southwest Canada into the central U.S. The spring season wind rose (Figure 19.3.2-33) shows dominant wind direction frequencies from the east, south, and west. During spring, the Icelandic low weakens, the southwest U.S. surface thermal low intensifies, and the north Atlantic Azores high pressure cell intensifies. Because of the northward shift of the subtropical high pressure belt (including the Azores high), storm systems and Canadian air masses are not always pushed towards the southeast, but rather stay farther north during their movement over the Midwest and eastern U.S. Intensification of the southwest U.S. thermal low increases winds from the south over the central U.S. Warm and stationary fronts form more frequently over the Midwest U.S. at the boundaries between northern and southern air masses. Surface pressure troughs at those fronts draw moist modified maritime tropical air from the south that results in surface convergence, lifting, and formation of precipitation at the fronts. The combined results of these changes are increased frequencies of west, south, and east winds as air masses converge on the area from more locations in the southwest, south, and southeast U.S. than during winter. During the summer season, the subtropical high pressure belt reaches its maximum intensity. It reinforces development of individual surface anticyclones, which follow in a general easterly direction behind weak cold fronts as they move eastward. Surface lows and precipitation are largely suppressed. The summer season wind rose (Figure 19.3.2-34) shows dominant wind direction frequencies from the south and southwest, reflecting flow out of the relatively slow moving surface high pressure centers.The autumn wind rose (Figure 19.3.2-35) reverts back to some cool season circulation patterns, which are also characteristic of the spring season. It shows dominant wind direction frequencies from the south and west, but east winds occur less frequently than during the spring season. East winds are less frequent because the subtropical surface pressure ridge extends westward from the north Atlantic to the central U.S. during autumn, whereas it is strongest off the Atlantic coastline during spring. Airflow, therefore, moves north out of surface anticyclones that are reinforced by the mean autumn subtropical ridge position across the east central U.S., and airflow relatively infrequently moves towards the west off of the North Atlantic. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-29Rev. 0Wind roses were generated for regional climate stations from TD-3505 hourly surface dataset files (NCDC, 2011m). The climate stations (Baraboo, Wisconsin; Madison, Wisconsin; Fond du Lac, Wisconsin; Freeport, Illinois; Rockford, Illinois; and Du Page County Airport, Illinois) were identified in Subsection 19.3.2.1.5. Rockford and Madison represent the geographical center of the site climate region. Baraboo, Fond du Lac, Freeport and Du Page County Airport represent the northwest, northeast, southwest and southeast corners of the climate region, respectively.Figure 19.3.2-36 shows a comparison of annual wind roses for the SWRA in Janesville and the six regional stations. The wind roses are arranged in the figure to match the approximate physical locations of the stations relative to Janesville, Wisconsin. The annual wind rose from Fond du Lac shows a bimodal southwest and northeast wind direction distribution. The northeast winds appear to be local effects of nearby Lake Winnebago, which is located approximately three miles northeast of the Fond du Lac airport. However, the annual wind roses at the other five regional stations (Baraboo, Madison, Freeport, Rockford, and Du Page County Airport) show overall multi-modal patterns similar to the annual wind rose from Janesville. This consistency verifies the representativeness of wind measurements from the SWRA in Janesville for purposes of dispersion modeling.19.3.2.4.5Atmospheric Stability Pasquill stability class is derived from hourly wind speed, ceiling height, and sky cover measurements from the AWOS at the SWRA in Janesville, Wisconsin. The Pasquill stability class is derived using computer code from USEPA, 1999 which implements the method described by (Turner, D.B,1964). Table19.3.2-21 shows the joint data recovery of wind speed, wind direction, and the computed Pasquill stability class. Joint data recovery exceeds 90 percent for 2005, 2006, and 2008-2010, and is 86 percent for 2007.Table19.3.2-22 presents the annual Pasquill class frequency distributions for the combined local data period 2005-2010, and each individual year in the combined period. This table shows that the Pasquill class "D" stability class is the most frequently occurring stability class for each year and for the combined period. The Pasquill "A" class is the least frequently occurring class. Both of these results are consistent with generally observed stability class climatologies. A similar distribution is also presented, for example, in Stern et al., 1984.The results in Table19.3.2-22 are presented in the form of JFDs of wind direction and wind speed stratified by Pasquill stability, in Table19.3.2-23 through Table19.3.2-29. These JFDs are used for /Q and radiological dose calculations presented in Subsection 19.4.8.2.19.3.2.5Programs or Policies to Reduce Greenhouse Gas EmissionsSHINE is committed to minimizing its carbon footprint and promoting initiatives to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG). SHINE will develop a comprehensive program to avoid and control GHG emissions associated with the facility. It is expected that this program will include elements of the following, as SHINE determines to be appropriate for the facility:*Participating in USEPA initiatives such as the Climate Leaders Program, ENERGY STAR Commercial Buildings Program, Green Power Partnership, and SmartWay Transport
Partnership.*Developing a GHG emission inventory, including appropriate procedures for estimating or monitoring GHG emissions. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-30Rev. 0*Investigating and implementing methods for avoiding or controlling the GHG emissions identified in the inventory.*Implementing energy efficiency and conservation programs at the SHINE facility.*Working with suppliers, transporters, and customers to improve their energy efficiency.*Installing solar panels and/or purchasing electricity generated from renewable energy sources.*Encouraging car pooling or other measures to minimize GHG emissions due to vehicle traffic during construction and operation of the SHINE facility.*Conducting periodic audits of GHG control procedures and implementing corrective actions when necessary.19.3.2.6Noise19.3.2.6.1Baseline Noise Conditions A commonly used measure of noise is A-weighted decibels (dBA). The SHINE site is currently an agricultural field. Consequently, the SHINE site itself has no noise-generating facilities. However, intermittent seasonal noise emissions at the site caused by use of farming equipment may result in noise emissions ranging from 85 to 100 dBA (Bean, T., 2008). At night, or at certain times during the day when traffic on US 51 is particularly light, noise levels at the SHINE site are more typical of a quiet urban setting where the noise level can be expected to range from 40 to 50 dBA (Table 19.3.2-30). The SHINE site was analyzed for current noise conditions resulting from off-site sources. Continuous daytime baseline level noise at the SHINE site is predominately the result of vehicle noise generation associated with traffic along US 51. The existing daytime traffic volume on US 51 is modeled to result in a 67 dBA noise level approximately 81 ft. (25 m) east of the edge of the northbound driving lane, which attenuates to 57 dBA at 260 ft. (79 m) east of the edge of the northbound driving lane. The nearest noise receptors to the SHINE site are Airport Park (0.30 mi. [0.48 km] to the northwest); a residence immediately west of Airport Park (0.33 mi. [0.53 km] to the northwest); and a church, Iglesia Hispania Pentecostes (0.35 mi. [0.56 km] to the south). There are no other known traffic-related noise receptors within an audible range of the SHINE site.On an intermittent basis, the loudest noise-generating facility within an audible range of the SHINE site is SWRA. The baseline noise condition at the SHINE site is characterized by additional intermittent noise generated by take-offs and landings of aircraft at the airport. There is one known past noise study, conducted by SWRA that analyzed noise generated within an audible range of the SHINE site. At the SHINE site, take-off and landing activity associated with Runway 4/22 is indicated to have a day night average sound level (Ldn) value of 60 at the northwest edge of the site with attenuation to an Ldn value of 55 near the middle of the site (Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, 2004).The Union Pacific Railroad is approximately 1.6 mi. (2.6 km) northeast of the SHINE site. Given the distance from the site, intermittent noise levels generated by trains are expected to attenuate to baseline levels at the site. There are no other industries or businesses within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the site that are characterized by notable noise emissions. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-31Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-1 Selected Characteristics of Wisconsin Physiographic Provinces (a)a) Characteristics are based on Moran, J.M. and E.J. Hopkins, 2002 and Rand McNally, 2005.Lake Superior LowlandNorthern HighlandCentral PlainEastern Ridges and LowlandsWestern UplandsVegetationBroadleaf deciduous and needleleaf evergreen treesAgriculture is limited by lakes, swamps, and short growing season.Marginally suited for agriculture. Irrigation required.
Tamarack bogs occur above impervious lake
clays.Broadleaf deciduous and needleleaf evergreen treesBroadleaf deciduous treesTopographyGently sloping plains, with steep escarpments at the southern shore of Lake Superior.The southernmost portion of the
Canadian Shield of crystalline bedrock. Weathering and erosion have reduced terrain to nearly a plain. Scattered hills of resistant bedrock remain. Lake and swamp
terrain.Relatively flat or
gently rolling topography with occasional sandstone mesas, buttes, pinnacles.Numerous
glacial landforms, lowest elevations of Wisconsin. Lake Winnebago is remnant of a larger glacial lake. Niagara cuesta is a rock ridge in the northeast in Door and Waukesha
Counties.Escaped recent glaciation, allowing streams and rivers to form steep valleys. Portions of the uplands are referred to as the "driftless area" due to the lack of glacial debris, or
"drift" ElevationsSeveral hundred feet above elevation of the
Great Lakes1,400 to 1,650 ft.
NAVD 88750 to 850 ft.
NAVD 88Topographic relief of 100 to 200 feet above the elevation of
Lake Michigan (mean lake elevation is approximately 600 ft. NAVD 88).Approximately 1,000 to 1,200 ft. NAVD 88,
including some topographic
relief approaching 500 feet. Rock bluffs, mounds (highest approximately 1,716 ft. NAVD 88). Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-32Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-2 Madison, Wisconsin Climatic Means and Extremes(Sheet 1 of 2)Table extracted from NCDC, 2011a. "POR" refers to the period of record (years). Refer to that reference for explanatory notes . Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-33Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-2 Madison, Wisconsin Climatic Means and Extremes(Sheet 2 of 2) Table extracted from NCDC, 2011a. "POR" refers to the period of record (years). Refer to that reference for explanatory notes . Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-34Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-3 Rockford, Illinois Climatic Means and Extremes (Sheet 1 of 2) Table extracted from NCDC, 2011c. "POR" refers to the period of record (years). Refer to that reference for explanatory notes . Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-35Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-3 Rockford, Illinois Climatic Means and Extremes(Sheet 2 of 2)Table extracted from NCDC, 2011c. "POR" refers to the period of record (years). Refer to that reference for explanatory notes . Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-36Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-4 Madison, Wisconsin and Rockford, Illinois Additional Climatic Means and Extremes(Sheet 1 of 2) (a)a)Based on NCDC, 1996b. Period of record for Rockford is 1951-1995 and 1948-1995 for Madison.ParameterPeriodMadison, Wisconsin Rockford, IllinoisMean number of days with rain or drizzle(NCDC, 1996b)January56February55 March1011
April1515May1616June1514July1514August1413 September1313 October1313 November1011 December78 Annual138139Mean number of days with freezing rain or drizzle(NCDC, 1996b)January11February< 0.5< 0.5 March< 0.5< 0.5 April< 0.5< 0.5
May00June00July00August00 September00 October< 0.50 November< 0.5< 0.5 December11 Annual22 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-37Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-4 Madison, Wisconsin and Rockford, Illinois Additional Climatic Means and Extremes(Sheet 2 of 2)ParameterPeriodMadison, Wisconsin Rockford, IllinoisMean number of days with snow(NCDC, 1996b)January1817February1413 March1311 April43 May< 0.5< 0.5 June00 July00 August00 September< 0.50 October11 November98 December1615 Annual7568Mean number of days with hail or sleet(NCDC, 1996b)January0< 0.5February0< 0.5 March< 0.5< 0.5 April< 0.5< 0.5 May< 0.5< 0.5 June< 0.5< 0.5 July< 0.5< 0.5 August< 0.5< 0.5 September< 0.5< 0.5 October< 0.5< 0.5 November< 0.5< 0.5 December< 0.50 Annual22 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-38Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-5 List of NOAA ASOS Stations Located within the Site Climate Region(a,b,c)a) The site climate region and station locations are defined via the map in Figure 19.3.2-16.b) Extracted from NCDC, 2012b.c) MSL elevations are functionally equivalent to the NAVD 88 elevations in this table.NameUSAFIDNo.WBANIDNo.St.County NorthLatitude(deg min sec)West Longitude (deg min sec)GroundElev.(ft. MSL)ApproximateAvailable DS 3505 Digital Database Period of Record (years)Baraboo72650354833WISauk43 31 1989 46 159781997-2011 (15)Burlington7220594866WIRacine42 41 2388 18 147791948-2011 (64)De Kalb TaylorMunicipal Airport72207504871WIDe Kalb41 55 5588 42 289151973-2011 (39)Juneau Dodge County72650904898WIDodge43 25 3388 42 109361997-2011 (15)Du Page County72530594892ILDu Page41 54 5088 14 567581973-2011 (39)Fond du Lac CountyAirport72650604840WIFond du Lac43 46 1288 29 98071997-2011 (14)Freeport Albertus Airport72208204876ILStephen-son42 14 4589 34 558592004-2011 (8) Janesville SouthernWisconsinRegional72641594854WIRock42 37 189 1 588081973-2011 (39)Madison Dane County TruaxField72641014837WIDane43 8 2789 20 418661948-2011 (64) Middleton
Municipal Morey Field720656n/aWIDane43 7 189 31 589282009-2011 (3)Monroe Municipal72641404873WIGreen42 36 5489 35 2710852001-2011 (10)Rochelle Municipal
AirportKoritzField72218204890IL Ogle41 53 3489 4 407812004-2011 (8)Chicago Rockford IntlAirport72543094822 ILWinne-bago42 11 3489 5 347431973-2011 (39)WatertownM unicipalAirport72646454834WIJefferson43 10 188 43 18331995-2011 (17) Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-39Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-6 List of NOAA COOP Stations in the Site Climate Region for which Clim-20 Summaries are Available(a,b)a)The site climate region and station locations are defined via the map in Figure 19.3.2-17.b)MSL elevations are functionally equivalent to the NAVD 88 elevations in this table.NameSt.County NorthLatitude (deg min)West Longitude (deg min)GroundElev.(ft. MSL) Approx. Period of Record(years)(temp precip)Arboretum Univ of WIWIDane43 289 2686541 41Arlington Univ FarmWIColumbia43 1889 20108049 49BarabooWISauk43 2889 4482358 73Beaver DamWIDodge43 2788 5184062 74
BeloitWIRock42 3089 2780121 162BrodheadWIGreen42 3789 23790115 115 Charmany FarmWIDane43 489 2991049 49DaltonWIGreen Lake43 3989 12860n/aDe KalbILDe Kalb41 5688 47873119 130 Fond du LacWIFond du Lac43 4888 27760126 126Ft AtkinsonWIJefferson42 5488 5280070 70 Hartford 2 WWIWashington43 2088 2598067 73 HoriconWIDodge43 2688 38880109 109 Lake GenevaWIWalworth42 3688 26880n/a Lake MillsWIJefferson43 588 54817119 121
Madison Dane Co APWIDane43 889 2186679 79MarengoILMcHenry42 1888 39815156 156OconomowocWIWaukesha43 688 3085673 73 PortageWIColumbia43 3289 26775119 123 Prairie du SacWISauk43 1989 44780n/a Rockford APILWinnebago42 1289 673061 61StoughtonWIDane42 3789 45840n/a WatertownWIJefferson43 1088 44825121 121 Wisconsin DellsWIColumbia43 3789 4683589 89 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-40Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-7 Nearest Federal Class I Areas to the SHINE Site (a)a) Extracted from NPS, 2011.Class I AreaDistance from SHINE Site (km)Distance from SHINE Site (mi.)Direction from SHINE SiteRainbow Lake Wilderness Area, WI455283NorthwestSeney Wilderness Area, MI475295North-northeastIsle Royale National Park , MI610379North Mammoth Cave National Park, KY630391South-southeastBoundary Waters Canoe Area, MN640398North-northwestMingo Wilderness Area, MO645401SouthVoyageurs National Park MN730454North Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-41Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-8 Regional Tornadoes and Waterspouts(a,b,c)a)Period of record is May, 1950 through July, 2011.b)Based on NCDC, 2011g.c)Additionally, an F5 tornado occurred on 8 June 1984 in Iowa County, Wisconsin, at the town of Barneveld, which is located approximately 50 mi. (80 km) west-northwest of the SHINE site.StateCountyArea (mi. 2)Number of Tornadoes Number of Waterspout sILBoone28280ILCarroll 466140ILCook1635510ILDe Kalb 635110ILDu Page 337240ILKane524190ILLake1368161ILLee729220ILMcHenry611 150ILOgle763190ILStephenson565 130ILWhiteside697 190WIAdams689170WIColumbia796 340WIDane1238560WIDodge907580WIFond du Lac766 430WIGreen585180WIGreen Lake380 300WIJefferson583 330WIJuneau804230WIKenosha 75491WIMarquette456 70WIRacine792201WISauk848230WIWalworth577 230WIWashington436 170WIWaukesha580 280 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-42Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-9 Details of Strongest Tornadoes in Rock County, Wisconsin(a,b,c)a) The SHINE site is located in Rock County, Wisconsin.b) Period of record is May, 1950 through July, 2011.c) Based on NCDC, 1960; NCDC, 1961; NCDC, 1970; NCDC, 1971; NCDC, 1988; NCDC, 1991; NCDC,1998, and NCDC, 2011g.Tornado IntensityDate Path Length (mi.) Path Width (yd.)Property Damage($)Additional DescriptionF215 Nov 19603.00672,500Occurred 1.5 mi. (2.4 km) south of Union, Wisconsin. Damage occurred to farm buildings, an abandoned restaurant, and a school roof.F222 Sep 19613.6022025,000Occurred 1 mi. (1.6 km) south of Whitewater, Wisconsin. Damage occurred to at least 15 farms. There was 1 injury.F29 Oct 197011.1050250,000The tornado moved NNW from the banks of the Rock River just north of Riverside Park (NW of Janesville) and 5 mi. (8.0 km) west of Edgerton toward Stoughton. An outbuilding was damaged. There was 1 injury.F21 Nov 19713.00100250,000A small tornado moved northeast in a mostly residential area along a line from 1.5 mi. (2.4 km) NNW to about 4 mi NNE of downtown Beloit. Several homes and
garages were severely damaged. There was 1 injury.F28 May 198827.00173250,000Tornado affected Rock, Dane, and Jefferson counties. Many farm buildings and two homes were damaged.F227 Mar 19917.004402.5 millionTornado affected Green, Rock, Dane, and Jefferson counties. There were 5 injuries and 1 fatality.F225 Jun 19982.50100845,000Tornado moved from 2.3 mi. (3.7 km) WNW of Leyden to 1 mi. (1.6 km) NNE of Leyden. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-43Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-10 Details of Strongest Tornadoes in Surrounding CountiesAdjacent to Rock County, Wisconsin(Sheet 1 of 2)(a,b,c,d,e,f)Tornado IntensityDateCounty Path Length (mi.)Path Width (yd.)Property Damage($)Additional DescriptionF421 Apr 1967Boone11.501200250,000Tornado moved near 50 mph (22.4 m/s) towards ENE to E, from 2 mi. (3.2 km) SE of Cherry Valley to two mi. north of Woodstock. Numerous reports of multiple funnel sightings were substantiated by damage. Almost complete destruction directly in path with major wind damage on either side. Many farm homes completely destroyed. Woods were stripped with large trees uprooted or snapped off. About 5 percent of the path was through an urban area, which was the SE corner of Belvidere, where a high school was hit. There were 450 injuries and 24 fatalities.F37 Jan 2008Boone7.001002.0 millionTornado traveled from about 1.2 mi. (1.9 km) N of Poplar Grove in Boone County, to about 3.2 mi (5.1 km) NE of Harvard in McHenry County. A large barn and farmhouse were destroyed, and other buildings severely damaged. Damage also occurred to power lines. Large trees were snapped, uprooted, and stripped of branches. There were 4 injuries.F32 Aug 1967Danen/an/a25,000Tornado moved SE on the N shore of Lake Mendota in the town of Westport, about 100 yards (0.1 km) inland. Three cottages were destroyed and several homes slightly damaged. There were 5 injuries and 2 fatalities. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-44Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-10 Details of Strongest Tornadoes in Surrounding CountiesAdjacent to Rock County, Wisconsin(Sheet 2 of 2)a) The SHINE site is located in Rock County, WI.b) Counties adjacent to Rock County include: Green (WI), Dane (WI), Jefferson (WI), Walworth (WI), Boone (IL), Winnebago (IL), and Stephenson (IL).c) Period of record is May, 1950 through July, 2011. d) "n/a" means information not available. e) Based on data in references NCDC, 1967a; NCDC, 1967b; NCDC, 1975; NCDC, 1980; NCDC, 1992; NCDC, 2005b; NCDC, 2008; and NCDC, 2011g.f) Additionally, an F5 tornado occurred on 8 June 1984 in Iowa County, Wisconsin, at the town of Barneveld, which is located approximately 50 mi. (80 km) west-northwest of the SHINE site.Tornado IntensityDateCounty Path Length (mi.)Path Width (yd.)Property Damage($)Additional DescriptionF34 Jun 1975Dane2.303325,000Tornado touched down three miles north of Sun Prairie and moved towards the east. Two farms had extensive damage and one home was destroyed.F317 Jun 1992Dane16.0040025.0 millionTornado occurred 2 mi. (3.2 km) north of Belleville. There were 30 injuries.F318 Aug 2005Dane17.0060034.3 millionStrong and destructive tornado started about 2.8 mi. (4.5 km) SE of Fitchburg and moved slowly ESE to the southern edge of Lake Kegonsa through residential neighborhoods including Dunn, Pleasant Springs, and Stoughton. There was extensive damage to homes, businesses, farm buildings, vehicles, power lines, and trees. There were 23 injuries and 1
fatality.F35 Jun 1980Jefferson4.00n/a25,000Tornado formed near Rock River at 0.25 mi. (0.4 km) E of Watertown, lifted and moved SE where it touched down a second time 1 mi. (1.6 km) SE of
Pipersville. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-45Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-11 Precipitation Extremes at Local and Regional NOAA COOP Meteorological Monitoring Stations within the Site Climate Region (a,b,c)a) The site climate region and station locations are defined in Figure 19.3.2-17.b) Based on 1971-2000 da ta in NCDC, 2001a-x.c) Madison and Rockford statistics were updated through the year 2010 from NCDC, 2011a and NCDC,2011c.Station NameStateCountyMaximum Recorded24-HourRainfall(in.)Maximum RecordedMonthlyRainfall(in.)Maximum Recorded24-HourSnowfall(in.)Maximum Recorded MonthlySnowfall(in.)Arboretum Univ of
WIWIDane6.0012.0712.025.5Arlington Univ FarmWIColumbia5.1012.9214.028.0BarabooWISauk7.7814.7912.035.2Beaver DamWIDodge4.4115.0513.030.0 BeloitWIRock5.7714.3911.022.0BrodheadWIGreen6.6213.1110.031.1Charmany FarmWIDane5.8511.4713.020.5DaltonWIGreen Lake4.6913.7721.025.5DeKalbILDe Kalb8.0914.2315.634.5Fond du LacWIFond du Lac6.8312.7014.025.1
Ft AtkinsonWIJefferson4.479.0514.039.0Hartford 2 WWIWashington5.2011.2312.033.0 HoriconWIDodge5.9414.7216.040.0Lake GenevaWIWalworth3.8811.3013.238.5 Lake MillsWIJefferson4.9311.3111.031.0Madison Dane Co APWIDane5.2815.1817.340.4MarengoILMcHenry5.1511.7012.021.0OconomowocWIWaukesha5.3811.3911.528.7PortageWIColumbia6.2916.0912.534.0Prairie du SacWISauk5.7311.4111.623.5Rockford APILWinnebago6.4213.9811.430.2StoughtonWIDane5.058.8612.035.5WatertownWIJefferson6.6510.4713.050.4Wisconsin DellsWIColumbia7.6714.1314.028.4 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-46Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-12 Mean Seasonal and Annual Hail or Sleet Frequencies at Rockford, Illinois and Madison, Wisconsin (a)a) Statistics from NCDC, 2011a and NCDC, 2011c.StationWinterSpringSummerAutumnAnnualRockford<0.3<0.5<0.5<0.5<0.5Madison<0.2<0.5<0.5<0.5<0.7 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-47Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-13 Ice Storms that have Affected Rock County, Wisconsin (a)a) Based on 1995 - 2011 data in NCDC, 2011g.Date of StormDescription of Ice Storm26 Feb 1995Freezing rain and freezing drizzle. Coating of ice up to one-quarter inch.26 Nov 1995Two to six hour period of sleet and/or freezing rain glazed road surfaces.13 Dec 1995Ice accumulations of one-quarter to one-half inch on top of one to five inches of snow. A glazing of less than one-quarter inch of freezing rain or freezing drizzle.4 Feb 1997Several hours of freezing rain, accumulated to one quarter inch. Sheets of ice on roads and sidewalks, especially rural.3 Feb 2003Periodic light freezing drizzle of light freezing rain glazed roads and sidewalks.7 Apr 2003Freezing drizzle left crusty layers. 16 Jan 2004Freezing rain caused road surfaces to become very slippery due to initial ice glazing of 1/16 to 1/8 inch.7 Mar 2004Freezing drizzle/rain generated a thin layer of ice on road surfaces. 18 Dec 2004Light freezing drizzle coated roads and bridges during morning hours.1 Jan 2005Pockets of freezing rain or drizzle resulted in a light glaze of ice on many road surfaces and sidewalks.17 Feb 2008Ice storm affected a 25 to 30 mile wide area stretching from Janesville to Ft. Atkinson to Delafield to Wes Bend to Port Washington, with about 11 hours of freezing rain. Ice accumulations ranged from one quarter to one half inch. Roads were icy. 8 Dec 2008Freezing rain produced ice accumulations of 1/10 to 2/10 inch near the Illinois border.28 Mar 2009Mixture of sleet, rain, freezing rain and snow caused very hazardous driving conditions. Ice accumulations were 0.10 inch.23 Dec 2009Freezing rain during afternoon hours resulted in a low-end ice storm with ice accumulations of one quarter to one half inch. Trees and power lines were coated, causing them to break. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-48Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-14 Mean Seasonal Thunderstorm Frequencies at Rockford, Illinois and Madison, Wisconsin (a)a) Statistics from NCDC, 2011a and NCDC, 2011c. StationWinter(days)Spring(days)Summer(days)Autumn(days)Rockford0.34.07.42.7Madison0.23.67.12.3 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-49Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-15 Design Wet and Dry Bulb Temperatures (a)a) 0.4%, 1% and 2% temperatures from ASHRAE, 2009. 5% temperatures from NCDC, 1996bStatisticBounding Value (°F)Maximum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 0.4 percent91.5 (Rockford)Mean coincident WBT (MCWB) at the 0.4 percent DBT75.0 (Rockford) Maximum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 2.0 percent85.8 (Rockford)Mean coincident WBT (MCWB) at the 2.0 percent DBT72.0 (Rockford)Minimum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 0.4 percent-9.1 (Madison)Minimum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 1.0 percent-2.9 (Madison)Maximum WBT with annual exceedance probability of 0.4 percent78.3 (Du Page County Airport)Maximum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 5 percent81 (Rockford)Minimum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 5 percent9 (Madison) Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-50Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-16 Estimated 100-Year Return Maximum and Minimum DBT, MCWB coincident with the 100-Year Return Maximum DBT, Historic Maximum WBT and Estimated 100-Year Annual Maximum Return WBT StationEstimated 100-yr maximum DBT (°F)MCWB coincident with 100-yr maximum DBT (°F)HistoricmaximumWBT (°F)Estimated 100-yrmaximumWBT (°F)Estimated 100-yr minimumDBT (°F)Rockford104.88083.685.9-35.1Madison104.37585.086.0-33.4Bounding value104.88085.086.0-35.1 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-51Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-17 Dry Bulb Temperature Extremes at Local and Regional NOAA COOP Meteorological Monitoring Stations within the Site Climate Region(a,b,c,d)a) The site climate region and station locations are defined in Figure 19.3.2-17.b) Based on 1971-2000 data in NCDC, 2001a-x. c) Rockford and Madison statistics were updated through the year 2010 from NCDC. 2011a and NCDC, 2011c.d) The highest and lowest dry bulb temperatures in the region are in bold font. StationNameStateCounty Maximum RecordedDry BulbTemperature (°F)MinimumRecordedDry Bulb Temperature (°F)Arboretum Univ. of WIWIDane108-38Arlington Univ. FarmWIColumbia102-36 BarabooWISauk102-45Beaver DamWIDodge100-36BeloitWIRock102-26BrodheadWIGreen102-36Charmany FarmWIDane102-34DaltonWIGreen Lake103-39 De KalbILDe Kalb103-27Fond du LacWIFond du Lac103-41Ft AtkinsonWIJefferson102-39Hartford 2 WWIWashington105-35 HoriconWIDodge101-36Lake GenevaWIWalworth106-27 Lake MillsWIJefferson104-33Madison Dane Co APWIDane104-37MarengoILMcHenry109-29 OconomowocWIWaukesha101-33 PortageWIColumbia103-35 Prairie du SacWISauk103-42Rockford APILWinnebago104-27StoughtonWIDane103-35WatertownWIJefferson103-33Wisconsin DellsWIColumbia102-43 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-52Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-18 FAA Specifications for Automated Weather Observing Stations(a)a) From FAA, 2011ParameterRangeAccuracyResolutionOtherDry bulb temperature-30° - +130°F (-35° - +55°C) 1°F RMSE over entire range with maximum error of 2°F 1° Ftime constant 2 minRelative humidity5 - 100 percent 5 percent 1 percenttime constant < 2 minWind speed2 - 85 knotsa) +/- 2 knots up to 40 knotsb) RMSE +/- 5 percent above 40 knots1 knota) distance constant < 10 mb) 2 knot threshold Wind direction1°- 360° azimuth+/- 5 percent RMSE1°a) time constant < 2 secondsb) 2 knot thresholdPressure17.58 - 31.53 in. Hga) +/- 0.02 in. Hg RMSE; b) maximum error 0.02 in. Hg 0.001 in. Hg drift 0.02 in. Hg for period not less than 6 monthsVisibility< 1/4 - 10 mi.a) 1/4 1/4 mi.: +/- 1/4 mi. b) 1-1/2 3/4 mi.: + 1/4 , -1/2 mi. c) 2 1/2 mi.: +/- 1/2 mi. d) 3 1/2 mi.: +1/2, -1 mi.
e) 4 mi.: +/- 1 mi.< 1/4, 1/4, 1/2, 3/4, 1, 1-1/4, 1-1/2, 2, 2-1/2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 10 and > 10
mi.time constant 3 minPrecipitation0.01 - 5 in/hr0.002 in/hr RMSE or 4 percent, which ever is greater0.01 in.Cloud height 0 to 12,500 ft 100 ft. or 5 percent, which ever is greatera) 0 - 5,500 ft.: 50 ft. b) 5,501 -10,000 ft.: 250 ft. c) > 10,000 ft.: 500 ft.a) sampling rate at least once every 30 seconds b) at least three cloud layers when visibility 1/4 mi.Time0000 - 2359 UTCwithin 15 seconds each month1 second Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-53Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-19 Annual Data Recovery Rates (in Percent) of Dry Bulb Temperatures, Relative Humidity, Wind Speed, and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport for 2005-2010 (a)a) From NCDC, 2011lYearDry Bulb Temperature Relative HumidityWind SpeedWind Direction200595.995.894.094.0200693.092.991.191.1200787.787.687.387.3 200892.692.691.291.2200993.993.692.792.6201093.893.792.492.4 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-54Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-20 Historical Dry Bulb Temperatures, Relative Humidity, and Wind Speed from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport for 2005-2010 (a)a) From NCDC, 2011lDry Bulb Temperature (°F) Relative Humidity(percent)Wind Speed (mph)MonthMaximum Minimum AverageAverageMaximum AverageJanuary61-2022.679.2359.2February59-1724.276.0498.7 March77736.872.7338.9April841949.763.24010.4May933059.265.5318.8 June934369.071.3487.0July974671.974.7316.1August934571.973.3385.8 September953464.072.8306.5October902351.572.4388.0November771240.173.1339.2 December55-824.082.4448.6Average811848.773.1388.1 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-55Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-21 Annual Joint Data Recovery Rates of Wind Speed, Wind Direction, and Computed Pasquill Stability Class from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (a)a) From NCDC, 2011l YearJoint Data Recovery(percent)200593.6200690.5200786.0 200890.6200991.7201091.7 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-56Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-22 Pasquill Stability Class Frequency Distributions from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (Percent) 2005-2010(a)a) From NCDC, 2011lFrequency of Occurrence (Percent)Pasquill Class2005200620072008200920102005-2010 A0.780.670.860.681.181.160.89 B5.003.433.613.645.245.394.40C11.8811.3110.1511.1810.6711.9811.21D52.9056.4556.6755.4454.0050.1954.24 E8.838.248.157.417.317.087.83F10.1010.2810.359.699.5910.4810.08G10.519.6210.2111.9612.0113.7211.35Total100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-57Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-23 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class A) (a)a)From NCDC, 2011l Speed (m/s)N NNENEENEEESESESSESSSWSWWSWWWNWNWNNW TotalCalm3230.00 < WS < 1.00 00000010000000001 1.00 < WS < 2.00 00112102000020009 2.00 < WS < 3.00 623957969553955492 3.00 < WS < 4.00 00000000000000000 4.00 < WS < 5.00 00000000000000000 5.00 < WS < 6.00 00000000000000000 6.00 < WS < 8.00 000000000000000008.00 < WS < 10.00 00000000000000000> 10.00 00000000000000000Totals6241078108955311554425 Speed (m/s)Calm0.680.00 < WS < 1.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 1.00 < WS < 2.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.02 2.00 < WS < 3.00 0.010.000.010.020.010.010.020.010.020.010.010.010.020.010.010.010.19 3.00 < WS < 4.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 4.00 < WS < 5.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 5.00 < WS < 6.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 6.00 < WS < 8.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.008.00 < WS < 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00> 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00Totals0.010.000.010.020.010.020.020.020.020.010.010.010.020.010.010.010.89 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-58Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-24 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class B) (a)a) From NCDC, 2011l Speed (m/s)N NNENEENEEESESESSESSSWSWWSWWWNWNWNNW TotalCalm6970.00 < WS < 1.00 00000000000000000 1.00 < WS < 2.00 51012811115481387125134136 2.00 < WS < 3.00 31252723292321222128402735332319427 3.00 < WS < 4.00 47393429383137474556614362613137698 4.00 < WS < 5.00 359106253132185191289138 5.00 < WS < 6.00 00000000000000000 6.00 < WS < 8.00 000000000000000008.00 < WS < 10.00 00000000000000000> 10.00 00000000000000000Totals8679827084676876871181178212811175692096 Speed (m/s)Calm1.460.00 < WS < 1.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 1.00 < WS < 2.00 0.010.020.030.020.020.020.010.010.020.030.020.010.030.010.030.010.29 2.00 < WS < 3.00 0.070.050.060.050.060.050.040.050.040.060.080.060.070.070.050.040.90 3.00 < WS < 4.00 0.100.080.070.060.080.070.080.100.090.120.130.090.130.130.070.081.46 4.00 < WS < 5.00 0.010.010.020.020.010.000.010.010.030.040.020.010.040.030.020.020.29 5.00 < WS < 6.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 6.00 < WS < 8.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.008.00 < WS < 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00> 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00Totals0.180.170.170.150.180.140.140.160.180.250.250.170.270.230.160.144.40 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-59Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-25 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class C) (a)a) From NCDC, 2011l Speed (m/s)N NNENEENEEESESESSESSSWSWWSWWWNWNWNNW TotalCalm11180.00 < WS < 1.00 00000000000000000 1.00 < WS < 2.00 152571567315151661814149167 2.00 < WS < 3.00 34242734251925283738573559535830583 3.00 < WS < 4.00 523939392439245665837272105946059922 4.00 < WS < 5.00 71724957544545811111361481141591501201011513 5.00 < WS < 6.00 422931273626174581105876561915356852 6.00 < WS < 8.00 05564565121221182381021428.00 < WS < 10.00 0001300043631110032> 10.00 000011022030501015Totals2141711561711621411242203273924103134414113162575344 Speed (m/s)Calm2.350.00 < WS < 1.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 1.00 < WS < 2.00 0.030.000.010.010.030.010.010.010.030.030.030.010.040.030.030.020.35 2.00 < WS < 3.00 0.070.050.060.070.050.040.050.060.080.080.120.070.120.110.120.061.22 3.00 < WS < 4.00 0.110.080.080.080.050.080.050.120.140.170.150.150.220.200.130.121.93 4.00 < WS < 5.00 0.150.150.100.120.110.090.090.170.230.290.310.240.330.310.250.213.17 5.00 < WS < 6.00 0.090.060.070.060.080.050.040.090.170.220.180.140.130.190.110.121.79 6.00 < WS < 8.00 0.000.010.010.010.010.010.010.010.030.030.040.040.050.020.020.000.308.00 < WS < 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.010.000.000.000.010.010.010.010.020.000.000.000.07> 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.010.000.010.000.000.000.03Totals0.450.360.330.360.340.300.260.460.690.820.860.660.930.860.660.5411.21 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-60Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-26 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class D) (a)a) From NCDC, 2011l Speed (m/s)N NNENEENEEESESESSESSSWSWWSWWWNWNWNNW TotalCalm13530.00 < WS < 1.00 000000000000000001.00 < WS < 2.00 393140364532251831272430473528405282.00 < WS < 3.00 24116816515820416415413718318518014025420121215028963.00 < WS < 4.00 32320520522427122020321334228223724033123926023640314.00 < WS < 5.00 32618918620027419016120238225018220331923526724138075.00 < WS < 6.00 37422924826329720519425646847632125348634438132651216.00 < WS < 8.00 25915120129134621817422761748838133460544847137955908.00 < WS < 10.00 632861901485931531391701121122391441661151730> 10.00 2768276825142172678196120745539800Totals16521007111412891653111395611272234194515181408240117201840152625856 Speed (m/s)Calm2.840.00 < WS < 1.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.001.00 < WS < 2.00 0.080.070.080.080.090.070.050.040.070.060.050.060.100.070.060.081.112.00 < WS < 3.00 0.510.350.350.330.430.340.320.290.380.390.380.290.530.420.440.316.073.00 < WS < 4.00 0.680.430.430.470.570.460.430.450.720.590.500.500.690.500.550.508.464.00 < WS < 5.00 0.680.400.390.420.570.400.340.420.800.520.380.430.670.490.560.517.995.00 < WS < 6.00 0.780.480.520.550.620.430.410.540.981.000.670.531.020.720.800.6810.746.00 < WS < 8.00 0.540.320.420.610.730.460.370.481.291.020.800.701.270.940.990.8011.738.00 < WS < 10.00 0.130.060.130.190.310.120.070.110.290.360.230.230.500.300.350.243.63> 10.00 0.060.010.020.060.140.050.030.040.150.140.170.200.250.160.120.081.68Totals3.472.112.342.703.472.332.012.364.694.083.182.955.043.613.863.2054.24 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-61Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-27 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class E) (a)From NCDC, 2011l Speed (m/s)N NNENEENEEESESESSESSSWSWWSWWWNWNWNNW TotalCalm00.00 < WS < 1.00 00000000000000000 1.00 < WS < 2.00 00000000000000000 2.00 < WS < 3.00 593548497782767091857544755053381007 3.00 < WS < 4.00 513554529084829416711568611368173361279 4.00 < WS < 5.00 422137326431185815012773541267676541039 5.00 < WS < 6.00 239111617166306544162662232719410 6.00 < WS < 8.00 000000000000000008.00 < WS < 10.00 00000000000000000> 10.00 00000000000000000Totals1751001501492482131822524733712321853992302291473735 Speed (m/s)Calm0.000.00 < WS < 1.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 1.00 < WS < 2.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 2.00 < WS < 3.00 0.120.070.100.100.160.170.160.150.190.180.160.090.160.100.110.082.11 3.00 < WS < 4.00 0.110.070.110.110.190.180.170.200.350.240.140.130.290.170.150.082.68 4.00 < WS < 5.00 0.090.040.080.070.130.070.040.120.310.270.150.110.260.160.160.112.18 5.00 < WS < 6.00 0.050.020.020.030.040.030.010.060.140.090.030.050.130.050.060.040.86 6.00 < WS < 8.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.008.00 < WS < 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00> 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00Totals0.370.210.310.310.520.450.380.530.990.780.490.390.840.480.480.317.83 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-62Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-28 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class F) (a)a) From NCDC, 2011l Speed (m/s)N NNENEENEEESESESSESSSWSWWSWWWNWNWNNW TotalCalm9750.00 < WS < 1.00 00000000000000000 1.00 < WS < 2.00 26142118413121192832182636152319388 2.00 < WS < 3.00 11774901111581531481641961761641312651922041012444 3.00 < WS < 4.00 3726533251495082100858460109717138998 4.00 < WS < 5.00 00000000000000000 5.00 < WS < 6.00 00000000000000000 6.00 < WS < 8.00 000000000000000008.00 < WS < 10.00 00000000000000000> 10.00 00000000000000000Totals1801141641612502332192653242932662174102782981584805 Speed (m/s)Calm2.050.00 < WS < 1.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 1.00 < WS < 2.00 0.050.030.040.040.090.070.040.040.060.070.040.050.080.030.050.040.81 2.00 < WS < 3.00 0.250.160.190.230.330.320.310.340.410.370.340.270.560.400.430.215.13 3.00 < WS < 4.00 0.080.050.110.070.110.100.100.170.210.180.180.130.230.150.150.082.09 4.00 < WS < 5.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 5.00 < WS < 6.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 6.00 < WS < 8.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.008.00 < WS < 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00> 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00Totals0.380.240.340.340.520.490.460.560.680.610.560.460.860.580.630.3310.08 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-63Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-29 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class G) (a)a) From NCDC, 2011lSpeed (m/s)N NNENEENEEESESESSESSSWSWWSWWWNWNWNNW TotalCalm40530.00 < WS < 1.00 00000000000000000 1.00 < WS < 2.00 77353862113106956110174557218312692671357 2.00 < WS < 3.00 00000000000000000 3.00 < WS < 4.00 00000000000000000 4.00 < WS < 5.00 00000000000000000 5.00 < WS < 6.00 00000000000000000 6.00 < WS < 8.00 000000000000000008.00 < WS < 10.00 00000000000000000> 10.00 00000000000000000Totals77353862113106956110174557218312692675410 Speed (m/s)Calm8.500.00 < WS < 1.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 1.00 < WS < 2.00 0.160.070.080.130.240.220.200.130.210.160.120.150.380.260.190.142.85 2.00 < WS < 3.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 3.00 < WS < 4.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 4.00 < WS < 5.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 5.00 < WS < 6.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00 6.00 < WS < 8.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.008.00 < WS < 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00> 10.00 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00Totals0.160.070.080.130.240.220.200.130.210.160.120.150.380.260.190.1411.35 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-64Rev. 0Table 19.3.2-30 Representative Environmental Noise Levels (a)a)
Reference:
California Department of Transportation, 1998Common Outdoor ActivitiesNoise Level (dBA)Common Indoor Activities--110--Rock BandJet Fly-over at 1000 feet--100--Gas Lawnmower at 3 feet --90--Food Blender at 3 feetDiesel Truck going 50 mph at 50feet--80--Garbage Disposal at 3 feetNoisy Urban Area during DaytimeGas Lawnmower at 100 feet--70--Vacuum Cleaner at 10 feetCommercial AreaNormal Speech at 3 feetHeavy Traffic at 300 feet--60--Large Business OfficeQuiet Urban Area during Daytime--50--Dishwater in Next RoomQuiet Urban Area during Nighttime--40--Theater, Large Conference Room (background)Quiet Suburban Area duringNighttime--30--LibraryQuiet Rural Area during NighttimeBedroom at Night, Concert Hall (background) --20--Broadcast/ Recording Studio --10--Lowest Threshold of HumanHearing--0--Lowest Threshold of Human Hearing Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewGeologic EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-65Rev. 019.3.3GEOLOGIC ENVIRONMENTThis subsection provides a description of the geology, soils, and seismology of the site and region.19.3.3.1Summary of On-Site Geotechnical InvestigationsSHINE conducted a geotechnical investigation at the Janesville site during the fourth quarter of 2011. The investigation included the installation of 15 soil borings, with four of the borings converted to groundwater monitoring wells and one boring used solely for seismic profile testing (Figure 19.3.3-1). The geotechnical investigation methods and results are detailed in three reports:*Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report, Janesville, Wisconsin: August 3, 2012.*Preliminary Hydrological Analyses, Janesville, Wisconsin: August 3, 2012.*Seismic Hazard Assessment Report, Janesville, Wisconsin: August 3, 2012.The geotechnical report includes descriptions of soils encountered to a maximum boring depth of 221 ft. (67m) below ground surface, the results of vertical seismic profiling, depth to groundwater, engineering properties of the soils encountered at the site, an assessment of geologic hazards at the site or nearby, and the suitability of materials at the site for the construction of the proposed facility.The hydrological analyses report utilizes data gathered during the geotechnical investigation to assess the hydrologic regime at the site, including the flood risks from nearby surface waters, stormwater and runoff management risks, and groundwater flow and transport. The seismic hazard report summarizes the geologic history of the region and makes an assessment of hazards associated with seismic events based on the vertical seismic profiling and a review of published and on-line data. Results from each of these reports are used in the following subsections to further characterize the geological environment at the SHINE site. 19.3.3.2Bedrock Formations The SHINE site lies within the Central Lowlands physiographic province of the United States (Fenneman, Nevin Melancthon, 1946) in an area where thick sections of sedimentary rock overlie crystalline rock of Precambrian age (Olcott, Perry G., 1968). The sedimentary rock consists of Cambrian and Ordovician sandstone, dolomite, and shale (Figure 19.3.3-2). The sedimentary rock formations include the Mount Simon and Eau Claire s andstones and the Prairie du Chien group of Cambrian age, and the St. Peter sandstone, and Platteville, Decorah, and Galena formations of Ordovician age (Figure 19.3.3-3). According to Zaporozec (Zaporozec, Alexander, 1982), the "most significant feature of the bedrock surface (in Rock County) is the ancestral Rock River valley more than 300ft. (91m) deep, subsequently filled with outwash and other fluvial deposits."The Central Lowlands province is located within the middle of the relatively stable North American craton. The North American craton is the portion of the North American continental Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewGeologic EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-66Rev. 0plate that has been least affected by collisions with other plates or tectonic activity. The regional geologic structures within the basement rock that have been mapped include the Sandwich and Plum River fault zones (inactive); the La Salle anticlinorium, and the Wisconsin and Kankakee Arches (Figure19.3.3-4).Between 1.0 and 1.2 billion years ago, a rift zone identified as the Mid-Continent Rift was active from Wisconsin through Mississippi. After the Mid-Continent Rift had ceased being an active rift zone, subsequent cooling of the crust and regional subsidence associated with the Appalachian Orogeny to the east are the probable causes of the regional geologic structures.Overlying the sedimentary bedrock units are unconsolidated quaternary deposits of glacial till and outwash, consisting of well-sorted sand and gravel. The till and outwash deposits were deposited as the continental ice sheets advanced and retreated during the latter portion of the Pleistocene Epoch, between approximately 10,000 and 30,000 years ago. These outwash deposits are good sources of water, with single well yields of over 5000 gallons per minute (gpm) (1.89x104 liters per minute [lpm]) (Olcott, Perry G., 1968). The stratigraphy of the bedrock units that underlie the site (see Figure 19.3.3-3) from youngest to oldest is:*Galena Formation
- Decorah Formation
- Platteville Formation*St. Peter sandstone*Prairie du Chien Group
- Trempealeau Group*Tunnel City Group*Wonewoc Formation
- Eau Claire Formation*Mount Simon Formation*Precambrian basement rockThe bedrock units within Rock County are described in greater detail based on Zaporozec, Alexander, 1982.The Cambrian-Ordovician sedimentary rocks were deposited in shallow seas on an uneven and arched surface of igneous and metamorphic (basement) rocks of Precambrian age. Both the Precambrian surface and the sedimentary rocks dip gently to the south and southeast. The sedimentary units thicken in the direction of dip from about 1000ft. (305 m) in the northwestern corner of Rock County to over 1500ft. (457m) in the southeastern corner of the county.
The oldest formations of Cambrian age in Rock County are, in ascending order, the Mt.Simon sandstone, Eau Claire sandstone, Wonewoc (also known as the Galesville Formation) sandstone, Tunnel City Group (formerly Franconia sandstone), and Trempealeau Formation, consisting of the Jordan sandstone and St. Lawrence dolomite. In the Rock River valley, these rocks of Cambrian age are overlain primarily by unconsolidated Quaternary deposits, with much of the younger Ordovician sequence having been removed by erosion. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewGeologic EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-67Rev. 0Rock formations of Ordovician age include, in ascending order, the Prairie du Chien Group (dolomite), the St. Peter Formation (sandstone), and the Platteville-Galena Formation - also called the Sinnipee Group - consisting of carbonate rocks (limestone and dolomite). The Prairie du Chien Group was greatly thinned by erosion or completely eroded before deposition of the St.Peter sandstone when the land was elevated above sea level. In many areas of Rock County, the Prairie du Chien group is absent, and the St. Peter Formation rests directly on sandstones of Cambrian age. Because it was laid down on an uneven erosional surface, the St.Peter Formation varies considerably in thickness. The bedrock surface in the western part of the county is formed primarily by the St. Peter sandstone. Bedrock east of the Rock River valley and the ridge tops west of the valley are formed by the Platteville-Galena unit.After the deposition of the sedimentary rocks, erosion over a long period of time produced a bedrock surface having a maximum relief of 1000ft. (305m) in Rock County. The most significant feature of the bedrock surface is the ancestral Rock River valley, which reaches depths of greater than 300 ft (91m) (see Figure 19.3.3-2) and was subsequently filled with outwash and other fluvial deposits. East of the buried valley the bedrock has a flat, relatively undissected surface. West of the valley the bedrock surface is rugged and dissected.19.3.3.3Bedrock OverburdenThe site has been influenced strongly by Pleistocene glacial erosion and deposition, and subsequent post-glacial erosional and depositional processes. The site is covered by a mantle of well-drained loamy soils underlain by stratified sand and gravel. These sands and gravels represent late Wisconsin to possibly Holocene age glaciofluvial outwash deposits, transported from the Wisconsin-age glacial moraines related to the Green Bay Ice lobe of the Laurentide Ice Sheet to the north. Depth to bedrock at the SHINE site may be as deep as 300 ft. (91m), supported by geotechnical boreholes for this investigation completed to 221-ft. (67m) depths without encountering bedrock (Figure 19.3.3-5).Lab testing showed the soils to be primarily clean sandy soils with occasional gravel layers, with the density of the sand increasing with depth. A hard clayey silt layer was observed at approximately 180 ft. (55m) below ground surface, and groundwater was observed at a depth of 50 to 65 ft. (15.3 to 19.8m) below ground surface.19.3.3.4Soils On-Site Soil TypesThe soils were formed primarily from glacial processes which occurred in the region. Glacial till and outwash are the primary parent materials for the soil, in addition to reworked loess, decomposed vegetation, and deposits from the dolomite and sandstone bedrock in the area. Most of the glacial outwash in the area consists of stratified sand and gravel, deposited by water flowing from the glacier as it melted and receded. A layer of finer-grained material, which overlies the outwash, eventually weathered to form the silt loam and loam present at the site (USDA-SCS, 1974).The soils at the site are classified by the USDA Soil Conservation Service Soil Survey of Rock County, Wisconsin as two types, the Warsaw silt loam and the Lorenzo loam (USDA-SCS, 1974) (see Figure 19.3.1-5). The Warsaw silt loam, the primary soil at the site, is characteristic of outwash plains and terraces, with the surface layer either a silt loam or loam. The Warsaw silt Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewGeologic EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-68Rev. 0loam typically has slow runoff and is well-suited for farm and crop production. Soils in the Warsaw series consist of level to sloping loamy soils which are underlain by stratified sand and gravel. Permeability is typically moderate in the subsoil, with underlying sand and gravel typically found at depths ranging from 24 to 40 in. (61 to 102cm) (USDA-SCS, 1974).A secondary soil found at the site is the Lorenzo loam. The Lorenzo loam is also typically found on outwash plains and terraces. The surface layer of the Lorenzo loam is a black loam. The Lorenzo loam is well-drained and is moderately susceptible to erosion. The soils of the Lorenzo series are moderately suited to agriculture, with slow runoff. Permeability is typically moderate in the subsoil, with the underlying stratified sand and gravel found at a depth ranging from 12 to 20in. (30 to 51cm) (USDA-SCS, 1974).Prime FarmlandThe Warsaw silt loam with less than 2percent slope is classified as a prime farmland soil by the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, indicating that the soil has the best combination of physical and chemical characteristics for producing crops suitable for the area. Additional factors in the prime farmland designation include favorable climate, adequate and dependable water supply, acceptable soil pH, acceptable salt/sodium content, and the soil is not excessively eroded or saturated with water. Criteria for defining and delineating these lands are determined by the appropriate state or local agencies in cooperation with USDA. The significant difference between farmland of statewide importance and USDA designated prime farmland is that although the criteria used to designate both types of soils are not appropriate outside the state or local area, these lands which are designated as farmland of statewide importance approach the productivity of lands in their area that meet criteria for prime farmland and unique farmland.The Lorenzo silt loam present on the site is classified as farmland of statewide importance. Farmland of statewide importance approaches the productivity of prime farmland, but the soil does not meet the criteria for designation as prime farmland. The prime farmland on the site is shown on Figure 19.3.1-5. Approximately 41,950 ac. (16,977ha) of the area within the region are lands having soils classified as prime farmland or farmland of statewide importance.
Soil ErodibilityThe Warsaw and Lorenzo soils, when found on slopes greater than 2percent, are described by the USDA SCS (USDA-SCS, 1974) as slightly-to-moderately-erodible soil units. The soils found on slopes less than 2percent are not considered erodible. The erodibility of the soil units is a factor of the soil type, the amount of rainfall and runoff, wind speed, and the length and steepness of the ground slope. No soils present on the site or within the area of the site are listed as highly erodible land by the USDA NRCS (USDA NRCS, 2012a). Current erosion control practices observed at the site include the use of conservation or minimum tillage measures, the use of vegetated swales, and contoured cultivation. Conservation tillage is minimally disturbing the stubble from the preceding crop prior to planting of the next crop so that the root system serves to anchor the topsoil. Vegetated swales slow the rate of runoff, reducing the amount of sediment carried in the water, and sediment is trapped in place. Contoured cultivation parallels the contours of the land surface, allowing stormwater to be detained within the furrows, leading to increased infiltration. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewGeologic EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-69Rev. 0Soil Shrink/Swell PotentialThe shrink/swell potential of soil is the tendency of soil to expand or contract due to changes in the water content of the soil. Highly plastic clays are a significant component of soils with a high shrink-swell potential. The content of the soil on the site is primarily sand, with no evidence of highly plastic clays. The shrink/swell potential of the soils at the site is considered to be minimal.19.3.3.5SeismologyWisconsin, located in the central portion of the North American craton, is not within or near active seismic zones or fault zones; however, minor earthquakes can occur in the region. Three earthquakes within approximately 200 mi. (322km) of the site have been recorded during the first six months of 2012. These three earthquakes were centered near the towns of McHenry, Illinois; Clintonville, Wisconsin; and Topeka, Indiana. The McHenry earthquake was reported as a 2.3magnitude earthquake, the Topeka earthquake was reported as a 3.0magnitude earthquake, and the Clintonville earthquake was reported as a 1.5magnitude earthquake (CERI, 2012). The intensity and frequency of the earthquakes within the region are reflected in the Wisconsin Seismic Hazard Map (Figure 19.3.3-6), which depicts the Janesville region as within the seismic hazard zone with a less than 2percent chance of exceeding 0.4 to 0.6 gravities (g) within the next 50years, where g is the acceleration of an object due to the force of gravity.The geologic history of the basement rocks indicates that the site is located in a region of relative tectonic stability. Several post-500 million year old geologic structures have been mapped near the site, including the Sandwich and Plum River fault zones, the La Salle anticlinorium, and the Wisconsin and Kankakee Arches (see Figure 19.3.3-4). These geologic structures appear to have formed and been seismogenic under a tectonic regime different from the present-day. No seismogenic "capable" faults are recognized on or near the site. Capable faults are defined as either having exhibited movement at the surface in the past 35,000 years or recurring movement within the past 500,000 years. The closest known "capable" faults are part of the Wabash Valley liquefaction features located approximately 170 mi. (274 km) south of the site, and the New Madrid seismic zone located approximately 400 mi. (644 km) south of the site (Figure 19.3.3-7). Within 124 mi. (200 km) of the SHINE site, available earthquake catalogs contain only 35 epicenters for small to moderate earthquakes up to expected moment magnitude (E[ M]) 5.15 that have occurred since 1804. Interpretation of readily-available felt intensity records indicates that only moderate earthquake shaking (i.e., Modified Mercalli Intensity scale V) has probably been felt at the site four times in approximately the last 200years.Estimates of seismic hazard for the region from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 2008 national seismic hazard maps indicate that the site is located within one of the lowest earthquake hazard areas in the conterminous United States. As noted in Subection 2.5.7.3, liquefaction of soils typically occurs in loose soils under saturated or near-saturated conditions. The soils underlying the site at depths where saturated or near-saturated conditions are encountered were classified as dense during the geotechnical investigation. In Subsections 2.5.4 and 2.5.5, a detailed discussion of the seismic setting at the site and the derivation of probabilistic estimates of earthquake ground shaking from maximum potential Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewGeologic EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-70Rev. 0earthquakes can be found. The estimates were derived using the national seismic hazard model for five return periods between 475 and 19,900 years, using a maximum potential ( M) of 5.8. The peak horizontal ground acceleration (PGA) estimates derived from the national seismic hazard model, presented in Table 2.5-5, indicate a low to very low level of earthquake shaking hazard at the site.19.3.3.6Other Hazards 19.3.3.6.1TsunamisThe nearest source for tsunami-related impact is Lake Michigan, located approximately 63 mi (101km) to the east of the site. The elevation of the lake nearest to the site is in the Kenosha, WI area, at an elevation of approximately 580ft. (177m), which is approximately 230 to 250 ft. (70to 76m) below the elevation of the site. While the possibility of a large wave being generated in Lake Michigan exists, there is a negligible probability of it being greater than 230ft. (70m) and maintaining sufficient height for more than 60 mi. (96km) to impact the site. Consequently, the risk of tsunami is correspondingly very low.19.3.3.6.2VolcanismAs noted in Subsection 19.3.3.5, the site is located in a tectonically-stable region of the middle of the continent identified as the Central Lowlands (see Subsection 19.3.3.2). Volcanoes tend to cluster along narrow mountainous belts where folding and fracturing of the rocks provide channelways to the surface for the escape of magma (USGS, 2012a). The lack of magma forming processes in the Central Lowlands province prevents the formation of volcanoes in the region.19.3.3.6.3LandslidesBased on the landslide overview map of the conterminous United States, the SHINE site is located in a zone of low landslide incidence, which is defined as less than 1.5 percent of area involved in landsliding. The Rock County Hazard Mitigation Plan indicates that "-no significant landslides-have been reported in Rock County in recent years.".19.3.3.7Karst and Subsidence Karst terrain results from the dissolution of carbonate bedrock which is often followed by the formation of sinkholes with the subsidence of soils overlying the sinkholes. Karst areas can also include subsurface caverns and streams, which may also collapse, leading to subsidence of overlying soils and the formation of sinkholes. Rock County, especially the eastern third, contains carbonate bedrock which can be susceptible to dissolution or karst formation. The SHINE site is located in the central portion of the county, and no evidence for karst or subsidence has been observed at the site. In addition, subsidence has not been an issue in Rock County, and the subsidence hazard is low. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-71Rev. 019.3.4WATER RESOURCES19.3.4.1Hydrology19.3.4.1.1Surface WaterThe SHINE site is located within a small sub-watershed of the Upper Rock River (Hydrologic Unit Code 07090001 [USEPA, 2012b]). The project area watershed discharges to the Rock River at approximately river mile 179.4, as indicated on Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood profiles (FEMA, 2008). This project area discharge location is approximately 10 mi. (16km) by river downstream of downtown Janesville and approximately 8.3 mi. (13.4km) by river upstream from the Wisconsin - Illinois state line. The Rock River watershed area at the USGS stream gaging station at Afton, at Rock River mile 181.3, is 3340 sq. mi. (8651sq. km).19.3.4.1.1.1Watershed DescriptionThe drainage area of the project area watershed is approximately 1377 ac. (557 ha) (Figure 19.3.4-1). At the upstream end of the watershed, the USGS Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 12-digit drainage boundary for the watershed extends north of SH 11. No drainage culverts under SH 11 in that area are apparent and little or no surface drainage occurs southerly across SH 11. Another small, unnamed tributary to the Rock River borders the project area watershed to the southeast. The project area watershed has generally low relief, however, slopes as high as approximately 6 percent are present in the watershed.US 51 runs north-south through the project area watershed, with approximately half of the project area watershed located on each side of the highway.There are culverts under US 51 that convey water from the east side ditch to the west side, including two culvert locations (three culvert pipes) adjacent to the site (Figure 19.3.4-2). The watershed runoff that flows through those culverts passes through the SWRA, then through culverts under West Airport Road, through the Glen Erin Golf Course, and then through a box culvert under West Happy Hollow Road before discharging to the Rock River. Downstream of West Happy Hollow Road, the stream passes through the wooded Rock River floodplain and Happy Hollow Park, which has a boat ramp located at the confluence of the stream with the Rock River.Soils within the project area watershed have a relatively high infiltration capacity and the water table is generally not near the surface. Consequently, the project area watershed generates low surface runoff. As a result, aerial images of the area do not show readily identifiable stream channels, as defined by stream banks or vegetation upstream of the wooded Rock River floodplain.The project area watershed has a land use that consists primarily of cultivated fields. Other land uses in the project area watershed include the airport, the Glen Erin Golf Club, and the Happy Hollow Park.As is illustrated in Figure 19.3.4-1, a small upstream area drains through a portion of the approximately 91.27-ac. site. The site topography slopes toward the southwest. Most of the drainage generated by the site or upstream of the site is intercepted by the US 51 drainage ditch Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-72Rev. 0that is located along the western side of the site. A small portion of the site drains to the south onto private land abutting the south boundary of the site.19.3.4.1.1.2Climate Climate of the SHINE site is characterized as having four distinct seasons. Based on the Rockford, Illinois NOAA station located approximately 30 miles south of the site, monthly normal temperatures range from a normal daily maximum in July of 83.1 degrees Fahrenheit (°F) (28.4degrees Celsius [°C]) to a normal daily minimum of 9.3 °F (-12.6°C) for the month of January (NCDC, 2011c). Annually, the mean number of days when the maximum daily temperature does not exceed 32°F (0°C) is 55.3. The normal annual precipitation in the Janesville vicinity based on the NOAA station at Rockford is approximately 36.6 in. (93.0cm). The period from April through September receives a normal rainfall of 24.23 in. (61.5cm), with June the calendar month with the largest normal rainfall amount. The normal annual snowfall is 38.7 in. (98.3 cm). A summary of monthly and annual precipitation data is provided in Table 19.3.4-1. Rainfall depth-duration-frequency statistics for the area for durations up to 10 days are summarized in Table 19.3.4-2. The 24-hour (hr.) duration, 2-year recurrence interval rainfall is 2.78 in. (7.06cm) and the 24-hr., 100-year rainfall depth is 7.06 in. (17.9cm) (Huff, Floyd A. and James R. Angel, 1992).19.3.4.1.1.3Soils and Land CoverThe site is covered by a mantle of well-drained loamy soils underlain by stratified sand and gravel with a depth to bedrock as much as 300 feet. The silty loam soils in the vicinity of the SHINE site have slopes ranging from nearly flat up to approximately 6percent. The surficial soils at the site are identified by the NRCS soil survey information (USDA NRCS, 2012a and 2012b) as Warsaw silt loam and the Lorenzo loam. The Warsaw silt loam and Lorenzo loam are classified as having a moderately low runoff potential as Hydrologic Soil Group (HSG) B. HSG B soils are those that have a moderate infiltration rate and water transmission rate within the soil profile in the range of 0.15 to 0.30 inches per hour (in/hr) (0.4 to 0.76 centimeters per hour [cm/hr]). Warsaw silt loam is characterized as having a sand content of 67 percent and the Lorenzo loam has a sand content of 62 percent. The Warsaw silt loam has a saturated vertical hydraulic conductivity of approximately 62 micrometers per second (equivalent to 6.2 x 10 -3 cm/s or 8.8 in/hr [22.4cm/hr]), and the Lorenzo loam has a saturated vertical hydraulic conductivity of approximately 50micrometers per second (equivalent to 5.0 x 10 -3 cm/s or 7.1 in/hr [18cm/hr]), which are relatively high hydraulic conductivities, and lead to the classification as "well drained" soils. The saturated vertical hydraulic conductivity identified for the soils are significantly greater than the water transmission rate range associated with HSG B soils as described above.The NRCS soil survey classification information also indicates depth to water table is greater than 179 cm (70 in.) throughout the project area and adjoining land (the water table level is more than 50 feet below ground surface, as described in Subsection 19.3.3.3). The relatively low runoff potential is reflected in the relative absence of well defined intermittent stream channels near the
site. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-73Rev. 0The site is currently utilized for row crop agriculture. The eastern portion of the site is equipped with a center-pivot irrigation system, which is also indicative of both a well drained soil as described above and a readily available groundwater supply.19.3.4.1.1.4StreamflowThere are no streamflow monitoring data from the project area watershed and there are no permanent streams on the site or in proximity to the site. The Rock River is located approximately 2 mi. (3.2km) south-southwest of the site. To characterize runoff and streamflow in the area, however, there are several USGS streamflow monitoring stations in Rock County (Table 19.3.4-3). The nearest Rock River streamflow station (USGS Station 05430500 Rock River at Afton, Wisconsin) (USGS, 2012b) is located upstream from the point where the site watershed drains into the river west of the site. The Turtle Creek at Carvers Rock Road near Clinton, Wisconsin (Station05431486) is located east of the site. The Yahara River near Fulton, Wisconsin (Station 05430175) is located to the northwest, and Badfish Creek near Cooksville, Wisconsin (Station 05430150) is located to the northwest. There are other stations, but none with long term streamflow records. Flows at these four stations indicate that the runoff in the Rock River, Turtle Creek and Yahara River is very similar when expressed in inches of runoff per year per unit drainage area. Runoff rates presented as 12-month depths based on the running average over the previous 60 months (5years) for these streams along with precipitation similarly expressed as 12-month depths from the 60-month (5-year) running average are presented in Figure 19.3.4-3. The figure illustrates that even over an arbitrary 5-year period variations in average streamflow are notable and trend closely with precipitation. Badfish Creek appears to have a higher sustained flow from groundwater contribution(s). The figure illustrates that for these four representative streams, the 5-year average runoff rate has ranged from approximately 4 to 17 inches per year (in/yr) (10 to 43centimeters per year [cm/yr]). The long-term average discharges for these streams range from approximately 8.2 to 11.4 in/yr (20 to 28cm/yr), whereas the long-term flow at the Badfish Creek station has been approximately 18.3 in/yr (46cm/yr) The City of Janesville has stated an assumed average groundwater recharge rate for Rock County of 6.3 in/yr (16cm/yr) (City of Janesville, 2010) and that the estimated groundwater production is approximately 15 percent of the recharge rate (0.95 in/yr, [2.41cm/yr]). A portion of the groundwater production is not ultimately consumed (e.g., treated wastewater discharges) and returns to the streams as surface flow.Olcott describes the upper part of Turtle Creek and the Rock River as receiving groundwater discharge (Olcott, Perry G., 1968). The lower portion of Turtle Creek, nearest the site, is described as being a losing stream, with infiltration to the groundwater, which then may discharge into the Rock River.The baseflow contribution to the total flow in these streams can be quantified using standard procedures (Sloto, Ronald A. and Michele Y. Crouse, 1996; Hughes et al., 2003). Analyses using these methods indicate that the baseflow contributions are approximately 84 to 91 percent of the flow at the Rock River at Afton station, 77 percent at the Turtle Creek station, 87 to 89 percent at the Badfish Creek station, and 86 percent at the Yahara River near Fulton station. Based on these estimates of the baseflow component of streamflow and the total runoff, the typical long-term average surface flow component of streamflow ranges from approximately 0.8 to 2.0 in/yr (2 to 5cm/yr). Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-74Rev. 019.3.4.1.1.4.1High FlowsThe annual maximum floods on streams in Rock County typically occur either in late winter/early spring (March to April) or due to early summer thunderstorms, most often in June. Floods on the Rock River at Afton generally occur in March or April, with few floods occurring in November to January. For smaller watersheds, the peak runoff events typically occur either in February to March or in June to July time periods.The USGS has evaluated watershed peak runoff rates and developed regression equations relating various watershed parameters to observed high flows (Walker, J.F. and W.R. Krug, 2003). For the physiographic region in which the site is located, the watershed parameters of drainage area, main channel slope, and surface storage in lakes, ponds, wetlands, etc., as indicated on USGS and NRCS information, are the three watershed parameters found to provide the best statistical predictor. The USGS has estimated discharge frequency data for the Rock River at long-term streamflow stations, including Station 05430500 at Afton. The discharge frequency data are summarized in Table 19.3.4-4. Rock River flood discharge frequency data used by FEMA for the Rock County Flood Insurance Study (FEMA, 2008) are also included in Table 19.3.4-4. Rock River flood levels near the site are well below the lowest ground elevations at the site. River flood levels are also sufficiently below the site that the river flood levels have no backwater influence on the tributary flood water levels.Analyses were completed to estimate the maximum water levels at the SHINE site resulting from a local Probable Maximum Precipitation (PMP) event. Several conservative assumptions were made for the analyses, including the assumption of nearly complete runoff (limited infiltration and losses) and the failure of the site drainage system (designed for a 100-year return period event), resulting in exclusively overland flow. The SHINE site also has a perimeter berm with an external conveyance area that splits runoff from areas upstream of the site, resulting in a portion of stormwater that flows west along the northern edge of the site and a portion that flows south and then west along the site. The analyses determined that the maximum water levels around the site safety structures from on-site runoff are below the floor levels of the structures. Additionally the maximum water runoff from an approximate 234-ac. drainage area is diverted around the site by the perimeter berm and conveyance system, resulting in water levels below the top of berm at all locations. The analyses also determined that flow velocities associated with those diverted flows are not high and, therefore, not significantly erosive.19.3.4.1.1.4.2Low FlowsLow flows at the Rock County streamflow gaging stations (Table 19.3.4-3) can be characterized based on average flows over selected periods of 7, 15, and 30 days. The minimum average low flows during the period of record in these streams exhibit more variation than high flows. The Rock River flows at Afton are affected by upstream flow controls. The 7-, 15- and 30-day average low flows in the 98-year long period of record are 0.0343, 0.045, and 0.052 cubic feet per second per square mile (cfs/sq. mi. [0.0025, 0.0034, and 0.0039 cubic meters per second per square kilometer (cms/sq. km)]), respectively. The shorter duration (e.g., 7-day) average low flows are more affected by gated controls than longer duration flows, such as the 30-day average low flow, which is comparable to rates on other local streams that are not affected by flow Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-75Rev. 0controls. The corresponding (7-, 15-, and 30-day) record low flows in the 72-year Turtle Creek record are 0.085, 0.091, and 0.096 cfs/sq. mi. (0.0062, 0.0067, and 0.0070 cms/sq. km). The record low flows (runoff per unit drainage area) in the Yahara River and Badfish Creek, both of which have 35-year periods of record, are approximately twice and six times those in Turtle
Creek.The annual minimum 7-day average low flows on the Rock River at Afton show a significant autocorrelation and long-term variation, similar to the variation in the 5-year running average flows as shown in Figure 19.3.4-3. The annual minimum 7-day average low flows during the 35-year period from 1935 to 1970 are significantly lower than the flows during the period from 1914 to 1935 and the period from 1970 to 2011. As observed for the 5-year running average comparison with rainfall, distinct rainfall and flow variations over relatively long time periods have occurred. The 20 lowest values of the annual (January-December) minimum 7-day and 30-day average low flows from the period of record are summarized in Table 19.3.4-5.19.3.4.1.1.5Dams and Reservoirs There are numerous dams on the Rock River. These low dams were originally constructed for hydropower and are characterized as having a small increase in water level, or head, for increased power but generally do not create a large reservoir volume. With reference to the junction of the tributary stream through which the site drains to the Rock River, the Indianford Dam is located on the Rock River approximately 21 mi. (34km) upstream; the Centerway Dam is located upstream near downtown Janesville just downstream of the West Centerway Street / US 51 bridge crossing, and Monterey Dam is located approximately 6.5 mi. (10.5km) upstream. Downstream from the SHINE site, the first dam on the Rock River is the Blackhawk Dam, also known as the Beloit Dam, located approximately 8.4river mi. (13.5 river km) downstream of the site.None of these dams maintain a large upstream reservoir or have a high head, especially during high flow events. The Indianford Dam was constructed downstream of the natural Lake Koshkonong. There are no dams or reservoirs upstream of the site or on an adjacent stream within a distance of the site that would potentially affect the site in the event of a failure of the structure. While Wisconsin has many natural lakes, Rock County has few lakes and no large lakes other than Lake Koshkonong. The southern end of Lake Koshkonong is located in Rock County but the majority of the lake is located in Jefferson County. The nearest named lake is Lions Pond located in Lions Park in southern Janesville, approximately 3.3 mi. (5.3km) north of the site and just east of the Rock River. Delavan Lake is located 19.6 mi. (31.5km) east of the site in Walworth County. The only other relatively close lake included in the Wisconsin DNR lake maps inventory (WDNR, 2012b) is Spaulding Pond, located approximately 8.5 mi. (13.7km) northeast of the site.19.3.4.1.1.6Estuaries and OceansNo estuaries or oceans are located near the SHINE site. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-76Rev. 019.3.4.1.1.7Applicable Regulations and PermitsSite development stormwater regulatory criteria applicable to the site area are established by Wisconsin administrative code, Chapters Natural Resources (NR) 151 and NR 216 and City of Janesville Ordinances Chapter 15, Sections 15.05 (construction erosion and sediment control) and 15.06 (post-construction stormwater management) (City of Janesville, 2011a). Stormwater discharge regulatory requirements established pursuant to the federal National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program are based on industrial classification code applicable to the activity. The facility is believed to be appropriately classified with SIC 2834 (325412 North American Industry Classification System [NAICS]) (USCB, 2012). This industrial classification code requires a Wisconsin Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (WPDES) stormwater discharge permit (NR 216.21 (2)(b)), except that an exclusion exists for certain facilities that are constructed and operated such that no activities defined as "industrial activities" are exposed to stormwater (NR 216.21 (3)). This industry type requires a WPDES stormwater discharge permit for industrial activity only if industrial activities are exposed to stormwater; it is anticipated that the site design and operation would be such that no industrial activities are exposed to stormwater and that a Conditional No Exposure Certification submitted regularly as required would be applicable. The "no exposure" exclusion exists and if the site has no industrial activities exposed to stormwater, then a WPDES permit for stormwater discharge would not be required.For construction sites disturbing 1ac. (0.4ha) or more, controls must be implemented that reduce sediment discharge from the site by 80percent on an average annual basis (NR 151.12). Additionally, the site must be constructed such that peak discharge rate and a minimum infiltration volume are provided (NR 151.12(5)). The local stormwater regulations require that for sites that disturb more than 1 ac. (0.4ha), the 2-, 10-, and 100-year design storms must be managed on the site to result in no increase in peak runoff rates for those events (City of Janesville, 2011b). Also, for new development sites that are not in-fill development of less than 5ac. (2ha), the post-development infiltration is to be at least 60 percent of the pre-development infiltration volume on an average annual basis. Additionally, total suspended solids must be reduced by 80 percent from the loading if no controls were implemented (same requirement as state criteria at NR 151.12).Other regulatory designations and standards related to water quality are discussed in Subsection19.3.4.3.1. While existing and potential for surface water use at the vicinity of the site is limited, water use exceeding certain threshold rates including the capacity to withdraw water at a rate of 100,000 gallons per day or more (WDNR, 2011b), requires registration in the state's water use program. There are no designated floodplains within the SHINE site, so floodplain regulations established by the local community in accordance with minimum federal requirements for participation in the National Flood Insurance Program are not applicable (i.e.,criteria for development within a designated flood hazard area). The site is not located within a FEMA 100-year floodplain. However, Rock County ordinance Chapter 32 (Rock County, 2005) provides for regulation of floodplain deve lopment within regional floodplains, defined as floodplains that are mapped by local, non-FEMA studies. No regional floodplain mapping at the site is known. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-77Rev. 019.3.4.1.2GroundwaterThere are two major aquifer systems within the region, the surficial aquifer and the Cambrian-Ordovician aquifer system, neither of which are identified by the USEPA as sole-source aquifers (USEPA, 2012c) The surficial aquifer system consists of sand and gravel, ice-contact deposits, and alluvium. The Cambrian-Ordovician aquifer system consists of a sandstone and dolomite aquifer and two sandstone aquifers, typically separated by less-permeable confining layers (Olcott, Perry G., 1992). At the SHINE site, the surficial aquifer is present as glacial outwash, and the Cambrian-Ordovician aquifer is either an upper Cambrian sandstone or a lower Ordovician sandstone and dolomite unit. The stratigraphy of the site is described in detail in Subsections 19.3.3.2 and 19.3.3.3 and a cross-section of the site, including the location of the water table, is shown on Figure 19.3.3-5.19.3.4.1.2.1Surficial Aquifer SystemThe regional surficial aquifer is composed of material deposited during multiple advances and subsequent retreat of continental glaciers during the Quaternary period. The SHINE site is located within a pre-glacial river valley, where the bedrock surface was eroded up to 300 ft. (91m) below surrounding bedrock (Olcott, Perry G.,1968). The pre-glacial valley is filled with glacial outwash, consisting of well-graded sand and sand and gravel. The sand extends to a depth of at least 221 ft. (67m) below ground surface. A 10 ft. (3 m) to 18 ft. (5 m) thick layer of hard clayey silt layer occurs at approximately 180 ft. (55m) below ground surface. The hard clayey silt layer is underlain by sand or silty sand to the borehole termination depth of 221 ft. (67m) below ground surface. The hard clayey silt layer occurred within all three borings at depths greater than 180 ft. (55 m) below ground surface. Monitoring of wells installed on the SHINE site (Figure 19.3.4-4) demonstrates that groundwater is present at a depth of 50 to 65 ft. (15.3 to 19.8m) below ground surface, corresponding to groundwater elev ations ranging from 765.72 ft. (233.39 m) to 761.96 ft. (232.25 m) (Table 19.3.4-6).Based on monthly water level measurements, the direction of groundwater flow at the site is to the southwest, toward the Rock River (Figures19.3.4-5, 19.3.4-6, 19.3.4-7, and 19.3.4-8), with minimal seasonal change in flow direction. The coarse nature of the glacial outwash material is reflected in permeability estimates derived from slug tests performed in the monitoring wells installed at the SHINE site. The slug-in tests indicate an average permeability estimate of 0.0051 feet per second [fps] (0.155 centimeters per second [cm/s]) and the slug-out tests indicate an average permeability of 0.0039 fps (0.119cm/s), with the average permeability of 0.0045 fps (0.137 cm/s). The surficial aquifer in the area has shown yields of 5000 gpm (1.89 x 10 4 lpm) with a resulting drawdown of less than 7ft. (2.1m) over a 24-hr. test (Olcott, Perry G., 1968). The average north to south hydraulic gradient at the site ranges from 0.0007 to 0.0008 feet per foot (0.021 to 0.024 cm per cm) between monitoring wells SM-GW1A and SM-GW2A, and the average east to west hydraulic gradient ranges from 0.0002 to 0.0005 feet per foot(0.006 to 0.015 cm per cm) between monitoring wells SM-GW3A and SM-GW4A. Prior to the start of SHINE's investigation, no wells were present on the site. Consequently, no historic groundwater information is available for the site. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-78Rev. 019.3.4.1.2.2Bedrock GroundwaterIn Rock County, the deeper bedrock groundwater is found within the sedimentary formations (Platteville-Galena dolomite, St. Peter sandstone, Prairie du Chen dolomite, and Cambrian sandstone) which overlie the Precambrian basement rock. The formations may act as a single aquifer or as independent aquifers, based on the separation of the units by less permeable members. This deep groundwater is not typically utilized for water supplies (Zaporozec, Alexander, 1982). The drilling was terminated at approximately 220 ft. (67m) below ground surface and did not penetrate the bedrock formation.The Cambrian sandstone's estimated thickness at the SHINE site is 1000 ft. (300 m), and is the primary source of water where the surficial aquifer is not available. Pump tests on wells within the Cambrian sandstone have resulted in estimated yields ranging from 32,000 to 37,000 gallons per day per foot (gpd/ft) (121,133 to 140,060 liters per minute per meter) (LeRoux E.F., 1963).19.3.4.2Water Use 19.3.4.2.1Regional Surface Water UseThe USGS has periodically reported water use information within Wisconsin, including statistics by county. The USGS (Buchwald, Cheryl A., 2011) found that in 2005 the total water use in Rock County was 96.31 million gallons per day (Mgd) (364.6 million liters per day [Mld]) with 50.56 Mgd (191.4 Mld), or 52.5percent, coming from surface water sources and 45.75 Mgd (173.2 Mld) (47.5 percent) coming from groundwater sources. However, 50.12 Mgd (189.7 Mld), including only 0.12 Mgd (0.5 Mld) from groundwater, was used for thermo-electric power generation and all, or nearly all, of that use was for cooling water. When excluding thermo-electric power generation from water use, the USGS reported that the 2005 surface water use was equivalent to 4.7 gallons (17.8 liters) per capita per day, compared to a similar per capita groundwater use of 385.4 gallons per day (gpd) (1458.9 liters per day [lpd]). A similar USGS report of water use in the year 2000 listed a Rock County total water use of 162.61 Mgd (615.5 Mld) and a thermoelectric power generation water use of 133.54 Mgd (505.5 Mld) (Ellefson, et al., 2002).The Wisconsin Department of Health Services reported that no community water supplies in Rock County rely on surface water while a population of 122,585 is served by groundwater (Wisconsin Department of Health Services, 2012). Olcott reported that surface water use prior to 1968 was limited, with the only significant industrial use being cooling water (Olcott, Perry G., 1968).The Janesville City Water Utility developed a water conservation plan in 2010 in accordance with a Public Service Commission requirement (City of Janesville, 2010). In 2010 the Water Utility projected a total 2010 water pumpage volume of 5,060 million gallons (13.86 Mgd [52.5 Mld]) and a projected 2020 volume of 5910 million gallons (16.2 Mgd [61.3 Mld]). Peak water pumpage through 2009 occurred in 1999; water usage dropped in the following years primarily due to reduction in industrial use (City of Janesville, 2010) The Water Utility plans to develop an industrial facility water audit program that the industrial water users, which included 29 users in 2010, may voluntarily use to improve water efficiency. Water conservation programs will also be developed for other water use sectors. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-79Rev. 0The City is currently planning to install a new water distribution line along the northern boundary of the project property. This distribution line would serve the properties in the vicinity of the SHINE site as well as the facility. Water uses in the vicinity of the project include agricultural irrigation and potable water supply. Near the site, the SWRA uses the public water supply system. These uses are both supplied by groundwater resources. There are no apparent, or known, surface water uses near the SHINE site.19.3.4.2.2Groundwater All public water supplies in Rock County are from groundwater. Table 19.3.7-14 lists the nine major municipal water suppliers that each serve communities in Rock County. Six of the nine municipal water systems in Rock County have a wellhead protection plan including Clinton, Evansville, Footville, Janesville, Milton, and Orfordville. Wellhead protection ordinances are in place for only Evansville and Janesville (USGS, 2012c). Janesville and Evansville have both a wellhead protection plan and a wellhead protection ordinance.The water systems serving the largest populations are those in Beloit and Janesville. In addition to the public water systems, numerous private wells provide drinking water to residents not connected to municipal water supplies. The Janesville Water Utility provides water supply for both public drinking water and for fire protection utilizing eight wells. The water supply system for the city of Janesville includes three booster stations, two water storage reservoirs, and a water tower. According to the city of Janesville, the total pumping capacity of its eight groundwater wells is 29 Mgd (109.8 Mld). Average water usage is about 11 Mgd (41.6 Mld). Accordingly, the excess capacity of the Janesville water supply system is approximately 18 Mgd (68.1 Mld).Public water supplies within Wisconsin are monitored to ensure public health protection, whereas individual well owners are responsible for monitoring and testing private wells. The public water use index for Rock County is 80 (Table 19.3.7-15), which estimates how many people are served by public water supplies. A number greater than 50 means more people are served by public water versus private wells.The Janesville water supply is disinfected with chlorine treatment and fluoride added at each pumping station and pumped directly into the distribution system. There are two earth-covered reservoirs for storage as well as a 500,000-gallon (1,892,706-liter) water tower completed in 2007. The wells include four deep wells, approximately 1150 ft. (350m) deep, and four sand and gravel wells that are 100 to 200 ft. (30.5 to 61m) deep. The shallow wells have nitrate concentrations that are controlled by blending with water from the deep wells.In addition to the municipal water utility, groundwater is also withdrawn for agricultural irrigation. The USGS estimates that agricultural crop irrigation is the largest user of groundwater in Rock County, with an estimated usage of 16.2 Mgd (61.3Mld) (Buchwald, Cheryl A., 2011). 19.3.4.2.3Facility Water Use Water use by the SHINE facility is described in Subsection 19.2.3 and is entirely supplied by groundwater from the City of Janesville water supply wells. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-80Rev. 019.3.4.3Water Quality19.3.4.3.1Surface WaterStream water quality generally reflects groundwater characteristics as a result of the groundwater discharge conditions that exist in much of Rock County (Olcott, Perry G., 1968). Surface water management activities conducted in accordance with Section 305(b) of the Clean Water Act and the Total Daily Maximum Load (TMDL) program provide water quality characterization and are described below. 19.3.4.3.1.1Water Quality19.3.4.3.1.1.1Impaired Waters and Total Maximum Daily LoadThe SHINE site is located in the watershed of an unnamed stream located within the Lower Rock River Basin. The unnamed tributary flows into the most downstream segment of the Rock River identified by WDNR for purposes of water quality monitoring and reporting. The Rock River segment extends from the Illinois state boundary upstream approximately 12.4 river mi. (20riverkm) to the Janesville wastewater treatment plant. This segment of the Rock River is considered to be impaired due to total suspended solids and total phosphorous (The CADMUS Group, 2011). This segment of the Rock River (Illinois state line to the Janesville wastewater treatment plant) has previously been impaired as a result of mercury and polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) pollutants; however, those have since been removed. The specific impairments listed for this reach of the Rock River are low dissolved oxygen and degraded habitat. The SHINE site drains into the Rock River through the project area watershed at a point approximately 8.3mi. (13.4km) upstream from the Illinois state line.On a regional and state-wide basis, Wisconsin has identified phosphorus and suspended solids as parameters of concern due to the ability of particulates to adsorb and transport phosphorus. State regulations include specific numerical criteria directed at the control of discharge of phosphorus and suspended solids from development sites. The State's 303d list of impaired streams developed and updated as required by the Clean Water Act has identified only the Rock River in the vicinity of the SHINE site as an impaired water body. The TMDL states that industrial facilities operating under a general WPDES permit will be screened to determine if additional requirements might be needed to ensure that the permitted activity is consistent with TMDL goals. Individual permits, if issued, will include limits consistent with approved TMDL wasteload allocations (The CADMUS Group, 2011).19.3.4.3.1.1.2Other Water Body Designations The Lower Rock River is a state-designated Area of Special Natural Resource Interest as a result of it being Natural Heritage Inventory (NHI) water. The NHI program was created by the Wisconsin legislature in 1985.Bass Creek and Turtle Creek, two tributaries to the Rock River in the vicinity of the site, are designated as Exceptional Resource Waters (Rock County Planning, Economic & Community Development Agency, 2009). An Exceptional Resource Water is defined as a stream or lake that has excellent water quality, high recreational and aesthetic value, high quality fishing, but that Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-81Rev. 0does not rise to the designation of outstanding resource water because it may be impacted by point source pollution or that it may have the potential for future discharge from a small community sewer system. (NR102.11 (1)(d)28).19.3.4.3.1.2Project Surface Water MonitoringSurface water quality monitoring was completed monthly from October 2011 through September 2012. The later part of this period occurred during a widely-recognized severe drought condition in south-central Wisconsin. As a result of these conditions, surface water samples were only collectable at location SW-02 on the unnamed tributary south of the SHINE site. The other two locations were established as opportunistic sampling locations and were observed to be dry on all twelve sampling events during the monitoring period. Laboratory results for samples collected at monitoring location SW-02 (Figure 19.3.4-4) are presented in Table 19.3.4-7 and field-measured parameters are provided in Table 19.3.4-8. Water was consistently present in the unnamed stream at location SW-02, although it was shallow and slow-flowing. It is believed that the flow was dominated in each sample by base flow contributed from groundwater seepage.Total phosphorus is a constituent of primary regional concern in surface waters. The phosphorus concentration at SW-02 was generally less than the detection limit (<0.2 mg/L). Field-measured parameters are summarized in Table 19.3.4-8. No remarkable measurements were documented. As noted above, physical conditions for sampling were less than ideal due to shallow water depth.19.3.4.3.2Groundwater19.3.4.3.2.1Groundwater Quality Groundwater quality monitoring was completed in four groundwater wells on a monthly basis from October 2011 through September 2012. The later part of this period occurred during a widely recognized severe drought condition in south-central Wisconsin. Laboratory results for samples collected at m onitoring location SM-GW1A, SM-GW2A, SM-GW3A, and SM-GW4A (Figure 19.3.4-4) are presented in Table 19.3.4-9 and field measured parameters are provided in Table 19.3.4-10. The groundwater elevations were also measured during the sampling events and are summarized in Table 19.3.4-6. Figures 19.3.4-5 through 19.3.4-8 provide groundwater isopleths for the first month of each quarterly monitoring period.Nitrate impact is a concern in agricultural areas due to the use of fertilizers and the presence of livestock. The nitrate concentrations were consistently above the drinking water standard of 10mg/l, with all samples found to contain nitrates. The minimum nitrate concentration detected was 13.5 mg/l and the maximum detection of 19.3 mg/l. Fecal coliform and Escherichia coli (E-coli) are common bacterial contaminants, often found in groundwater under the influence of surface water which has come into contact with human or animal waste. The groundwater samples were not found to contain E. coli above the detection limit. Fecal coliform was present in 3 of the 53 samples analyzed, with a maximum detection of 7 colony-forming units per 100 mL (CFU/100mL). Salinity and specific conductance are field parameters used to determine the stability of the groundwater prior to collection of the samples. During the May field effort, these Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-82Rev. 0parameters were elevated over previous months, but returned to earlier levels during the June field event.19.3.4.3.3Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Actions Subsection 19.4.13 provides an analysis of the cumulative effects of the SHINE project in consideration of other past, present and reasonably foreseeable future actions. On-going agricultural uses will place continuing demand on the groundwater supply in the vicinity of the SHINE site. With respect to other potential uses of water resources, SHINE identified one key off-site activity representing a potential additional demand on water supplies, wastewater treatment, and pollutant loading. Specifically, the lands immediately to the northeast of the SHINE site are zoned for future light industrial development. While designs and devel opment plans have not been prepared for this development area, it is expected that such uses will place additional demands on the City's water supply and water treatment system. Additionally, construction of these areas will represent a potential additional source of pollutant loading associated with runoff from construction sites.There are no other identified domestic, municipal, industrial, mining, recreation, navigation, or hydroelectric power uses of any bodies of water or aquifers at distances close enough to affect or be adversely affected by the facilities. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewWater ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-83Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-1 Rockford, Illinois Climatic Means and Extremes(Sheet 1 of 2) Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewWater ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-84Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-1 Rockford, Illinois Climatic Means and Extremes(Sheet 2 of 2)Table extracted from NCDC, 2011c. "POR" refers to the period of record (years). Refer to that source for explanatory notes. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-85Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-2 Rainfall Depth-Duration-Frequency Data for Janesville Vicinity DurationRainfall (inches) for Given Recurrence Interval (years)0.51251025501005-min0.220.270.330.420.500.620.730.8510-min0.380.470.580.740.881.091.271.48 15-min0.490.610.750.951.131.401.641.9130-min0.670.831.031.311.551.922.242.611-hour0.861.061.311.661.972.432.853.32 2-hour1.051.301.612.052.443.003.514.093-hour1.171.441.782.262.693.323.884.526-hour1.171.692.092.653.153.884.555.30 12-hour1.371.962.423.073.654.515.276.1424-hour1.822.252.783.534.25.186.067.0648-hour1.972.463.073.964.685.796.757.8272-hour2.162.703.384.345.166.347.348.4710-day2.973.714.725.936.868.219.3310.6
Reference:
Huff, Floyd A. and James R. Angel, 1992 Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-86Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-3 USGS Streamflow Monitoring Stations in Rock County, WisconsinStation Name Station NumberDrainage Area(sq. mi.)Period of RecordRock River at Newville, WI54275302560October 2009-presentRock River at Indianford, WI54275702630May 1975-2011Yahara River near Edgerton, WI5430000430October 1916-Nov 1917Badfish Creek near Cooksville, WI543015082.6July 1977-present Yahara River near Fulton, WI5430175518 (481.4)
(a)July 1977-presentFischer Creek Tributary at Janesville, WI54304031.42August 1980-November 1984Markham Creek at O Leary Road near Janesville, WI54304469.32June 2004-November 2005Rock River at Afton, WI54305003340January 1914-presentStevens Creek near Footville, WI543054013.9May 2004-November 2005Turtle Creek at Carvers Rock Road near Clinton, WI5431486199 (196.67) (a)September 1939-presentTurtle Creek near Clinton, WI5431500202September 1939-December 1979a) Contributing drainage area.
Reference:
USGS, 2012b Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-87Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-4 Flood Discharge Frequency Data - Rock River at Afton, WisconsinRecordPeriodDischarge (cfs) for Indicated Recurrence Interval2-yrs.5-yrs.10-yrs.25-yrs.50-yrs.100-yrs.500-yrs.1914 - 20006,3508,73010,20011,90013,00014,100NA1914 - 20116,4606,01010,61012,53013,90015,22018,150
Reference:
Flynn et al., 2006 Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-88Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-5 Annual Minimum Low Flows - Rock River at Afton
Reference:
USGS, 2012b30-Day Average Low Flow7-Day Average Low FlowYearFlowRankYearFlowRank (cfs)(cfs)1934174119341151193619321964149219641953193215231939202419361704195820351958171519322186195917961949252719391887193725781949204819592579194822591948275101946237 101963282111937238 111931288121953242 121946297131931243 131941308141963258 141953320151940260 151971328161941278 161957333171962278 171940342181957285 181955356191955288 191988361201971288 20 Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-89Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-6 Groundwater Monitoring Well Water Table Elevations(Sheet 1 of 2)Well IDDateTOC Elevation (ft) (a)Depth to Watera (ft - BTOC)Water Table Elevation(a)SM-1A10/26/2011828.0462.32765.72SM-2A10/26/2011821.4056.98764.42 SM-3A10/26/2011829.9664.52765.44SM-4A10/26/2011814.1549.51764.64SM-1A11/16/2011828.0462.44765.60 SM-2A11/16/2011821.4057.09764.31SM-3A11/16/2011829.9664.65765.31SM-4A11/16/2011814.1549.61764.54 SM-1A12/13/2011828.0462.58765.46SM-2A12/13/2011821.4057.18764.22SM-3A12/13/2011829.9664.77765.19 SM-4A12/13/2011814.1549.75764.40SM-1A1/9/2012828.0462.66765.38SM-2A1/9/2012821.4057.27764.13 SM-3A1/9/2012829.9664.86765.10SM-4A1/9/2012814.1549.85764.30SM-1A2/13/2012828.0462.86765.18 SM-2A2/13/2012821.4057.44763.96SM-3A2/13/2012829.9664.04765.92SM-4A2/13/2012814.1550.03764.12 SM-1A3/12/2012828.0462.97765.07SM-2A3/12/2012821.4057.55763.85SM-3A3/12/2012829.9665.15764.81 SM-4A3/12/2012814.1550.13764.02 SM-1A4/16/2012828.0463.11764.93SM-2A4/16/2012821.4057.67763.73SM-3A4/16/2012829.9665.32764.64 SM-4A4/16/2012814.1550.27763.88SM-1A5/22/2012828.0463.39764.65SM-2A5/22/2012821.4057.90763.50 SM-3A5/22/2012829.9665.62764.34SM-4A5/22/2012814.1550.42763.73SM-1A6/13/2012828.0463.62764.42 SM-2A6/13/2012821.4058.16763.24 Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-90Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-6 Groundwater Monitoring Well Water Table Elevations(Sheet 2 of 2)Well IDDateTOC Elevation (ft) (a)Depth to Water (ft - BTOC)Water Table Elevation(a)SM-3A6/13/2012829.9665.90764.06SM-4A6/13/2012814.1550.68763.47 SM-1A7/16/2012828.0464.30763.74SM-2A7/16/2012821.4058.93762.47SM-3A7/16/2012829.9666.77763.19 SM-4A7/16/2012814.1551.29762.86SM-1A8/15/2012828.0464.52763.52SM-2A8/15/2012821.4059.18762.22 SM-3A8/15/2012829.9666.84763.12SM-4A8/15/2012814.1551.62762.53SM-1A9/18/2012828.0464.81763.23 SM-2A9/18/2012821.4059.44761.96SM-3A9/18/2012829.9667.12762.84SM-4A9/18/2012814.1551.89762.26a) TOC: top of casing; BTOC: below top of casing; all vertical elevations are NAVD 88 Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-91Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-7 Surface Water Analytical Results ParameterUnitsMethod Detection LimitsNumberSamplesCollectedNumberDetectsMin.MaxAlkalinity, Bicarbonate (CaCO3)mg/L2.31717272301Alkalinity, Total As CaCO3mg/L101717278327Biochemical Oxygen Demand, 5 daymg/L2.0175ND10.4Carbon Dioxide mg/L5.015159.821Carbon Dioxide (Not Preserved - NP)mg/L5.0442022 Chemical Oxygen Demandmg/L11.3179ND43.8Chlorophyll A mg/m30.0841714ND27Coliform, FecalCFU/100mL11714ND1300 Coliform, TotalMPN/100mL1171765027200Escherichia ColiMPN/100mL117171649Kjeldahl Nitrogen, Totalmg/L0.351710ND2.6 Nitrate As Nitrogenmg/L1.017176.410.4Nitrite As Nitrogenmg/L0.1174ND0.26Nitrogen As Ammoniamg/L0.25170NDNDOrthophosphorusmg/L0.00317170.0160.062Pheophytin A mg/m30.0591710ND16Phosphorusmg/L0.088174ND0.42 Silicamg/L0.134171711.922.9 Total Dissolved Solids (TDS)mg/L8.71717378500Total Hardnessmg/L0.151717351414 Total Organic Nitrogenmg/L0.351710ND2.6 Total Suspended Solids (TSS)mg/L0.03117170.8238Calciummg/L6.6171779.294.6Chloridemg/L2.0171724.548.2 Cyanide, Totalmg/L0.0043173ND0.0071Ironmg/L0.004817170.03966.52Leadmg/L0.0013179ND0.0236 Magnesiummg/L0.0231171737.343.2Mercurymg/L0.0001170NDNDPotassiummg/L0.047317172.123.96 Sodiummg/L0.028517175.5716Sulfatemg/L2.0171725.434.6Zincmg/L0.0016177ND0.0322 mg/L - milligrams per literND - not detected above the detection limit mg/m3 - milligrams per cubic meterMPN/100ml - most probable number per 100 milliliters Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewWater ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-92Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-8 SHINE Medical Surface Water Field Data - JanesvilleSample IDDateTemp. (°C) pH(SU)Specific Conductivity(µS/cm)Dissolved Oxygen(mg/L)Turbidity(NTU)Salinity(%)ColorOdorWaterLevel(inches)CommentsSM-SW0110/27/2011 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSStream Dry SM-SW0210/27/2011 8.197.1860015.141.60.00ClearNo Odor6.0SM-SW0310/27/2011 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW0111/16/2011 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSStream Dry SM-SW0211/16/2011 10.896.5960010.780.00.00ClearNo Odor7.0SM-SW0311/16/2011 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW0112/13/2011 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSStream Dry SM-SW0212/13/2011 6.847.467547.723.40.37ClearNo Odor8.0SM-SW0312/13/2011 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW011/9/2012NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSStream Dry SM-SW021/9/20125.847.447707.80-1.60.38ClearNo Odor7.0SM-SW031/9/2012NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW012/13/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSStream Dry SM-SW022/13/2012 5.927.476007.932.60.29ClearNo Odor3 - 11SM-SW032/13/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW013/13/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSStream Dry SM-SW023/13/2012 8.877.417647.985.00.38ClearNo Odor4.0SM-SW033/13/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW014/16/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSStream Dry SM-SW024/16/2012 10.427.546457.141.30.32ClearNo Odor8.0SM-SW034/16/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW015/22/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSStream Dry SM-SW025/22/2012 11.557.4314968.0534.70.76*ClearNo Odor6.0SM-SW035/22/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW016/12/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSStream Dry SM-SW026/12/2012 15.677.537288.0221.90.36ClearNo Odor5.0SM-SW036/12/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW017/16/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSStream Dry SM-SW027/16/2012 21.696.797576.186.00.37ClearNo Odor6.0SM-SW037/16/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW018/15/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSStream Dry SM-SW028/15/2012 17.337.447484.7316.00.37ClearNo Odor7.0SM-SW038/15/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW019/18/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry SM-SW029/18/2012 13.836.997977.312.00.39ClearNo Odor6.0SM-SW039/18/2012 NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSCulvert Dry Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewWater ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-93Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-9 Groundwater Analytical Results for Monitoring Wells Parameter UnitsMethod Detection LimitsNumberSamplesCollectedNumberDetectsMinimumMaximumAlkalinity, Bicarbonate (CaCO3)mg/L2.35353231302Alkalinity, Total As CaCO3mg/L105353248612Biochemical Oxygen Demand, 5 daymg/L2530NDNDCarbon Dioxide mg/L548481831Carbon Dioxide (Not Preserved - NP)mg/L510102030Chemical Oxygen Demandmg/L11.35315ND89.1Chlorophyll Amg/m30.084537ND1.6Coliform, FecalCFU/100mL 1533ND7Coliform, TotalMPN/100mL 15337ND2419Escherichia ColiMPN/100mL 1530NDNDKjeldahl Nitrogen, Totalmg/L0.35538ND0.46Nitrate As Nitrogenmg/L1535313.522.2Nitrite As Nitrogenmg/L0.1530NDNDNitrogen As Ammoniamg/L0.25531ND0.52Orthophosphorusmg/L0.0035338ND0.086Pheophytin Amg/m30.059537ND2.2Phosphorusmg/L0.088531ND0.26Silicamg/L134535313.918.8Total Dissolved Solids (TDS)mg/L8.75353340462Total Hardnessmg/L1505353330565Total Organic Nitrogenmg/L0.35536ND0.46Total Suspended Solids (TSS)mg/L0.03153531389Calciummg/L6.6535374.6126Chloridemg/L2535316.629.2Cyanide, Totalmg/L0.0061538ND0.018Ironmg/L4.853530.0443.04Leadmg/L1.35336ND0.0042Magnesiummg/L23.1535333.660.8Mercurymg/L0.0001530NDNDPotassiummg/L47.353530.4492.96Sodiummg/L28.553532.269.15Sulfatemg/L2535310.120.3Zincmg/L0.00165328ND0.0302 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewWater ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-94Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-10 SHINE Medical Groundwater Field Data - Janesville(Sheet 1 of 2)Sample IDDateWaterLevel(ft BTOC)Temp.(°C)pH(standard units)SpecificConductivity(µS/cm)DissolvedOxygen(mg/L)ORP(mV)Turbidity(NTU)Salinity(%)Color/Odor SM-GW1A10/26/201162.3810.707.3070510.70125.227.00.35Clear/No Odor SM-GW2A10/26/201157.0210.647.3067310.94134.75.70.33Clear/No Odor SM-GW3A10/27/201164.5911.607.2370310.14104.96.00.35Clear/No Odor SM-GW4A10/27/201149.5510.397.2172411.19107.98.90.36Clear/No Odor SM-GW1A11/16/201162.4510.117.2271110.44133.73.70.35Clear/No Odor SM-GW2A11/16/201157.0911.237.2067810.74116.48.90.33Clear/No Odor SM-GW3A11/17/201164.679.357.2470110.03122.5-0.80.34Clear/No Odor SM-GW4A11/17/201149.659.037.1574511.06135.6-0.80.37Clear/No Odor SM-GW1A12/13/201162.5910.437.2170010.44150.332.70.35Clear/No Odor SM-GW2A12/13/201157.2210.337.236989.78123.35.60.34Clear/No Odor SM-GW3A12/19/201164.8111.147.2273311.08120.65.00.36Clear/No Odor SM-GW4A12/19/201149.7810.177.1876311.73113.318.30.37Clear/No Odor SM-GW1A1/10/201262.698.197.2869311.60113.616.60.34Clear/No Odor SM-GW2A1/10/201257.298.507.3067411.72120.90.20.33Clear/No Odor SM-GW3A1/10/201264.929.667.2671911.25120.63.70.35Clear/No Odor SM-GW4A1/10/201249.857.697.1973711.45133.86.00.36Clear/No Odor SM-GW1A2/14/201262.888.417.2271111.70141.035.50.35Slightly Turbid/No Odor SM-GW2A2/14/201257.488.637.3067311.95112.80.70.33Clear/No Odor SM-GW3A2/14/201264.048.237.2472310.98144.44.60.35Clear/No Odor SM-GW4A2/14/201250.047.797.1772911.85180.26.50.36Clear/No Odor SM-GW1A3/12/201262.9611.547.1371410.02122.928.90.35Clear/No Odor SM-GW2A3/12/201257.5411.917.1968010.4399.71.50.33Clear/No Odor SM-GW3A3/12/201265.1612.257.117269.72107.50.30.36Clear/No Odor SM-GW4A3/12/201250.1311.807.0255610.16169.89.10.36Light Tan/No Odor SM-GW1A4/16/201263.1410.877.3558610.10121.532.60.29Light Brown/No Odor SM-GW2A4/16/201257.6810.547.4058010.62131.04.10.28Clear/No Odor SM-GW3A4/17/201263.3513.467.0672910.13155.4-2.30.36Clear/No Odor SM-GW4A4/17/201250.3114.487.017449.85198.5-4.10.37Clear/No Odor SM-GW1A5/23/201263.4415.976.62132010.03332.40.50.67(a)Clear/No Odor SM-GW2A5/23/201257.9018.006.66128210.09414.43.10.64(a)Clear/No Odor SM-GW3A5/22/201265.6614.776.20136910.07416.42.00.69(a)Clear/No Odor SM-GW4A5/22/201250.4413.916.73137010.47319.61.30.69(a)Clear/No Odor Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewWater ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-95Rev. 0Table 19.3.4-10 SHINE Medical Groundwater Field Data - Janesville(Sheet 2 of 2)Sample IDDateWaterLevel(ft BTOC)Temp.(°C)pH(standard units)SpecificConductivity(µS/cm)DissolvedOxygen(mg/L)ORP(mV)Turbidity(NTU)Salinity(%)Color/Odor SM-GW1A6/13/2012 63.6613.047.2164611.68202.66.60.32Clear/No Odor SM-GW2A6/12/2012 58.2214.147.2464711.68194.10.40.32Clear/No Odor SM-GW3A6/13/2012 65.9412.447.1768711.72200.00.00.34Clear/No Odor SM-GW4A6/12/2012 50.6713.007.1770011.55217.124.10.34Clear/No Odor SM-GW1A7/16/2012 64.3617.855.4265211.44618.5103.70.32Light Brown/No Odor SM-GW2A7/17/2012 58.9719.116.3177911.68549.5131.20.38Light Brown/No Odor SM-GW3A7/17/2012 66.7713.494.5274712.47574.410.70.37Light Brown/No Odor SM-GW4A7/16/2012 51.3020.336.0077113.39549.181.60.38Light Brown/No Odor SM-GW1A8/15/2012 64.5515.567.2963510.01122.33.90.31Clear/No Odor SM-GW2A8/16/2012 59.2014.797.3464510.48147.16.50.32Clear/No Odor SM-GW3A8/16/2012 66.8713.447.3370410.25147.13.70.35Clear/No Odor SM-GW4A8/15/2012 51.6514.007.2767210.35122.20.90.33Clear/No Odor SM-GW1A9/19/2012 64.8112.817.4071010.52201.07.70.35Clear/No Odor SM-GW2A9/18/2012 59.4614.115.7872111.01339.30.30.35Clear/No Odor SM-GW3A9/18/2012 67.1413.096.7180910.59212.30.30.40Clear/No Odor SM-GW4A9/19/2012 51.913.897.1678110.43260.17.40.38Clear/No Odora) meter malfunctioningµS/cm - micro Siemens per centimetermV - millivoltNTU - nephelometric turbidity unit Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-96Rev. 019.3.5ECOLOGICAL RESOURCESThis subsection provides a description and characterization of the terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems potentially affected by the construction and operation of the SHINE facility. Consultations with the WDNR (WDNR, 2012c) and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) (USFWS, 2012) were initiated for information regarding ecological resources near the SHINE site. This consultation process was used to obtain agency input regarding threatened and endangered species, sensitive habitats, commercial and recreational species, and other ecological characteristics for the site and near-site areas. Ecological resources described herein are based on recorded information provided by resource agencies and supplemental quarterly field surveys conducted in 2011 and 2012. 19.3.5.1Off-Site Areas Ecoregions are geographical areas within which the biotic and abiotic components of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems exhibit relatively homogenous patterns in comparison to that of other areas. Ecoregions serve as a spatial framework for the research, assessment, monitoring, and management of ecosystems and ecosystem components. Wisconsin contains 27 Level IV ecoregions nested within six larger Level III regions that also occupy portions of Illinois and other adjoining states (Omernik et al., 2008). Three Level III ecoregions have been identified and are further divided into several other Level IV ecoregions in southern Wisconsin and northern Illinois as depicted in Figure 19.3.5-1. The Rock River Drift Plain and the Southeastern Wisconsin Savannah and Till Plain are the only two ecoregions mapped within Rock County. The only ecoregion near the site (5-mi. [8-km] radius) is the Rock River Drift Plain as part of the larger Southeastern Wisconsin Till Plains ecoregion. Ecoregions are mapped by the USEPA (USEPA, 2012d) and are described in Wisconsin and Illinois by Omernik et al. (Omernik et al., 2008) and Woods et al. (Woods et al., 2006), respectively.The SHINE site is located within the Rock River Drift Plain as depicted in Figure 19.3.5-1. The Rock River Drift Plain is located in both southern Wisconsin and northern Illinois. This Level IV ecoregion is characterized by a landscape containing numerous small creeks, a greater stream density, and fewer lakes than in ecoregions to the north and east. Steeper topography and broad outwash plains with loamy and sandy soils characterize this ecoregion (Omernik et al., 2008). The soils of the Rock River Drift Plain have developed primarily from glacial till, outwash deposits, loess, or alluvium. Oak savanna, prairie, and to a lesser extent, forest (primarily on fire-protected dissected uplands and along water courses) were the predominant vegetative communities prior to European settlement. Today, more than half of the Rock River Drift Plain is cropland. Although forage crops and feed grains harvested to support dairy operations and livestock are most common, cash-grain farming is also important (Woods et al., 2006).19.3.5.2Site and Near Site Areas The SHINE site consists of a 91.27-ac. (36.94 ha) parcel located south of Janesville, Wisconsin, as depicted in Figure 19.3.1-1. Within the site boundary, 91.09 ac. (36.86 ha), or 99.8percent of the site, consists of agriculture/cultivated crops (see Table 19.3.1-1). The remaining 0.18ac. (0.07 ha) consists of developed open space as described in Subsection19.3.1. Because of continuous land disturbance associated with agricultural practices, the site is devoid of natural landscapes such as forest, we tlands, grasslands, prairie, old field, and other natural plant communities. In addition, there are no ephemeral, intermittent, or perennial streams and associated riparian zones located within the boundaries of the SHINE site. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-97Rev. 0The entire 5-mi. (8-km) radius of the site center point is contained within the Rock River Drift Plain Level IV ecoregion as depicted in Figure 19.3.5-1. The Rock River Drift Plain LevelIV ecoregion is described in Subsection 19.3.5.1. Land cover near the site (5-mi. [8-km] radius) is illustrated in Figure 19.3.1-2 and summarized in Table 19.3.1-1. The vast majority of the area near the site is used for agricultural production (see Table19.3.1-1). Cultivated crops make up 25,236 ac. (10,213ha), or more than 50percent of the area near the site. Corn, soybeans, and winter wheat are commonly grown. An additional 5896 ac. (2386 ha), or approximately 12percent near the site, is used for pasture or hay production. Altogether, agricultural activities make up 61.9percent of the area near the site. Developed lands account for 11,861 ac. (4800 ha), or nearly 24percent near the site (see Table19.3.1-1). This includes developed lands mapped as open space, low intensity, medium intensity, and high intensity. Developed lands are further described in Subsection 19.3.1. Forested resources account for 3367 ac. (1363 ha), or less than 7percent, near the site (see Table 19.3.1-1). Forested resources primarily consist of deciduous forest but also include minor amounts of evergreen and mixed forest. Because most of the natural communities near the site have been converted to agriculture, forested resources are concentrated in riparian corridors along the Rock River and its associated tributary streams. Mapped wetland land cover is sparse near the SHINE site as indicated in Table 19.3.1-1. Wetlands mapped near the site include 722 ac. (292 ha) of woody wetlands and 787 ac. (318ha) of emergent herbaceous wetlands. Together, wetland cover types account for 3percent of the land cover near the site. A total of 796 ac. (322 ha), or close to 2percent, near the site is mapped as open water. Grassland resources account for 1049 ac. (425 ha), or just over 2percent, near the site. Shrub/scrub and barren lands each account for 1percent or less near the site (see Table19.3.1-1). 19.3.5.3HistoryThe SHINE site is located within the Southeastern Wisconsin Till Plains where, at the time of European settlement, forests were common on moraines and along watercourses whereas prairie occurred on level to rolling uplands (Woods et al., 2006). According to Will-Wolf and Montague (Will-Wolf, S, and T.C. Montague, 1994), prairie covered approximately 50percent of southern Wisconsin prior to European settlement. However, given the intensity of agricultural land uses, a very small fraction of the original tallgrass prairie remains in Wisconsin (Higgins et al., 2001; Smith, Daryl D., 1990).Conversion of native plant communities to agriculture in the Midwest took place primarily in the 19th Century and was accelerated in 1837 by John Deere's invention of the self-scouring steel plow (Robertson, Ken, 2008). Conversion to agriculture not only changed the composition of plant communities, but also resulted in the draining of wetlands and the channelization of small streams to accommodate row crop production. Lands of the SHINE site have been in continuous agricultural production for several decades. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-98Rev. 019.3.5.4Places and Entities of Special InterestThis subsection provides information relative to the ecological resources of special interest near the SHINE site. The occurrence and characteristics of these features is developed as a result of quarterly field studies on and immediately surrounding the site, general field reconnaissance, and from agency correspondence.19.3.5.4.1Communities and Habitats of Special InterestEcological communities of special interest near the SHINE site include wetlands and terrestrial communities of special interest identified by WDNR. As described in Subsection 19.3.5.6, mapped wetland land cover is sparse near the SHINE site as indicated in Table 19.3.1-1. Wetlands mapped near the site include 722 ac. (292 ha) of woody wetlands and 787 ac. (318 ha) of emergent herbaceous wetlands. Together, wetland cover types account for 3percent of the land cover within the 5-mi. (8 km) radius. There are no wetlands on-site.As part of a WDNR endangered resources review letter, six communities of special interest were identified near the SHINE site (WDNR, 2012c): *Dry prairie, *Dry-mesic prairie, *Mesic prairie, *Southern dry-mesic forest,
- Southern mesic forest, and *Wet prairie.
Dry Prairie. This dry grassland community usually occurs on steep south or west facing slopes or at the summits of river bluffs with sandstone or dolomite bedrock near the surface. Short to medium-sized prairie grasses such as little bluestem (Schizachyrium scoparium), side-oats grama (Bouteloua curtipendula), hairy grama (Bouteloua hirsuta), and prairie dropseed (Sporobolus heterolepis) are the dominants in this community. Common shrubs and forbs include lead plant (Amorpha canescens), silky aster ( Aster sericeus), flowering spurge (Euphorbia corollata), purple prairie-clover (Dalea purpurea), cylindrical blazing-star (Liatris cylindracea ), and gray goldenrod (Solidago nemoralis). Stands on knolls in the Kettle Moraine region of southeastern Wisconsin, and on bluffs along the St. Croix River on the Minnesota- Wisconsin border, occur on gravelly substrates and may warrant recognition as distinctive subtypes of "Dry Prairie."Dry Mesic Prairie. This grassland community was common in parts of southern Wisconsin, occurring on slightly less droughty sites than dry prairie. Today, this community type is rare because of conversion to agricultural uses or the encroachment of woody vegetation due to the lack of wildfire. Dry-mesic prairie has many of the same grasses as dry prairie, but taller species such as big bluestem (Andropogon gerardii) and Indian-grass (Sorghastrum nutans ) dominate. Needle grass (Stipa spartea) and prairie drop-seed may also be present. The herb component is more diverse than in dry prairies, as it may include many species that occur in both dry and mesic prairies. Composites and legumes are particularly well-represented in relatively undisturbed stands.Mesic Prairie. Although common historically, this type is extremely rare today. This grassland community occurs on rich, moist, well-drained sites, usually on level or gently rolling glacial Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.3-99Rev. 0topography. The dominant plant is the tall grass, big bluestem. The grasses little bluestem, Indian grass, needle grass, prairie dropseed, and switch grass ( Panicum virgatum) are also frequent. The forb layer is diverse in the number, size, and physiognomy of the species. Common taxa include the prairie docks (Silphium spp.), lead plant, heath aster ( Aster ericoides), smooth aster (Aster laevis), prairie coreopsis (Coreopsis palmata), prairie sunflower (Helianthus pauciflorus ), rattlesnake-master (Eryngium yuccifolium), flowering spurge, bee-balm (Monarda fistulosa ), prairie coneflower (Echinacea pallida), and spiderwort (Tradescantia spp. ).Southern Dry-mesic Forest. Red oak is a common dominant tree of this upland forest community type. White oak (Quercus alba), basswood (Tilia americana), sugar maple ( Acer saccharum), red maple (Acer rubrum), white ash (Fraxinus americana), shagbark hickory (Carya ovata), and black cherry (Prunus serotina) are also important. The herbaceous understory flora is diverse and includes many species listed under southern dry forest plus jack-in-the-pulpit (Arisaema triphyllum), enchanter's-nightshade (Circaea spp.), large-flowered bellwort (Uvularia grandiflora), interrupted fern (Osmunda claytoniana), lady fern ( Athyrium filix-femina), tick-trefoils (Desmodium spp.), and hog peanut (Amphicarpaea bracteata ).Southern Mesic Forest. This upland forest community occurs on rich, well-drained loamy soils, mostly on glacial till plains or loess-capped sites south of the tension zone. The dominant tree species is sugar maple, but basswood, and near Lake Michigan, American beech may be co-dominant. Many other trees are found in these forests, including those of the walnut family, ironwood ( Carpinus caroliniana), red oak ( Quercus rubra), red maple, white ash, and slippery elm (Ulmus rubra). The understory is typically open, or sometimes brushy with species of gooseberry (Ribes spp.) on sites with a history of grazing, and supports fine spring ephemeral displays. Characteristic herbs are spring-beauty (Claytonia spp.), trout-lilies ( Erythronium spp.), trilliums (Trillium spp.), violets (Viola spp.), bloodroot (Sanguinaria canadensis), blue cohosh (Caulophyllum thalictroides), mayapple (Podophyllum peltatum), and Virginia waterleaf (Hydrophyllum virginianum ).Wet Prairie. This is a rather variable tall grassland community that shares characteristics of prairies, southern sedge meadow, calcareous fen and even emergent aquatic communities. The wet prairies' more wetland-like character can mean that sometimes very few obligate prairie species are present. In wet prairie the dominant graminoids may include Canada bluejoint grass (Calamagrostis canadensis), cordgrass ( Spartina spp.), and marsh wild- timothy (Muhlenbergia glomerata), plus several sedge species including lake sedge ( Carex spp.), water sedge ( Carex aquatilis), and woolly sedge (Carex spp.). Many of the herbs are shared with the wet-mesic prairies, but the following species are often prevalent: New England aster (Aster novae-angliae ), swamp thistle (Cirsium muticum), northern bedstraw (Galium boreale), yellow stargrass ( Hypoxis hirsuta), cowbane (Oxypolis rigidior), tall meadow-rue (Thalictrum dasycarpum), golden Alexander ( Zizia spp.), and mountain-mint (Pycnanthemum spp. ).A total of ten state designated natural areas are located in Rock County (Figure 19.3.5-2). However, only Rock River Prairie is located within 5-mi (8-km) of the SHINE site. Rock River Prairie is a 37-ac. (14 ha) dry prairie situated on the rolling terrace above the Rock River and contains large populations of prairie forbs and grasses including several rare and threatened plants. The prairie supports over 50 native prairie species including pasque flower ( Anemone patens), cream wild indigo (Baptisia bracteata ), rock sandwort (Arenaria spp.), and prairie gentian (Gentiana puberulenta). Dominant grasses include little blue-stem and side-oats grama with prairie drop-seed. More common forbs present include silky aster, shooting-star
(Dodecatheon spp.), prairie-smoke (Anemone patens), bird's-foot violet (Viola pedata), smooth Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-100Rev. 0yellow flax (Linum spp.), fringed puccoon (Lithospermum incisum), and spiderwort. The prairie also contains rare plants including one of Wisconsin's largest populations of the state-endangered wild petunia ( Ruellia humilis). Other rare plants include prairie bush-clover (Lespedeza leptostachya ), woolly milkweed (Acerates lanuginosa) and prairie thistle ( Cirsium spp.). The rare prairie false dandelion (Microseris cuspidata) was recently rediscovered at the site after the reintroduction of fire and other management activities. Rock River Prairie is owned by the WDNR and was desig nated a State Natural Ar ea in 1999 (WDNR, 2012d).Given the landscape position of the SHINE site, it is likely that the SHINE site may have been prairie habitat before its conversion to agriculture. However, because of the complete conversion of the lands of the SHINE site and its immediate environs to cultivated fields or other developed uses, none of the above habitat types are present either on-site or in adjacent off-site areas.19.3.5.4.2Other Sensitive or Susceptible AreasIn addition to the state-listed natural areas described above, Happy Hollow County Park, located southwest of the site is a park with natural features of special interest (see Figure 19.3.5-2). The park consists of 192 ac. (77 ha) that are located along the Rock River. The park supports a wide variety of habitats including wetlands, grasslands, and forested areas. It is of interest for bird watching and supports an abundance of bird species such as eagles, hawks, owls, kingfishers, herons, sea gulls and a variety of song birds. The park also has a trail system that is designated for both hiking and equestrian use (Rock County, 2012c).19.3.5.4.3Important Ecological SystemsRock County is located along a principal route of the Mississippi Flyway (Bird Nature, 2012). As such, natural habitats along the Rock River and other areas are particularly useful to migrating birds for resting, feeding and foraging. Unbroken forested lands and riparian habitats are particularly recognized for their value in providing support to neotropical migratory birds both during migration and as habitats for nesting and nursery areas. Such areas however, are largely confined to the lands west of US 51 along the Rock River. Habitats of the SHINE site and adjacent lands are dominated by agricultural and developed uses and are not considered to be high value or important ecological systems.19.3.5.5Aquatic Communities and Potentially Affected Water BodiesThere are no aquatic resources or water bodies present on the SHINE site. This subsection therefore, provides information that describes the aquatic communities and potentially affected water bodies within the 5-mi. (8-km) area around the SHINE site.Available mapping indicates that the majority of site runoff flows southwest toward the Rock River. However, because of the high infiltration rate of the soils near the SHINE site, no organized stream channel and associated aquatic habitats are present. Sampling was performed within an unnamed stream located south of the site in order to characterize aquatic biota near the SHINE site.Aquatic habitats near the SHINE site include those associated with the Rock River and an unnamed stream which is a tributary to the Rock River. The unnamed stream is located approximately 1.6 mi. (2.6km) south of the site, while the Rock River is 1.9 mi. (3.1 km) Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-101Rev. 0southwest of the site. The SHINE site and immediate off-site areas drain south and west towards the Rock River and its tributaries. Local streams have substrates consisting primarily of sand, gravel, cobble, and occasional boulders.Surveys of adult and juvenile fish in the Rock River have been compiled by the WDNR and are accessible in a fish mapping database (WDNR, 2012e). Table 19.3.5-1 su mmarizes Rock River fish species from the WDNR database collected within Rock County since the year 1980. In order to further characterize the aquatic biological communities of tributaries potentially draining the site, fish surveys and benthic macroinvertebrate surveys were conducted within the unnamed stream south of the site (Figure 19.3.5-3). Fish surveys were conducted utilizing a seine on a quarterly basis (October 2011, January 2012, April 2012, and July 2012). Macroinvertebrate surveys were conducted in October 2011 and April 2012 by use of a kicknet in representative in-stream habitats. Aquatic location 2 was the only location along the unnamed stream that contained water. Therefore, no samples were collected from aquatic location 1. Six sweeps or kicks collected at aquatic location 2 were composited, preserved using 5 percent buffered formaldehyde, and transported to AMEC's St. Louis laboratory for analysis. WDNR's fish mapping database indicate that a total of 21 distinct species have been collected in the Rock River by electrofishing since 1980 (see Table 19.3.5-1). Results reflect a fish community typical of flowing river habitats. Representative species of the Rock River near the SHINE site include smallmouth bass ( Micropterus dolomieu), northern pike ( Esox lucius ), rock bass (Ambloplites rupestris), freshwater drum (Aplodinotus grunniens), northern hogsucker (Hypentelium nigricans ), white bass (Morone chrysops), channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatus ), bigmouth buffalo (Ictiobus cyprinellus), shorthead redhorse (Moxostoma macrolepidotum ), white sucker (Catostomus commersonii), spotfin shiner (Cyprinella spiloptera), emerald shiner (Notropis atherinoides), spottail shiner (Notropis hudsonius), logperch (Percina caprodes ), sauger (Sander canadensis), and walleye (Sander vitreus). Other species that are more characteristic of slow-moving/backwater included bowfin (Amia calva), common carp ( Cyprinus carpio), pumpkinseed (Lepomis gibbosus), bluegill ( Lepomis macrochirus), and black crappie (Pomoxis nigromaculatus ). Only two species were collected from the unnamed tributary of the Rock River, located south of the site. Species present in this small stream included brook stickleback (Culaea inconstans) and green sunfish (Lepomis cyanellus). This stream is the closest freshwater body to the SHINE site and is characterized as having a channel that is 3 to 4 ft. (0.9 to 1.2m) wide at the ordinary high water mark, and having a depth of up to approximately 1 ft. (0.3m) deep. Given its small size, fish species diversity was expected to be low. Benthic macroinvertebrate collections from the unnamed stream south of the site contained a total of 252 specimens representing 12 distinct taxa in the fall 2011 samples, and a total of 284 specimens representing 9 distinct taxa in the spring 2012 samples (Table 19.3.5-2). Low species diversity is likely due to the very small and intermittent nature of this stream. Crustaceans, particularly the amphipod Gammarus, dominated both samples representing 79percent of the fall 2011 sample and 94percent of the spring 2012 sample. All other taxa collected in the benthic macroinvertebrate samples made up less that 5percent of the samples. Shannon diversity for fall 2011 and spring 2012 was 0.96 and 0.35 (respectively). Biotic index values for fall 2011 and spring 2012 were 6.29 and 6.69, respectively (see Table 19.3.5-2). These values indicate the presence of a moderately tolerant benthic invertebrate community. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-102Rev. 019.3.5.6WetlandsWetlands are transitional ecosystems between aquatic and terrestrial systems where the water table is usually at or near the surface or the land is covered by shallow water (Cowardin et al., 1979). Wetlands vary widely because of regional and local differences in soils, topography, climate, hydrology, water chemistry, vegetation, and other factors, including human disturbance. For regulatory purposes under the Clean Water Act, the term wetland means "...those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs and similar areas" (40 CFR 230.3(t)). Jurisdictional wetlands are regulated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and display characteristic hydrology, soils, and hydrophytic plants. A wetland delineation survey was performed at the SHINE site in October 2011 in accordance with Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Northcentral and Northeast Region (USACE, 2009). No jurisdictional wetlands were identified within the site boundary. 19.3.5.7Terrestrial CommunitiesThis subsection provides a description and characterization of terrestrial communities identified on the SHINE site and the surrounding area. Quarterly pedestrian and roadside surveys were conducted to identify and characterize plant and animal species that occur on site and those that are characteristic of the area.19.3.5.7.1Plant Communities Characterization of terrestrial plant communities on and in proximity to the SHINE site is based on records review (recorded distributional records), agency consultation with WDNR and USFWS, and field studies. Investigative methods included vegetative land cover type mapping and field confirmation, general site reconnaissance, and pedestrian surveys. Pedestrian surveys were performed during the growing season in the fall 2011 and spring and summer 2012 to identify and record terrestrial plant species for a qualitative inventory of the flora on and in proximity to the site. Supplemental field studies are used in part to characterize the assemblage of terrestrial plant species and to aid in the identification of any federally listed threatened or endangered species or Wisconsin listed threatened, endangered or special concern species potentially occurring within and in proximity to the SHINE property boundary.Most of the site is used for cultivated crops, with generally opportunistic weedy species encountered in-between planted fields and along the west border with US 51 (Figure19.3.5-3). Cultivated crops on the SHINE site include corn (Zea mays), soybean ( Glycine max ), and winter wheat (Triticum aestivum). Weedy species encountered on-site include fescue (Festuca sp. ), green foxtail ( Setaria viridis), Queen Anne's lace (Daucus carota), and common dandelion (Taraxacum officinale ).As depicted in Figure 19.3.1-2, the land cover types found in proximity to the site are mainly developed-open space, developed-low, medium, and high intensity, and cultivated crops/pasture/hay, with a small area south of the site combining deciduous forest, scrub shrub, grassland herbaceous, and woody wetlands. Table 19.3.5-3 lists the terrestrial plants observed within these land cover areas from pedestrian surveys during the growing season. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-103Rev. 0No federal or state-listed threatened, endangered or special concern plant species have been observed on or in the proximity of the SHINE site. The site and terrestrial habitats in proximity to the site are mainly cultivated crops/pasture/hay and developed areas. This is consistent with the dominant land uses within the region (see Figure 19.3.1-2).19.3.5.7.2WildlifeThe terrestrial ecology of the SHINE site and near the site was characterized in a series of quarterly field studies conducted over a 1-year period extending from October 2011 to September 2012. The field studies for wildlife included surveys for avifauna, mammals and herpetofauna. In general, study methods within the ecological investigation area included a review of available mapping, databases, and correspondence with the appropriate agencies. Amap of the site along with the aquatic and bird survey locations is provided in Figure 19.3.5-3. The subsections below summarize relevant information from each of these studies and provide other data and descriptions of the terrestrial ecology in the area.19.3.5.7.2.1MammalsMethodology for the identification of mammal species within the SHINE site and near the site consisted of records review (i.e., recorded range/distributional records [American Society of Mammalogists, 2012]) and agency consultation with WDNR and USFWS. These methods were supplemented with additional field studies including general field reconnaissance and faunal observations, road kills, tracks, scat, nests, or other indicated evidence. Supplemental field studies within the site and near the site were used in part to characterize the assemblage of mammal species and to aid in the identification of protected species near the SHINE site. Specific mammal survey locations were not developed. Mammal species were recorded based on general field reconnaissance and incidental observations at the aquatic survey locations and along the bird survey route. A quarterly walk through of the entire site was also conducted for evidence of wildlife use. Mammals were not commonly observed during site reconnaissance due to the agricultural nature of the site. Mammal species observed on-site included white-tailed deer ( Odocoileus virginianus ), raccoon (Procyon lotor hirtus), eastern cottontail (Sylvilagus floridanus), and groundhog (Marmota monax). Mammal occurrence on-site is likely driven by the presence and life stage of the agriculture crop that is present, as agricultural crops provide a source of food for some wildlife species. The list of mammals observed on-site and those potentially occurring near the site, based on distributional range, are recorded in Table19.3.5-4. No protected mammal species have been observed or are known to occur at the SHINE site. White-tailed deer and eastern cottontail are both recreationally valuable as game species. Their use of the site, however, is sporadic given the lack of cover, shelter, and water supply. Agency consultation did not identify any state or federally listed mammal species that were recorded within 5 mi. (8 km) of the SHINE site.19.3.5.7.2.2BirdsIdentification of bird species potentially occurring on the site or in near off-site areas consisted of records review (i.e., recorded range/distributional records [WBBA, 2012 and USGS, 2012d]), field investigation and agency consultation with USFWS and WDNR. For the SHINE site and Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-104Rev. 0near the site, field studies included general field reconnaissance and observation, site surveys, and roadside bird surveys. Figure 19.3.5-3 depicts the roadside survey route that was surveyed seasonally (fall, winter, spring, summer) for birds. Observers stopped at 0.5 mi. (0.8km) intervals to record all birds seen or heard during a 3-minute survey period. The route was driven on two separate dates during each season with observations initiated approximately at sunrise each day. Fifty-eight species were observed during the 2011-2012 surveys near the site, 61 species were identified as part of the Wisconsin Breeding Bird Atlas (WBBA) da tabase (WBBA, 2012), and 74species were recorded as part of the closest Breeding Bird Survey route (USGS, 2012d). Abundant and common bird species observed during field surveys near the site included red-winged blackbird (Agelaius phoeniceus), northern cardinal (Cardinalis cardinalis), American goldfinch (Carduelis tristis), house finch (Carpodacus mexicanus), American crow ( Corvus brachyrhynchos), horned lark ( Eremophila alpestris ), house sparrow (Passer domesticus ), common grackle (Quiscalus quiscula), European starling (Sturnus vulgaris), and American robin (Turdus migratorius). Birds observed on-site included red-winged blackbird, Canada goose
(Branta canadensis), red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), killdeer (Charadrius vociferus ), American crow, and horned lark. The complete list of birds observed on-site and those potentially occurring near the site are recorded in Table 19.3.5-5. Based on the methodology outlined above, there are no protected bird species at the SHINE site. Canada goose is the only species observed on-site that is recreationally valuable since it is a game species. The state of Wisconsin is part of the Mississippi Flyway. Based on field observations, Canada geese occasionally fly over the site or use the site during migration to feed. In addition to the Mississippi Flyway, the Rock River (approximately 2 mi. [3.2km] south of the site) is a potential habitat for other waterfowl and shoreline bird use; however, there are no documented rookeries near the site along the Rock River. Agency consultation did not identify any state or federally listed bird species that were recorded within 5 mi. (8 km) of the SHINE site.19.3.5.7.2.3HerpetofaunaAmphibians and reptiles (herpetofauna) within the site and near the site areas were identified using records review (i.e., recorded range/distributional records [WDNR, 2012f]) and agency consultation with USFWS and WDNR. On the SHINE site these methods were supplemented with additional field studies including general field reconnaissance and site surveys. Supplemental field studies within the site and near the site were used in part to characterize the assemblage of amphibian and reptile species and to aid in the identification of protected species near the SHINE site. Terrestrial ecology study locations on the site and near the site are shown on Figure 19.3.5-3. Specific herpetofauna survey locations were not developed. Herpetofauna were recorded based on general field reconnaissance and incidental observations at the aquatic survey locations and along the bird survey route. A quarterly walk-through of the entire site was also conducted for evidence of wildlife use. Species observed or heard during field surveys near the site included the American toad (Bufo americanus), bullfrog (Rana catesbiana), green frog (Rana clanitans), northern leopard frog (Rana pipiens), spring peeper (Pseudacris crucifer ), common snapping turtle ( Chelydra serpentina), and eastern garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis ). There were no amphibians or reptiles observed on the SHINE site. The complete list of herpetofauna potentially occurring based on range/distribution near the site is recorded in Table19.3.5-6. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-105Rev. 0WDNR identified the Blanding's turtle (Emydoidea blandingii) as state threatened and potentially occurring near the site. The Blanding's turtle is found in a variety of aquatic habitats including marshes, lake bays, slow-moving streams, oxbows, drainage ditches, meadows, and wetlands. This species is semi-terrestrial thus individuals may spend a good deal of time on land moving between a variety of wetland types from early March to mid-October. They typically overwinter in standing water that is at least 3 ft. (0.9 m) in depth with a deep organic substrate but will also use both warm and cold-water streams and rivers where they can avoid freezing. Nesting occurs from about mid-May through June depending on spring temperatures and they have a strong preference for nesting in sandy soils. Hatching occurs from early August through early September but hatchlings can successfully overwinter in the nest, emerging the following spring (WDNR, 2012g). Blanding's turtles were not observed during field rec onnaissance. Given the absence of wetlands and open water habitat on the site or its immediate near-site environs, Blanding's turtles are not expected to occur on-site.19.3.5.8Invasive SpeciesNon-native species are those species that arrived in and colonized an area with direct or indirect human assistance, even if they are native elsewhere in the state. Non-native species may also be called non-indigenous, alien, exotic, adventive or naturalized species. Invasive species, as defined by Executive Order 13112, include alien species whose introduction does or is likely to cause economic or environmental harm or harm to human health. According to Executive Order13112, each federal agency whose actions may affect the status of invasive species shall, to the extent practicable and permitted by law, prevent the introduction of invasive species; detect and control populations of such species; monitor invasive species populations; and provide for the restoration of native species in ecosystems that have been invaded.In 2001, the Wisconsin Legislature directed the WDNR to establish a statewide program to control invasive species, and to promulgate rules to identify, classify and control invasive species for purposes of the program. On September 1, 2009, the WDNR created Wisconsin's Invasive Species Identification, Classification and Control Rule (Chapter NR 40, Wisconsin Administrative Code). In accordance with the rule, invasive species have been identified and classified into two categories: Prohibited and Restricted. With certain exceptions, the transport, possession, transfer and introduction of Prohibited species is banned. Restricted species are also subject to a ban on transport, transfer and introduction, but possession is allowed, with the exception of fish and crayfish (WDNR, 2012h).Because there are no ponds, streams, or other water bodies on-site, aquatic invasive species associated with these habitats, such as fish and crayfish, are not present on the SHINE site. Similarly, the lack of wetlands on-site precludes the presence of obligate wetland invasive species on the SHINE site.The list of invasive species for the State of Wisconsin (WDNR, 2010b) was evaluated against the terrestrial plant species observed during the vegetation surveys conducted on the site and near the site in 2011 and 2012. Based on this evaluation, seven "restricted" and two "prohibited" plant species were identified off-site in nearby areas. Restricted species observed in nearby off-site areas include musk thistle (Carduus nutans ), autumn olive (Elaeagnus umbellata), bush honeysuckle (Lonicera maackii), garlic mustard (Alliaria petiolata), wild parsnip ( Pastinaca sativa), dames rocket (Hesperis matronalis), and reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea). These weedy invasive species were observed in various Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-106Rev. 0land cover types including developed lands, agricultural lands, and riparian corridors. "Prohibited" species observed in nearby off site areas include Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), and sericea lespedeza (Lespedeza cuneata). Japanese honeysuckle was observed on nearby developed lands, whereas sericea lespedeza was observed in the riparian corridor of the unnamed stream south of the site. It should be noted that no invasive species listed by WDNR (neither restricted nor prohibited) were observed on the SHINE site. Additionally, there are no existing plans to implement invasive species management/control activities at the facility.19.3.5.9Procedures and ProtocolsThe SHINE site has been in agricultural production for several decades. As such, the site has a history of frequent ground disturbance (disking, planting, plowing) and herbicide applications to maximize row crop production. There are no ecological procedures or management plans in place for the SHINE site.19.3.5.10Studies and Monitoring The terrestrial and aquatic ecology of the SHINE site and near the site was characterized in a series of field studies conducted over a 1-year period extending from October 2011 to September 2012. The objective of the field studies was to obtain site-specific species data to characterize existing ecological conditions. The field studies included surveys for terrestrial vegetation, avifauna, mammals, herpetofauna, identification of waters of the United States (including wetlands), adult/juvenile fish, and benthic macroinvertebrates. In general, study methods within the ecological investigation area included a review of available mapping, databases, and correspondence with the appropriate agencies along with supplemental field studies. Subsections 19.3.5.5 and 19.3.5.7 summarize relevant information from each of these studies and provide other data on existing terrestrial and aquatic ecology in accordance with the guidance in the Final ISG Augmenting NUREG-1537.19.3.5.11Protected SpeciesA list of threatened/endangered species or species of special concern identified within 6 mi. (9.7km) of the SHINE site is provided in Table 19.3.5-7. Terrestrial and aquatic listed species include five fish species, five mussel species, one turtle species, and 27 plant species. Agency consultation did not identify any state or federally listed mammal, bird, or insect species near the SHINE site.The fish, unionid mussels, and turtle with the potential to occur near the study area are listed as state endangered, threatened, or species of special concern. The fish include the American eel (Anguilla rostrata), gravel chub (Erimystax (Hybopsis)x-punctatus ), redfin shiner ( Lythrurus umbratilis), greater redhorse (Moxostoma valenciennesi), and Ozark minnow (Notropis nubilus ). Listed mussels include the elktoe (Alasmidonta marginata ), purple wartyback (Cyclonaias tuberculata), monkeyface (Quadrula metanevra), ellipse (Venustaconcha ellipsiformis ), and rainbow shell (Villosa iris ). The Blanding's turtle (Emydoidea blandingii) is the only reptile species listed with the potential to occur near the SHINE site. These species were indicated to be known or likely to occur near the site during consultation with the WDNR (WDNR, 2012c). The species listed above inhabit aquatic areas such as rivers and streams and the Blanding's turtle requires ponds and wetlands. Because these habitats are absent from the site, these species are not expected to occur on the SHINE site. The Rock River and adjacent riparian Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-107Rev. 0area, approximately 2 mi. (3.2 km) from the SHINE site, is the nearest location with suitable habitat for the listed fish, mussel, and turtle species. Agency consultation identified 27 plant species that may potentially occur near the site that are listed as state endangered, threatened, or species of special concern (WDNR, 2012c). The state or federal status of each of these species is provided in Table 19.3.5-7. The prairie bush-clover (Lespedeza leptostachya) is listed as a state endangered and federally threatened species and is the only plant species that is federally listed near the site (WDNR, 2012c; USFWS, 2012). The listed plant species are discussed below based on the three general habitat types in which they are found: forests/woodlands, riparian areas, and prairies.Eight state-listed plant species known or likely to occur near the site prefer forested or woodland habitats including: yellow giant hyssop (Agastache nepetoides ), purple milkweed ( Asclepias purpurascens), kitten tails ( Besseya bullii), wood spurge (Euphorbia commutata), hairy wild-petunia (Ruellia humilis), snowy campion ( Silene nivea), purple meadow-parsnip ( Thaspium trifoliatum var. flavum ), and sycamore (Platanus occidentalis). There is no forested habitat on the SHINE site nor were any of these species observed during any of the vegetation surveys within the site or near the site.Two state-listed plant species known or likely to occur near the site prefer wetland or true aquatic habitats including small forget-me-not (Myosotis laxa) and yellow water lily (Nuphar advena ). Small forget-me-not is typically found in cold, clear forested streams whereas yellow water lily prefers shallow to deep water of sluggish streams, ponds and lakes (WDNR, 2012c). Aquatic habitats, including streams, ponds, and lakes, are lacking from the site and neither of these species was observed during any of the vegetation surveys within the site or near the site. Seventeen state-listed plant species that prefer prairie habitat were identified as known or likely to occur near the SHINE site include: a.Artemisa dracunculus (dragon wormwood) b.Asclepias lanuginosa (wooly milkweed) c.Cacalia tuberosa (prairie Indian-plantain) d.Calylophus serrulatus (yellow evening primrose) e.Camassia scilloides (wild hyancinth) f.Cirsium hillii (Hill's thistle) g.Cypripedium candidum (small white lady's-slipper) h.Echinacea pallida (pale purple coneflower) i.Hypericum sphaerocarpum (round-fruited St.John's-wort) j.Lespedeza leptostachya (prairie bush clover) k.Melica nitens (three-flowered melic grass) l.Nothocalais cuspidata (prairie false-dandelion) m.Penstemon hirsutus (hairy beardtongue) n.Polygala incarnata (pink milkwort) o.Polytaenia nuttallii (prairie parsley) p.Prenanthes aspera (rough rattlesnake-root) q.Scutellaria parvu la (small skullcap) None of these species were observed during the vegetation surveys performed within or near the site. Furthermore, the entire SHINE site is composed of agricultural land and does not include the preferred prairie habitat of the listed species above. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-108Rev. 0Table 19.3.5-1 Fish Potentially Occurring near the SHINE SiteCommon NameScientific Name Rock River(a)Unnamed Stream (Tributary of Rock River(b))Rock bassAmbloplites rupestris XBowfinAmia calva XFreshwater drumAplodinotus grunniens XWhite suckerCatostomus commersoniiXBrook sticklebackCulaea inconstans XSpotfin shinerCyprinella spiloptera XCommon carpCyprinus carpio XNorthern pike Esox lucius XNorthern hogsuckerHypentelium nigricans XChannel catfishIctalurus punctatus XBigmouth buffaloIctiobus cyprinellus XGreen sunfishLepomis cyanellus XPumpkinseedLepomis gibbosus XBluegillLepomis macrochirus XSmallmouth bassMicropterus dolomieu XWhite bassMorone chrysops XShorthead redhorseMoxostoma macrolepidotumXEmerald shinerNotropis atherinoides XSpottail shinerNotropis hudsonius XLogperchPercina caprodes XBlack crappiePomoxis nigromaculatusXSaugerSander canadensis XWalleyeSander vitreus XSpecies Richness 212a)WDNR, 2012c (fish collect ed on the Rock River within Rock County beyond the year 1980).b)SHINE ER field sampling program. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-109Rev. 0Table 19.3.5-2 Benthic Macroinvertebrates Collected in an Unnamed Stream (Tributaryof the Rock River) near the SHINE SiteOrdersAbundanceFall 2011Spring 2012 Diptera2DixidaeDixa modesta 1Chironomidae1Chironominae1 Apedilum1Stictochironomus 9Stratiomyidae Odontomyia2 Hemiptera Belostomatidae Belostoma 3Corixidae Sigara21GerridaeAquarius1Coleoptera Hydrophilidae 1Tropisternus 1Tricladida Dugesiidae Girardia106Megaloptera SialidaeSialis1Non-insects Amphipoda 9Gammarus200266IsopodaCaecidotea10 Lirceus5GastropodaGyraulus1 Planorbidae1 Physidae Physa1Total #252284 Taxa Richness129EPT Richness00Shannon Diversity Index0.960.35 Biotic Index6.296.69 Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-110Rev. 0Table 19.3.5-3 Terrestrial Plants Observed on or near the SHINE Site(Sheet 1 of 4)Botanical NameCommon NameQualitative Abundance in Land Cover Area Surveyed(a)SiteDeveloped-Open SpaceDeveloped-Low, Medium, High IntensityCultivated Crops/Pasture/Deciduous Forest/ Shrub/ Herbaceous/WetlandsTrees/SaplingsAbies balsamea Balsam fir CUAcer negundoBox elder COAcer rubrumRed mapleOUUAcer saccharinumSilver mapleOCAcer saccharumSugar mapleCOCBetula nigra River birch OCeltis occidentalis Hackberry COCercis canadensisEastern redbud UCrataegus mollisDowny hawthorn ACrataegus monogynaOneseed hawthorn OFraxinus americanaWhite ash CFraxinus pennsylvanicaGreen ash OOGleditsia triacanthosHoney locustUUUJuglans nigra Black walnutCOUJuniperous virginianaEastern red cedar UMorus alba White mulberry UMorus rubra Red mulberry UPicea pungens Blue spruce OPinus resinosaRed pineOCPinus strobusEastern white pine OOPopulus albaWhite poplar RPopulus grandidentataBigtooth aspen OCPrunus sp. CherryURPrunus serotina Black cherry OQuercus albaWhite oak OCSalix sp.WillowRUSalix babylonicaWeeping willow USalix nigraBlack willow UCUlmus americanaAmerican elm CCUlmus rubraSlippery elmAOAShrubsCeanothus cuneatusBuckbrush COCephalanthus occidentalisCommon buttonbush UCrataegus monogynaOneseed hawthorn OElaeagnus umbellataAutumn olive U Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-111Rev. 0Table 19.3.5-3 Terrestrial Plants Observed on or near the SHINE Site(Sheet 2 of 4)Botanical NameCommon NameQualitative Abundance in Land Cover Area Surveyed(a)SiteDeveloped-Open SpaceDeveloped-Low, Medium, High IntensityCultivated Crops/Pasture/Deciduous Forest/ Shrub/ Herbaceous/WetlandsShrubs (continued)Juniperous virginianusEastern red cedar UOLonicera maackiiBush honeysuckleAAARibes cynosbatiEastern prickly gooseberry CORosa rugosaRugosa rose CSymphoricarpos occidentalisWestern snowberry OSyringa vulgarisCommon lilac UViburnum sp.ViburnumOVinesLonicera japonicaJapanese honeysuckle OParthenocissus quinquefoliaVirginia creeper CARubus sp.BlackberryCCCSolanum dulcamaraClimbing nightshade UToxicodendron radicansPoison ivy UVitis sp.Wild grape UHerbsAchillea millefoliumYarrowOUCAlliaria petiolata Garlic mustardUCOAmaranthus sp.PigweedUAndropogon gerardiiBig bluestem UAntennaria neglecta Field pussytoes UArctium lappaGreater burdock RArctium pubensCommon burdockOURArtemisia ludovicianaWhite sagebrush OArtemisia serrataSawtooth wormwood CAsclepias syriacaCommon milkweed UAster sp. AsterUBidens aristosaBearded beggarticks CBoltonia asteroidesWhite doll's daisy UBrassica nigra Black mustard UBromus catharticusRescuegrass OBromus japonicusField bromeACCBromus pubescensHairy woodland brome CO Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-112Rev. 0Table 19.3.5-3 Terrestrial Plants Observed on or near the SHINE Site(Sheet 3 of 4)Botanical NameCommon NameQualitative Abundance in Land Cover Area Surveyed(a)SiteDeveloped-Open SpaceDeveloped-Low, Medium, High IntensityCultivated Crops/Pasture/Deciduous Forest/Shrub/Herbaceous/WetlandsHerbs (continued)Bromus tectorumDrooping brome CCarduus nutansMusk thistleUCCACarex sp.SedgeCCichorium intybusChicoryUCirsium vulgareBull thistle ODactylis glomerataOrchardgrass CCDaucus carotaQueen Anne's lace UOCEquisetum arvenseField horsetail CErigeron philadelphicusPhiladelphia fleabane OOErysimum sp.Wallflower UUEupatorium perfoliatumLate boneset UEupatorium rugosumWhite snakerootUCUFestuca sp. FescueAAOCFestuca arundinacea Tall fescueAAGlycine maxSoybeanAAHesperis matronalisDame's rocket CCImpatiens capensisJewelweed CLemna sp. DuckweedALeonurus cardiacaCommon motherwort OLespedeza sp.Lespedeza OOLespedeza cuneataSericea lespedeza OLeucanthemum vulgareOxeye daisyUURMarrubium vulgareWhite horehound RUMedicago sativa AlfalfaAMelilotus officinalisSweetclover OMonarda fistulosaWild bergamot UOenothera biennisCommon evening primrose RPanicum sp.Panic grassOOOPanicum virgatumSwitchgrass CUPastinaca sativaWild parsnip CPhalaris arundinaceaReed canary grass APhysalis longifoliaLongleaf groundcherry UPlantago lanceolataNarrowleaf plantainUPoa annuaAnnual bluegrass ACPoa compressaCanada bluegrass A Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-113Rev. 0Table 19.3.5-3 Terrestrial Plants Observed on or near the SHINE Site(Sheet 4 of 4)Botanical NameCommon NameQualitative Abundance in Land Cover Area Surveyed(a)SiteDeveloped-Open SpaceDeveloped-Low, Medium, High IntensityCultivated Crops/Pasture/Deciduous Forest/ Shrub/ Herbaceous/WetlandsHerbs (continued)Polygonum sp.KnotweedUCSchizachyrium scopariumLittle bluestem OUScirpus atrovirensGreen bulrush OSenecio pauperculusBalsam groundsel CCSetaria spFoxtailOSetaria faberi FoxtailAOSetaria viridisGreen foxtail OOCSilene csereiiBalkan catchfly OOSilene cucubalusMaidenstears OSilphium perfoliatumCup plant OSolidago altissimaTall goldenrod CSolidago canadensisCanada goldenrodUCOASolidago giganteaGiant goldenrod CSorghum halepenseJohnson grass OCStachys byzantinaLamb's ear OOStellaria mediaCommon chickweed OSymphyotrichum lanceolatumWhite panicle aster OSymphyotrichum novae-angliaeNew England aster OTaraxacum officinaleCommon dandelionUOCU CThlaspi arvenseField pennycress UToxicodendron radicansPoison ivy UTragopogon dubiusWestern salsify UTrifolium pratenseRed cloverOUOTriticum aestivumWinter wheatAOOATypha latifolia Broadleaf cattailURUVerbena strictaHoary verbena CViola sp.VioletCXanthium strumariumCockleburCAUZea maysCornACAZizia aureaGolden zizia Ca) Abundance Categories: A=abundant; C=common; O=occasional; U=uncommon; R=rare Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-114Rev. 0Table 19.3.5-4 Mammals Potentially Occurring on or near the SHINE SiteGroup/Scientific NameCommon Name Observed during Field SurveyPouched Mammals Didelphis virginianaOpossumXHare-Shaped MammalsSylvilagus floridanusEastern Cottontail XInsect-Eating MammalsBlarina brevicaudaNorthern Shor t-Tailed ShrewSorex cinereusMasked Shrew Sorex hoyi Pygmy ShrewScalopus aquaticusEastern MoleFlying MammalsEptesicus fuscus Big Brown BatLasiurus borealis Red BatLasiurus cinereus Hoary Bat Myotis lucifugusLittle Brown BatPipistrellus subflavusEastern PipistrelleFlesh-Eating MammalsCanis latrans CoyoteXUrocyon cinereoargenteusGray FoxVulpes vulpes Red FoxLontra canadensisRiver OtterMustela frenataLong-tailed WeaselMustela nivalisLeast WeaselNeovison visonAmerican Mink Mephitis mephitisStriped Skunk XProcyon lotor RaccoonXEven-Toed Hoofed MammalsOdocoileus virginianusWhite-Tailed Deer XGnawing MammalsMarmota monaxGroundhog XSciurus carolinensisGray Squirrel XSpermophilus tridecemlineatusThirteen-Lined Ground Squirrel XCastor canadensisBeaverZapus hudsoniusMeadow Jumping MouseMicrotus ochrogasterPrairie VoleMicrotus pennsylvanicus Meadow VoleOndatra zibethicusMuskratPeromyscus leucopusWhite-Footed MouseMus musculusHouse MouseRattus norvegicusNorway Rat
Reference:
American Society of Mammologists, 2012 Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-115Rev. 0Table 19.3.5-5 Avifaunal Species Potentially Occurring on or near the SHINE Site(Sheet 1 of 3)Scientific NameCommon Name FieldSurveysAbundance(a)Wisconsin Breeding Bird Atlas(b)Breeding Bird Survey(c)Actitis macularia Spotted sandpiper XAgelaius phoeniceus Red-winged blackbird A(d)XXAmmodramus savannarum Grasshopper sparrow RXAnas platyrhynchos MallardRXXAccipiter cooperii Cooper's hawk RArchilochus colubris Ruby-throated hummingbird XArdea herodiasGreat blue heron XXBaeolophus bicolorTufted titmouse OBombycilla cedrorum Cedar waxwing UXXBranta canadensis Canada goose O(d)XXBubo virginianusGreat horned owl XButeo jamaicensis Red-tailed hawk U(d)XXButorides virescens Green heron XCardinalis cardinalis Northern cardinal CXXCarduelis tristis American goldfinch CXXCarpodacus mexicanus House finch CXXCeryle alcyonBelted kingfisher XXChaetura pelagica Chimney swift XCharadrius vociferus KilldeerO(d)XXChordeiles minorCommon nighthawk RXCistothorus platensis Sedge wren XCoccyzus americanusYellow-billed cuckoo XCoccyzus erythropthalmusBlack-billed cuckoo XColaptes auratusNorthern flicker RXXColinus virginianus Northern bobwhite XColumba livia Rock dove UXXContopus virens Eastern wood pewee UXXCorvus brachyrhynchos American crow C(d)XXCyanocitta cristataBlue jayOXXDendroica petechiaYellow warbler RXXDolichonyx oryzivorusBobolinkXDumetella carolinensis Gray catbird UXXEmpidonax alnorumAlder flycatcher XEmpidonax minimus Least flycatcher RXEmpidonax spp.Willow/alder flycatcher XEmpidonax traillii Willow flycatcher XEremophila alpestris Horned lark C(d)XEuphagus cyanocephalus Brewer's blackbird UXFalco sparverius American kestrel XX Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-116Rev. 0Table 19.3.5-5 Avifaunal Species Potentially Occurring on or near the SHINE Site(Sheet 2 of 3)Scientific NameCommon Name Field Surveys Abundance(a)Wisconsin Breeding Bird Atlas(b)Breeding Bird Survey(c)Geothlypis triachasCommon yellowthroat RXXGrus canadensis Sandhill crane XXHirundo rustica Barn swallow UXXHylocichla mustelina Wood thrush XXIcterus galbula Baltimore oriole RXXIcterus spurius Orchard oriole RXJunco hyemalisDark-eyed junco OLarus delawarensis Ring-billed gull RXMelanerpes carolinus Red-bellied woodpecker OXXMelanerpes erythrocephalusRed-headed woodpecker XMeleagris gallopavo Wild turkey OXMelospiza melodia Song sparrow OXXMimus polyglottos Northern mockingbird OMolothrus ater Brown-headed cowbird OXXMyiarchus crinitus Great crested flycatcher RXXPasser domesticus House sparrow CXXPasserculus sandwichensis Savannah sparrow XPasserina cyanea Indigo bunting RXXPetrochelidon pyrrhonotaCliff swallow XXPhasianus colchicus Ring-necked pheasant XPheucticus ludovicianus Rose-breasted grosbeak XPicoides pubescensDowny woodpecker OXXPicoides villosus Hairy woodpecker XPipilo erythrophthalmus Eastern towhee UPoecile atricapillusBlack-capped chickadee OXXPolioptila caeruleaBlue-gray gnatcatcher RXXPooecetes gramineus Vesper sparrow XXProgne subisPurple martin RXQuiscalus quiscula Common grackle CXXRiparia riparia Bank swallow XSayornis phoebe Eastern phoebe OXXSialia sialis Eastern bluebird OXXSitta carolinensisWhite-breasted nuthatch OXXSpiza americanaDickcissel XSpizella arboreaAmerican tree sparrow RSpizella passerina Chipping sparrow OXXSpizella pusilla Field sparrow U(d)XXStelgidopteryx serripennis Northern rough-winged swallowRXX Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-117Rev. 0Table 19.3.5-5 Avifaunal Species Potentially Occurring on or near the SHINE Site(Sheet 3 of 3) Scientific Name Common Name FieldSurveysAbundance (a)Wisconsin Breeding Bird Atlas (b)Breeding Bird Survey(c)Sturnella magna Eastern meadowlark OXXSturnella neglecta Western meadowlark XSturnus vulgaris European starling AXXTachycineta bicolorTree swallow RXXToxostoma rufumBrown thrasher UXXTroglodytes aedon House wren XXTurdus migratoriusAmerican robin AXXTyrannus tyrannusEastern kingbird UXXVireo gilvus Warbling vireo XXVireo olivaceus Red-eyed vireo XXWilsonia catrina Hooded warbler XZenaida macrouraMourning dove UXXZonotrichia albicollis White-throated sparrow USpecies Richness 586174a)A=abundant; C=common; O=occasional; U=uncommon; R=rareb)WBBA, 2012c)USGS, 2012d d)Indicates species observed on-site. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-118Rev. 0Table 19.3.5-6 Reptiles and Amphibians Potentially Occurring on or near the SHINE SiteScientific NameCommon NameObserved during Field SurveyTurtlesApolone spinifera Spiny softshell turtleChrysemes pictaPainted turtleChelydra serpentinaCommon snapping turtle XEmydoidea blandingii Blanding's turtleGraptemys geographicaCommon map turtleGraptemys ouachitensisOuachita map turtleGraptemys pseudogeographica False map turtleSternotherus odoratus Common musk turtleSalamandersNecturus maculosaMudpuppyFrogs and ToadsBufo americanusAmerican toad XHyla chrysoscelis Copes gray treefrogHyla versicolorEastern gray treefrogPseudacris cruciferSpring peeper XPseudacris triseritataWestern chorus frogRana catesbianaBullfrogXRana clanitansGreen frog XRana pipiensNorthern leopard frog XRana sylvaticaWood frogSnakesColuber constictorBlue racerElaphe vulpina Fox snakeHeterodon platyrhinosEastern hog-nosed snakeLampropeltis triangulum Milk snakeNerodia sipedonNorthern water snakeOpheodrys vernalisSmooth green snakeSistrurus catenatusEastern massasaugaStoreria dekayiNorthern brown snakeStoreria occipitomaculataRed-bellied snakeThamnophis sirtalisEastern garter snake XLizardsCnemidophorus sexlineatusSix-lined racerunnerEumeces fasciatusFive-lined skink
Reference:
WDNR, 2012f Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-119Rev. 0Table 19.3.5-7 Protected Species near the SHINE Site(a)Scientific NameCommon Name Status(a)FishAnguilla rostrataAmerican eelSpecies of special concern (S)Erimystax x-punctatusGravel chubEndangered (S)Lythrurus umbratilisRedfin ShinerThreatened (S)Moxostoma valenciennesiGreater redhorseThreatened (S)Notropis nubilusOzark MinnowThreatened (S)Mussels Alasmidonta marginataElktoeSpecies of special concern (S)Cyclonaias tuberculataPurple wartybackEndangered (S) Quadrula metanevra MonkeyfaceThreatened (S)Venustaconcha ellipsiformisEllipseThreatened (S)Villosa irisRainbow shellEndangered (S)Turtles Emydoidea blandingiiBlanding's turtleThreatened (S) PlantsAgastache nepetoides Yellow giant hyssopThreatened (S)Artemisa dracunculusDragon wormwoodSpecies of special concern (S)Asclepias lanuginosaWoolly milkweedThreatened (S)Asclepias purpurascensPurple milkweedEndangered (S)Besseya bulliiKitten tailsThreatened (S) Cacalia tuberosaPrairie Indian-plantainThreatened (S)Calylophus serrulatusYellow evening primroseSpecies of special concern (S)Camassia scilloidesWild hyancinthEndangered (S)Cirsium hilliiHill's thistleThreatened (S)Echinacea pallidaPale purple coneflowerThreatened (S)Euphorbia commutataWood spurgeSpecies of special concern (S)Lespedeza leptostachyaPrairie bush-cloverEndangered (S)Threatened (F)Melica nitensThree-flowered melic grassSpecies of special concern (S)Nothocalais cuspidataPrairie false-dandelionSpecies of special concern (S)Penstemon hirsutusHairy beardtongueSpecies of special concern (S)Polytaenia nuttalliiPrairie parsleyThreatened (S)Prenanthes asperaRough rattlesnake-rootEndangered (S)Ruellia humilisHairy wild-petuniaEndangered (S)Scutellaria parvulaSmall skullcapEndangered (S)Silene niveaSnowy campion Threatened (S)Thaspium trifoliatumPurple meadow-parsnipSpecies of special concern (S)Cypripedium candidumSmall white lady's-slipperThreatened (S)Hypericum sphaerocarpumRound-fruited St. John's-wortThreatened (S)Myosotis laxaSmall forget-me-notSpecies of special concern (S)Nuphar advenaYellow water lilySpecies of special concern (S)Plantanus occidentalisSycamoreSpecies of special concern (S)Polygala incarnata Pink milkwortEndangered (S)a) Protected species information was provided by USFWS and WDNR within a 6-mi (9.7 km) radius of the site b) State listed (S), Federally listed (F).
References:
USFWS, 2012 and WDNR, 2012c Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-120Rev. 019.3.6HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCESCultural resource studies were performed for the SHINE site that consisted of a geographical information system (GIS) analysis, a records level review of properties listed on the National Register of Historic Properties (NRHP), and fi eld surveys. GIS analyses and records reviews were performed on an area within a 10-mi. (16-km) radius of the SHINE site. While this radius is not specified in the Final ISG Augmenting NUREG-15 37, the use of 10 mi. (16 km) is consistent with guidance of NUREG-1555 (Subsection 2.5.3) regarding the radius appropriate for the collection of sufficient data to describe historic properties within the area surrounding a proposed project. Field surveys and reviews consisted of a Phase I archaeological survey of the entirety of the SHINE site. This survey was conducted to ensure compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and other Federal and state cultural resources management regulations.19.3.6.1Cultural SettingGeneral information regarding the cultural setting in the vicinity of the SHINE site is summarized by Knopf and Krause (Knopf, Chad and Kari Krause, 2012) and is presented in this section. The prehistory of southern Wisconsin is divided into four broad periods describing Native American habitation and development: the Paleoindian, Archaic, Woodland, and Mississippian periods. Approximately 10,000 years ago, Paleoindians pushed northward into Wisconsin as the glaciers retreated. These hunter-gatherers exploited the new resource-rich environments and hunted woolly mammoth, mastodon, and bison. Small, mobile groups utilized fluted and unfluted projectile points/knives designed for hunting and butchering animals. Clovis and Folsom points have been recovered in southeastern Wisconsin.Along with the change in the climate to warmer and drier conditions that occurred around 8000years ago, came the shift from hunting Ice Age mammals to smaller modern animals such as deer and elk. This shift coincided with the Archaic Tradition, which is subdivided into the Early, Middle, and Late Archaic periods. The social organization during the Early and Middle Archaic periods continued with mobile groups of hunter-gatherers with an increasingly sedentary lifestyle during the Late Archaic period.Cultural changes that occurred during the Woodland period (approximately 3000 years ago) included the use of pottery and bow and arrow, construction of conical and effigy mounds, and the existence of large villages. The Early Woodland period is characterized by the appearance of flat bottomed vessels tempered with grit, Kramer and Waubesa projectile points, and conical mounds. Subsistence practices during the Middle Woodland period included hunting, gathering of nuts and wild rice, and cultivation of squash. The Late Woodland period is characterized by more intensive cultivation of corn and the use of pottery consisting of globular jars with cord or fabric impressed decorations. The Mississippian period began about 1000 years ago; Native American occupants of Rock County were the Koshkonong Oneota. These people lived in large villages, grew corn, beans, and squash, and maintained a large trade network that crossed the continent. The Oneota are considered the ancestors of the modern-day Ho Chunk (Winnebago) tribe. The Indian tribes present in the state when it was first visited by Jean Nicolet in 1634 included the Ho Chunk, Potawatomi, Menominee, and Chippewa Indians. With the influx of European fur traders, loggers and early settlers in the late 1600s, and the succeeding Native American and European wars, Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-121Rev. 0many tribes of southeastern Wisconsin either migrated (or were removed) west of the Mississippi River.Euro-American settlers moved into Wisconsin during the 1830s and 1840s to take control of the territory ceded by Native American groups. Throughout the 19 th and 20th centuries, Rock County was primarily an agricultural economy that utilized the power of the Rock River for mills and transportation of trade commodities. Despite burgeoning industrial development and population growth after the Civil War, the farming industry expanded as railroads and urban markets developed in veins along the rail lines throughout the state. Urban growth and the advancements in transportation spurred along the shift in Wisconsin agriculture to focus on commercial dairy production, which helped to extend the viability of traditional agriculture in the region. Manufacturing boomed in Rock County in the 20th century, as General Motors (GM) and other firms began producing tractors, machinery, paper, pens, and refined farm products such as snack foods. Though manufacturing gained a large market share, agriculture has remained an important factor in the regional economy.19.3.6.2Previous InvestigationsTo ensure that all potential impacts to known historic properties were addressed prior to construction, SHINE completed the background records review for the project at the Historic Preservation Office, Wisconsin Historical Society (WHS) in Madison, Wisconsin and at the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency (IHPA) in Springfield, Illinois; NRHP-listed properties were identified using the online NRHP database. This investigation covered a 10-mi. (16-km) radius surrounding the SHINE site. This radius encompasses all of Rock County, Wisconsin and portions of Winnebago and Boone counties, Illinois (Knopf, Chad and Kari Krause, 2012).19.3.6.2.1Previously Conducted Cultural Resources SurveysA total of 126 cultural resource surveys in Wisconsin and 17 surveys in Illinois were completed and recorded at the WHS and IHPA within a 10-mi. (16-km) radius surrounding the project area. These included 38 records reviews, 102 Phase I investigations, and two archaeological site excavations. Only seven surveys were conducted within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the SHINE site (Knopf and Krause, 2012) (Table 19.3.6-1). None of these investigations were located within the project boundary. Two reports could not be examined because they were either missing or never received by the WHS. The remaining five surveys were documented and the reports were on file at the WHS. The five documented surveys were associated with the construction along US 51, I-90, the installation of a sewer line, and upgrades at the SWRA. Two surveys were conducted at the SWRA. The SWRA is located immediately to the west of US 51. No archaeological sites were identified for any of these five projects, and no additional fieldwork was recommended.19.3.6.2.2Previously Recorded Archaeological SitesEligible or listed archaeological sites located within a 10-mi. (16-km) radius of the SHINE site were identified through a information request with the WHS and by a database search of Illinois Historic Preservation Agency (IHPA) records. There are 223 archaeological sites identified in Wisconsin, five sites identified in Illinois, and onesite that is bisected by the Wisconsin-Illinois state line (WHS, 2012a; IHPA, 2013). As is presented in Table 19.3.6-2, only one prehistoric site is listed on the NRHP, whereas a total of 87 sites are eligible for listing on the NRHP in Wisconsin; there are no eligible or listed sites in Illinois. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-122Rev. 0The majority of the 87 eligible sites consist of prehistoric burials or mounds (n=44), while one mound site is a listed NRHP property (the Strong Partridge Mound Group). The Strong Partridge Mound Group was listed on the NRHP on March1, 1994 and is located in Beloit, Wisconsin. It is a prehistoric effigy mound group from the Late Woodland period. The remaining eligible sites consist of 39 historic/modern period cemeteries and four archaeological sites. All cemeteries or burials/prehistoric mounds are protected under Wisconsin Statute 157.70. The Happy Hallow Cemetery is closest, located approximately 1.2 mi. (2.0 km) south of the SHINE site (Figure19.3.1-4).19.3.6.2.3Previously Recorded Historic Structures and Districts Table 19.3.6-3 lists historic structures and districts listed on the NRHP and located within a 10mi. (16-km) radius of the SHINE site. A total of 85NRHP-listed distri cts or properties are identified in Wisconsin as illustrated in Figure 19.3.6-1. However, no NRHP-listed properties are located in Illinois (IHPA, 2013).Recorded sites within Wisconsin summarized in Table 19.3.6-3 include districts and numerous individual properties located in Janesville and Be loit. Individually listed properties have also been identified in the communities of Bradford, Clinton, Footville, Turtle, and La Prairie. Janesville contains 14 historic districts and 20 historic properties. The Benton Avenue, Bostwick Avenue, Columbus Circle, Conrad Cottages and the Look West Avenue Historic Districts contain domestic architecture of such styles as Colonial Revival, Tudor Revival, Mission Revival, Greek Revival, Italianate, Queen Anne, Late Victorian, and bungalow/craftsman. The remaining historic districts, including Courthouse Hill, East and West Milwaukee, Jefferson Avenue, North Main and South Main Historic Districts, are associated with the city's residences, commerce, industry, and government. The Old Fourth Ward and Prospect Hill Historic Districts are of Italianate or Queen Anne construction and contain residential dwellings, as well as educational and religious facilities. The remaining individual historic properties are primarily houses distributed throughout Janesville; additional properties include a business, educational facilities, an armory, and churches. The nearest listed NRHP property, the John and Martha Hugunin House, is located 1.1mi. (1.7 km) northeast of the SHINE site. The Hugunin House is Italianate in style, and is significant for its architectural design and relation to historic farming in the region. It was listed on the NRHP on June1, 2005.Three historic districts are located in the City of Beloit, located 3.7 mi. (6.0 km) south of the SHINE site. The Bluff Street Historic District contains domestic dwellings dating from 1847 to 1915 and is significant for its association with European exploration and settlement. The Merrill Avenue Historic District contains domestic dwellings dating from 1891 to 1942 and is composed of 19th to 20th century revival architectural styles. The Near East Side Historic District is composed of a mix of architectural styles dating from 1850 to 1932 and contains two prehistoric archaeological mound groups as contributing elements to the district. While the remaining 27individual historic properties are primarily houses distributed throughout the area, additional properties include an apartment complex, municipal facilities, a museum, college buildings, and churches. Constructed in 1917, Fairbanks Flats were built exclusively for African-American workers after World War I and played a prominent role in community planning during the twentieth century. The apartments are located 6.9 mi. (11.1 km) south of the SHINE site. Another 21 NRHP-listed historic properties are scattered within the 10-mi. (16-km) radius around the SHINE site (Figure 19.3.6-1). The community of Clinton, located 8.2 mi. (13.2 km) southeast Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-123Rev. 0of the SHINE site, contains examples of governmental and commerce architecture with the Clinton Village Hall, water tower, Citizens Bank, and the Crosby Block. The remaining NRHP-listed properties are residential dwellings dating from the late 19 th century constructed in Italianate, Queen Anne, and Greek Revival architectural styles. Two farmsteads in Bradford Township; two dwellings in Plymouth and LaPrairie Townships; a house, church, and an iron bridge in Turtle Township; and two stores, one bank, and one house in the Town of Footville comprise the last of the NRHP-listed properties within the 10-mi. (16-km) radius of the SHINE
site.19.3.6.3Results of Phase I Cultural Resource Investigation A Phase I archeological survey was conducted on lands within the project boundary. The survey was supervised in the field by Mr. Chad Knopf while Ms. Kari Krause served as the Principal Investigator. Mr. Knopf has a Bachelor's degree in Anthropology and has over 2years of experience in historic and prehistoric archaeology. Kari Krause is a Registered Professional Archaeologist with a Master of Arts degree in Anthropology. Ms. Krause has over 17 years of experience conducting archaeological projects throughout the Midwestern United States. Fieldwork was performed following methodologies established by the WHS. The survey was completed utilizing a pedestrian survey at closely spaced transect intervals (less than 49 ft.[15m] between transects) that allowed crews to systematically inspect the ground surface of the tilled agricultural field. Three shovel test pits were judgmentally placed and excavated across the project area to provide an understanding of the soil stratigraphy. No archaeological sites or evidence of cultural resources were identified within the survey area, and no further archaeological investigations are recommended (Knopf, Chad and Kari Krause, 2012). The report was submitted to the WHS for review and comment. In a letter dated February 16, 2012 (WHS, 2012), the WHS indicated that they had reviewed the report and found it complete and concluded that consultation regarding the SHINE project was complete.19.3.6.4Native American and State Agency ConsultationSHINE initiated consultation with 13 tribes that are federally recognized in Wisconsin. A single response letter was received from the Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska who indicated that they have cultural properties of interest in the project area, but had no concerns regarding the project. However, they did indicate the desire to be contacted in the event burial sites or other cultural materials were discovered during construction. Follow-up calls were made to representatives of the remaining 12 tribes; however, no return calls to SHINE were received. Illinois currently does not have a federally recognized Nati ve American tribe. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-124Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-1 Previously Recorded Cultural Resources Surveys within 1-mi. (1.6-km) of the Site Report No.Survey TypeDateResultsDistance from Site (centerpoint)88-2033Interviews for planned project associated with US Highway 511988No sites identified; no additional fieldwork recommended0.2-mi. (0.3-km)
West00-0787Phase I archaeological survey at the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2000No sites identified; no additional fieldwork recommended0.6-mi. (1-km) West 93-2029Records review for proposed sewer and water main route 1993No sites identified; no additional fieldwork recommended0.3-mi. (0.5-km) West84-1001Phase I archaeological survey of Route 11 - pedestrian survey1985No sites identified; no additional fieldwork recommended0.8-mi. (1.3-km)
North05-0607Phase I archaeological survey at Rock County Airport - shovel testing2005No sites identified; no additional fieldwork recommended0.6-mi. (1-km) West 97-1131Phase I archaeological survey of proposed Janesville bypass1997Not available0.8-mi. (1.3-km) North89-5527Records review1989Not available0.8-mi. (1.3-km) North
Reference:
Knopf, Chad and Kari Krause, 2012 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-125Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-2 Eligible or Listed Archaeological Sites within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site, Rock County, Wisconsin(Sheet 1 of 4) State NumberBurial NumberSite NameAgeNRHP StatusRO-0130BRO-0179Spring Brook Burial SiteUnknownEligibleRO-0286BRO-0127Morgan School EnclosureUnknownEligibleRO-0036BRO-0126McLenegan Group SouthUnknownEligible RO-0141BRO-0085McLenegan Group NorthUnknownEligibleRO-0138BRO-0111Pierce GroupUnknownEligibleRO-0136BRO-0110Baarz MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0097BRO-0147Chrispinsen MoundUnknownEligibleRO-0007BRO-0181Crystal and Hiawatha SpringsUnknownEligible RO-032490J-WUnknownEligibleRO-0009Riverside Park VillageUnknownEligibleRO-0076BRO-0176Riverbank Quarry BurialsUnknownEligible RO-032590J-XUnknownEligibleRO-0080BRO-0140McElroy TrioUnknownEligibleRO-0082BRO-0142Sutherland GravesUnknownEligible RO-0103BRO-0150Bailey MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0104BRO-0151Spring Brook MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0107BRO-0152Several Small TumuliUnknownEligible RO-0117BRO-0153Woodstock Mound GroupUnknownEligibleRO-0290BRO-0102Rockport Park MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0307 JonesUnknownEligibleRO-0126BRO-0107Afton Mound GroupUnknownEligibleRO-0122BRO-?InmanUnknownEligibleRO-0291BRO-0099Six House MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0125BRO-0155Reynolds GroupUnknownEligibleRO-0119BRO-0154Afton MillUnknownEligibleRO-0127BRO-0108Henbest MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0021BRO-0116Roth Mound GroupUnknownEligibleRO-0023BRO-0117Yost MoundUnknownEligibleRO-0030BRO-0122Weirick Mound GroupUnknownEligible Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-126Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-2 Eligible or Listed Archaeological Sites within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site, Rock County, Wisconsin(Sheet 2 of 4) State NumberBurial NumberSite NameAgeNRHP StatusRO-0027BRO-0119Henderson MoundUnknownEligibleRO-0031BRO-0123Adams - DuquyUnknownEligibleRO-0143BRO-0087Strong Partridge Mound GroupUnknownNRHPRO-0142BRO-0086Joint Switch GroupUnknownEligibleRO-0034BRO-0125Poe MoundUnknownEligibleRO-0144BRO-0088Whitfield CampsiteUnknownEligibleRO-0019BRO-0115Water Tower MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0038BRO-0128JonesUnknownEligible RO-0015BRO-0114Beloit College Mound Group300-600 A.D. (un-calibrated); Date most likely between 500-900 A.D.EligibleRO-0039/ WO-0460(a)BRO-0129State Line Mound Group800-1300 A.D.EligibleRO-0390BRO-?Henbest MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0083BRO-0141Duplicate of RO-0104 Spring Brook MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0028BRO-0120Baldwin MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0396BRO-0174Buells BearUnknownEligibleRO-0407BRO-0172Oakwood Cemetery MoundsUnknownEligibleRO-0041BRO-0131HillcrestUnknownEligibleRO-0219BRO-0173Ho-Chunk Council HouseUnknownEligibleRO-0140BRO-0082Murphy GroupUnknownEligibleRO-0425BRO-0171Nyman-Inman BurialsUnknownEligibleRO-0426BRO-0050Dillenback CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0076Turtle Cemetery (aka Turtleville Cemetery)Currently activeEligible BRO-0078Shopiere Cemetery (aka Bethel Cemetery)Currently activeEligible BRO-0077Clinton Corners CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0167Jack Family CemeteryUnknownEligible Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-127Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-2 Eligible or Listed Archaeological Sites within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site, Rock County, Wisconsin(Sheet 3 of 4) State NumberBurial NumberSite NameAgeNRHP Status BRO-0168Murray Settlement CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0066Newark CemeteryCurrently activeEligible BRO-0067Unnamed CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0064Luther valley east CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0069Unnamed CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0070Plymouth Cemetery (aka Hanover Cemetery)Presently activeEligible BRO-0068Naugle Cemetery (aka Norwegian Cemetery; Baptist Church Cemetery)UnknownEligible BRO-0044Mount Zion Cemetery (Clarke)UnknownEligible BRO-0043Emerald Grove Cemetery1850-presentEligible BRO-0042Milton Lawn Memorial Park1932-presentEligible BRO-0053Mt. Pleasant CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0051Rock County Institution CemeteryUnknownEligibleBRO-0049Unnamed CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0048Mt. Olivet Cemetery1852Eligible BRO-0047Oak Hill Cemetery1851Eligible BRO-0046Unnamed CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0165Trinity Episcopal Church CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0045Unnamed cemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0081Indian CemeteryUnknownEligible BRO-0040Grove Cemetery1848Eligible BRO-0041Bethel Cemetery (aka Disciples Cemetery; Center Cemetery)1869-presentEligible BRO-0018Carver's Rock Burial1843Eligible BRO-0019Clinton Cemetery1860-presentEligibleBRO-0088Polander Mound GroupUnknownEligibleBRO-0122Haggerty Mound GroupUnknownEligible Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-128Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-2 Eligible or Listed Archaeological Sites within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site, Rock County, Wisconsin(Sheet 4 of 4) State NumberBurial NumberSite NameAgeNRHP Status BRO-0007Oakwood Cemetery (aka Beloit Cemetery)1840-presentEligible BRO-0006Calvary Catholic Cemetery1850sEligible BRO-0008East Lawn Cemetery1919-presentEligible BRO-0009Isolated GraveUnknownEligible BRO-0010Mt. Thabor Cemetery (aka Tabor Cemetery or Thabor Cemetery)1952Eligible BRO-0011Baldwin CemeteryPresently activeEligibleBRO-0129Nine Mile SwallowUnknownEligible BRO-0005Afton Cemetery (aka Town of Rock Cemetery)UnknownEligible BRO-0012Happy Hollow Cemetery (aka Gower or Rock Vale Cemetery)1850sEligibleBRO-0133Langford MoundUnknownEligiblea) Rock County, WI/Winnebago County, IL
References:
WHS, 2012a; IHPA, 2013 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-129Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-3 Historic Structures and Districts Listed on the NRHP within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site(Sheet 1 of 5)Historic NameCityDate State ListedNRHP Date ListedDistrict DescriptionArmory, TheJanesville1/1/198911/21/1978Bartlett Memorial Historical MuseumBeloit1/1/19894/11/1977Beloit Water TowerBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983Benton Avenue Historic
DistrictJanesville4/25/19959/7/199684 contributing buildingsBlodgett, Selvy, HouseBeloit1/1/19895/23/1980Bluff Street Historic DistrictBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983109 contributing and 5 non-contributing buildings, 5 non-contributing archeological sitesBostwick Avenue Historic
DistrictJanesville1/20/20064/24/20067 contributing buildings, 1contributing archeological siteBrasstown CottageBeloit1/1/19893/4/1983Church of St. Thomas the
ApostleBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983 Citizens BankClinton1/1/19898/1/1985City of Beloit Waterworks and Pump StationBeloit7/20/19909/13/1990 Clark-Brown HouseBeloit1/1/19899/13/1985Clinton Village HallClinton1/1/19898/1/1985Clinton Water TowerClinton1/1/19893/7/1985 Columbus Circle Historic
DistrictJanesville10/15/20045/19/200564 contributing and 8 non-contributing buildingsConrad Cottages Historic
DistrictJanesville2/3/19933/11/19937 contributing buildingsCourt Street Methodist ChurchJanesville1/1/198911/17/1977Courthouse Hill Historic DistrictJanesville1/1/19891/17/1986274 contributing and 72 non-contributing buildingsCrist, J. W., HouseBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-130Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-3 Historic Structures and Districts Listed on the NRHP within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site(Sheet 2 of 5)Historic NameCityDate State ListedNRHP Date ListedDistrict Description Crosby BlockClinton1/1/19898/1/19851 contributing buildingCrosby, James B., HouseJanesville4/25/199512/14/199810 contributing buildingsDean, Erastus, FarmsteadBradford (township)1/1/198912/4/1978DeLong, Homer B., HouseClinton1/1/19898/1/1985Dougan Round BarnBeloit1/1/19896/4/1979Dow, J.B., House and Carpenter Douglas BarnBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983East Milwaukee Street Historic
DistrictJanesville1/1/19892/8/19807 contributing buildingsEmerson HallBeloit1/1/19899/20/1979Fairbanks FlatsBeloit1/1/19891/7/19834 contributing buildingsFirst Congregational ChurchBeloit1/1/19891/23/1975Footville CondenseryFootville1/1/19895/7/1982Footville State BankFootville1/1/19895/7/1982Fredendall BlockJanesville1/1/19893/25/1982 Hanchett BlockBeloit1/1/19893/20/1980 Hilton House HotelBeloit7/18/200311/7/2003Hugunin, John and Martha,
HouseJanesville1/21/20056/1/2005Janesville Cotton MillJanesville1/1/19897/16/19802 contributing buildingsJanesville High SchoolJanesville1/15/19996/25/1999Janesville Public LibraryJanesville1/1/19897/1/1981Janesville Pumping StationJanesville1/1/19893/7/1985Jefferson Avenue Historic
DistrictJanesville1/20/20064/19/200677 contributing and 7 non-contributing buildingsJones, John W., HouseJanesville7/20/20073/14/2008Lappin-Hayes BlockJanesville1/1/198911/7/1976 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-131Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-3 Historic Structures and Districts Listed on the NRHP within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site(Sheet 3 of 5)Historic NameCityDate State ListedNRHP Date ListedDistrict DescriptionLaPrairie Grange Hall No. 79LaPrairie (township)1/1/19894/11/1977Lathrop-Munn Cobblestone HouseBeloit1/1/19898/22/1977Look West Historic DistrictJanesville1/1/19893/26/1987547 contributing and 92 non-contributing buildings, 1contributing archeological
siteLook West Historic District
ExtensionJanesville12/11/199312/10/199371 contributing and 4 non-contributing buildingsLovejoy and Merrill-Nowlan
HousesJanesville1/1/19891/21/19802 contributing buildingsMerrill Avenue Historic DistrictBeloit1/1/19892/19/19934 contributing buildingsMoran's SaloonBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983Murray-George HouseTurtle (township)1/1/19899/13/1985Myers-Newhoff HouseJanesville1/1/19895/18/1979Myers, Peter, Pork Packing Plant and Willard Coleman
BuildingJanesville1/1/19897/7/19833 contributing buildingsNear East Side Historic
DistrictBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983166 contributing and 14 non-contributing buildings, 2 contributing archeological sites, 1 contributing objectNeese, Elbert, HouseBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983North Main Street Historic DistrictJanesville1/1/19897/22/19834 contributing buildings Nye, Clark, HouseBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983Old Fourth Ward Historic DistrictJanesville2/7/19905/30/19901100 contributing and 443 non-contributing buildings, 1contributing and 1 non-contributing archeological
siteOwen, William J., StoreFootville1/1/19895/7/1982 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-132Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-3 Historic Structures and Districts Listed on the NRHP within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site(Sheet 4 of 5)Historic NameCityDate State ListedNRHP Date ListedDistrict DescriptionPangborn, J. L., HouseClinton1/1/19898/1/1985Payne-Craig HouseJanesville1/1/19897/2/1987Pearsons Hall of ScienceBeloit1/1/19896/30/1980Prospect Hill Historic DistrictJanesville7/22/199211/5/1992115 contributing and 12 non-contributing buildingsRandall, Brewster, HouseJanesville1/1/19893/1/1984Rasey HouseBeloit1/1/198912/27/1974Rau, Charles, HouseBeloit1/1/19898/13/1976Richardson-Brinkman Cobblestone HouseClinton1/1/19897/28/1977Richardson, Hamilton, HouseJanesville1/1/19897/17/1978Rindfleisch BuildingBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983Shopiere Congregational
ChurchTurtle (township)1/1/19898/13/1976Slaymaker, Stephen, HouseBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983Smiley, Samuel, HousePlymouth (township)1/1/198910/21/1982Smith, John, HouseClinton1/1/19898/1/1985South Main Street Historic DistrictJanesville4/19/19906/1/199014 contributing buildingsSt. Paul's Episcopal ChurchBeloit1/1/19894/4/1978Stark-Clint House1/1/19899/13/1985Strang, Soloman J., HouseFootville1/1/19895/7/1982Strong BuildingBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983Strunk, John and Eleanor, HouseJanesville7/20/20073/11/2008Tallman HouseJanesville1/1/198910/15/1970Taylor, A. E., HouseClinton1/1/19898/1/1985 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-133Rev. 0Table 19.3.6-3 Historic Structures and Districts Listed on the NRHP within a 10-mi. (16-km) Radius of the SHINE Site(Sheet 5 of 5)
References:
WHS, 2012a; WHS, 2013Historic NameCityDate State ListedNRHP Date ListedDistrict DescriptionTurtleville Iron BridgeTurtle (township)1/1/19899/15/1977West Milwaukee Street Historic DistrictJanesville2/19/19905/17/199054 contributing and 10 non-contributing buildingsWillard, Frances, SchoolhouseJanesville1/1/198910/5/1977Wyman-Rye FarmsteadBradford (township)1/1/198911/7/1977; 11/21/19772 contributing and 3 non-
contributing buildingsYates, Florence, HouseBeloit1/1/19891/7/1983 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-134Rev. 019.3.7SOCIOECONOMICSThis subsection characterizes the current socioeconomic conditions within the region of influence (ROI) surrounding the SHINE site. It provides the basis for assessing potential socioeconomic impacts as a result of the construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Janesville site. The socioeconomic characterization addresses demographics (resident and transient population growth rates, race and ethnicity), community characteristics (the economy, housing availability, public services, local transportation), and tax payment information. The socioeconomic characterization is presented on a spatial and temporal (demography) basis. The appropriate nature and extent of socioeconomic characterization is described in the Final ISG Augmenting NUREG-1537, Part 1, Section 19.3.7, that requires the applicant or licensee to briefly describe socioeconomic conditions in the region (affected counties) around the proposed site, including sufficient detail to permit the assessment and evaluation of impacts from the proposed action. Geographic Area of AnalysisFor this assessment, the ROI has been established as the appropriate geographic area of analysis to support the characterization of socioeconomic baselines. The ROI corresponds to the area that incurs the greatest stresses to community services resulting from the SHINE project's demand for construction/operations workers.For purposes of demographic and community characteristics analysis, the ROI is considered to correspond to the residential distribution of the majority of the construction and operational workforces for the SHINE facility. As shown in Table 19.3.7-1, approximately 83percent of the total labor force of Rock County, Wisconsin resides within Rock County. Approximately 15 percent out of the remaining 17percent of the Rock County labor force commutes from counties adjacent to Rock County, or very nearly adjacent, including Winnebago County in Illinois (6.0percent); and Dane County (2.9percent), Walworth County (2.1percent), Green County (1.9percent), and Jefferson County (1.6percent) in Wisconsin. This suggests that the Rock County resident population contains a large workforce that is capable of supporting both construction and operation of the SHINE facility. Table 19.3.7-2 provides a summary of the workforce of Rock County by labor type specific to the occupation categories which are projected to require 20 or more employees at peak times in the construction schedule and subsequent operational phase. This table demonstrates that the workforce of the county is substantial in most categories of projected need for construction labor force and is likely to support the SHINE project. Also demonstrated is the fact that Rock County has a substantial labor force in the areas of industrial process operations, technical support and production management. Available data support the assumption that the local resident labor force of Rock County is capable to meet much of the demand of the SHINE project. Therefore, Rock County, WI is determined to represent the socioeconomic ROI and serves as the basis for assessment of potential project effects from construction and operation.19.3.7.1DemographyThe demography statistics within the ROI are characterized in the following subsections. Within the ROI, there are two municipalities of greater than 25,000 population: Janesville and Beloit. Therefore, demographic analysis includes statistics for these municipalities in addition to Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-135Rev. 0statistics for the overall ROI. This characterization provides a description of the resident population and includes resident population from the 2000 U.S. Census Bureau (USCB), resident population from the 2010 USCB, and population projection through 2055.Population projections at the county level are provided through 2055 to support the assessment of potential effects during the period of the facility's operational license (30 years) and decommissioning. The initial date of operation is anticipated to be 2016. Population projections presented in this subsection are based on published county population projections through the year 2035 and are extended through the year 2055. 19.3.7.1.1Resident Population19.3.7.1.1.1Resident Population of Communities in ROI The resident population of the ROI and its 29 municipalities is 160,331. Between 2000 and 2010, the county experienced a 5.3percent increase in population. During the same period, the city of Janesville, which is the municipality having the largest population in Rock County, grew 6.9percent from a population of 59,498 in 2000 to 63,575 in 2010. The city of Beloit has the second greatest population within Rock County with a population of 36,966 (USCB, 2010c). Other municipalities having a population exceeding 5,000 include the town of Beloit, Edgerton, Evansville, and Milton. All other municipalities have population levels less than 5,000 with the majority being less than 2,000 (Table19.3.7-3). The municipalities in Rock County are shown on Figure 19.3.7-1.19.3.7.1.1.2ROI Resident Population Growth ProjectionThe SHINE Operating License is expected to extend to year 2046. Population projections beyond 2035 are based on extrapolation of the county-specific growth rate of 5 percent that is the resulting equivalent rate of growth projected between 2025 and 2035 based on published projections. The resulting projections for 2045 and 2055 are shown in Table 19.3.7-4. Population projections published by Rock County (Rock County, 2009) anticipate that the county's population will increase by 22,313 persons between 2010 and 2035. As shown in Table19.3.7-4, the projected population for the year 2025 is 174,018 and the projected population for the year 2035 is 182,644. The projected growth rate for this 10-year time period equates to 4.96 percent. Extrapolation of this growth rate for two additional 10-year periods yields population projections of 191,703 for the year 2045 and 201,212 for the year 2055. 19.3.7.1.1.3Transient Population within 5 mi. (8 km)Transient population within the 5-mi. (8-km) area around the SHINE site has been estimated. This subsection establishes an estimate of transient population within 5mi. (8km) from the SHINE site.Significant sources of transient population in the 5-mi. (8-km) area around the SHINE site include major employers, schools (including elementary, middle, and high schools, colleges and universities), recreation areas, medical facilities, lodging facilities, and the SWRA. Estimation of transient populations within a given area may vary according to the time spent in the area Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-136Rev. 0(duration). This estimate is based on raw transient population estimates weighted according to the length of time each transient population group is expected to be in the area as follows:*Employer and school estimates x 0.27, which assumes that each employee or student is present at the facility 9 hours per day and 5 days per week.*Recreation area estimates x 0.33, which assumes that each daily visitor is present at the recreation area 8 hours per day.*SWRA estimates (passengers and crew) x 0.0833, which assumes that each person is present for 2 hours for each takeoff or landing.*Medical facilities and lodging facilities were not multiplied by a weighting factor; the assumption is that each bed at a medical facility and each room in a lodging facility is occupied 24 hours per day and 7 days per week.The 2010 weighted transient population estimate is provided in Table 19.3.7-5. Schools and major employers account for the majority of the transients within the 5-mi. (8-km) area.19.3.7.1.1.4Race and Ethnicity of the Resident Population in the ROIRace and ethnicity information is described for Rock County and for major population centers having a resident population exceeding 25,000. Rock County's population is predominantly white (87.6percent). The county population in 2010 is slightly more diverse overall when compared to 2000 USCB data. In 2000, the county's white population was 91.0percent, and the percentages of Black or African American population (4.6percent) and population classified by the USCB as "Some Other Race" (1.8percent) were slightly less than 2010 USCB numbers (5.0percent and 3.7percent, respectively). Comparative data for persons of Hispanic origin indicate a growth rate that is higher than the statewide rate of growth but is consistent with the national trend. In 2000, the percentage of Rock County's total population that was classified as Hispanic or Latino was 3.9percent and in 2010, the percentage increased to 7.6percent (Table 19.3.7-6). The trends in the city of Janesville are similar to countywide trends, with a slightly more diverse population in 2010 than in 2000 due in part to increases of the Hispanic or Latino population (2.6percent of the total population in 2000, compared to 5.4 percent in 2010). In addition, the percentage of Janesville's population that is Black or African American doubled from 2000 to 2010 (1.3 percent to 2.6 percent), and the population classified as "Some Other Race" also grew, from 1.0 percent to 2.0 percent of the overall population. While there is increased diversity, approximately 92 percent of the Janesville population is white (see Table 19.3.7-6). The city of Beloit is more diverse in comparison with Janesville and Rock County's overall population. Beloit's population is approximately 69percent white, a reduction from 75.6percent in 2000. The City's gains in Hispanic or Latino population and population classified as "Some Other Race" are much more significant than in Janesville, Rock County, the state, and the nation. The percentage of "Some Other Race" and Hispanic populations increased in the city of Beloit from 4.6 percent to 10.0 percent and from 9.1 percent to 17.1percent, respectively (seeTable19.3.7-6).Total minority population percentage for a defined population reflects minority racial status in conjunction with Hispanic or Latino ethnicity. The total minority population percentage is highest Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-137Rev. 0in Beloit, and has increased from 28.1 percent in 2000 to 36.5 percent in 2010. This rate of increase is over twice the statewide rate of increase, and significantly greater than the national rate of increase. Janesville saw total minority population grow at approximately the same rate as the national rate of increase, reaching 11.2 percent in 2010, up from 6.1 percent in 2000. Rock County's total minority population increase, from 10.8 percent in 2000 to 15.5 percent in 2010, was less than the national rate of increase, but greater than that for the State of Wisconsin (seeTable 19.3.7-6).19.3.7.2Community CharacteristicsThe term "community characteristics" is used to describe those socioeconomic attributes that pertain to the local economy, local housing statistics, public services, infrastructure including major transportation facilities, and tax payment information. The data presented are at the level of the ROI with the exception of descriptions of some transportation infrastructure such as highways and railroads that are regional and trans-regional in nature. 19.3.7.2.1EconomyThe economy of the ROI has experienced notable change in recent years. Economic data presented in this subsection include key economic indicators and address the following economic characteristics within the ROI:*Income
- Labor force*Unemployment*Poverty rates19.3.7.2.1.1Income (Population and Household)The per capita income for the ROI is $23,209, which is almost equal to that for the city of Janesville ($23,300) but less than both the statewide ($26,279) and national ($26,942) averages. The per capita income for the city of Beloit ($17,180) is markedly lower. Compared to the 2000 to 2010 rates of change for the state and the nation, the ROI, Janesville, and Beloit experienced much more notable decreases in per capita income from 2000 levels when adjusted for inflation (decreases of 12.3 percent, 17.2percent, and 19.8 percent, respectively). Comparative state and national numbers reflect a more moderate decrease in per capita income (decreases of 2.4percent and 1.4percent, respectively) (Table19.3.7-7). Median household income in the ROI is $49,144, which represents a 14.8percent decline from 2000 when adjusted for inflation. The 2010 median household income for Janesville ($48,257) is slightly less than the ROI, although the city's rate of change from 2000 to 2010 is greater, a 17.1percent decline. The city of Beloit's median household income is comparatively lower at $37,430, which is an 18.8percent decline from 2000 when adjusted for inflation. The 2000 ROI median household income was greater than state and national levels. The 2010 USCB data show that the ROI's median household income ($49,144) is less than the state ($50,814) and the nation ($51,222), although the difference is not as great as that for per capita income levels (seeTable 19.3.7-7).
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-138Rev. 019.3.7.2.1.2Labor Force and UnemploymentThe 2012 civilian labor force in Rock County is 78,132, which represents a 5.2percent decrease from the total labor force in 2002. In contrast, the state of Wisconsin and national labor force have increased over this same time period, at 1percent and 6.8percent, respectively. Although the ROI labor force has been decreasing since 2006, unemployment rates are consistently higher than the statewide total number and national unemployment rates (Table19.3.7-8). This can be attributed mostly to layoffs by GM at its Janesville plant beginning in 2006, followed by the plant's closure in 2008. Overall, the GM plant closure resulted in the elimination of approximately 4,700 jobs, and subsequent closures of local automotive suppliers resulted in additional job losses (SWWDB, 2009). At the ROI, state, and national levels, the number of unemployed workers has increased significantly over a 10-year period (change of 43.3percent for county, 43.5percent for the state, and 51.3 percent for the nation); however, the unemployment rates are much higher for the ROI, peaking at 12.8 percent in 2009 compared to 8.7 percent for the state and 9.3 percent for the nation. The most current 2012 data available show a 9.2 percent unemployment rate for the ROI, a decrease compared with the previous 3 years, but higher than both the state (7.5percent) and the national unemployment rate (8.2percent) (seeTable19.3.7-8).As evidenced by the 2008 GM plant closure, a contributing factor to the higher unemployment rate in the ROI is the decline of its manufacturing base. In 2000, manufacturing was the largest employment category in the ROI (29.7 percent of total jobs in the ROI), followed by education and health services (18.6 percent) and retail trade (12.1 percent). These industry rankings are consistent with state data for 2000 (22.2 percent, 20 percent, and 11.6percent, respectively), although in the ROI a larger percentage of employment was manufacturing-based. Since 2000, the number of manufacturing employees in the ROI has decreased by 62.9percent, and the largest employer is now the education and health services industry. Manufacturing is estimated to currently comprise 13.9percent of the ROI's total jobs, compared to 16.3 percent of total jobs at the state level. Statewide there has been a significant decrease in manufacturing employment (declined by 27.1percent); however, the manufacturing industry remains the largest employer in the state. Other industries (retail trade, transportation/warehousing/utilities, information, finance/ insurance/real estate, and education and health services) also experienced employment losses at both the ROI and state level, and the rate of decline in employment for these industries is greater for the ROI than statewide. Both the ROI and statewide levels of employment in construction, mining, and natural resources declined based on comparative analysis of the 2012 estimates with 2000 data (declines of 65.1percent and 65.4percent, respectively) (Table19.3.7-9). The actual change is likely not as high, however, due to the fact that the construction, mining, and natural resources category in 2000 included farm employment (under agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting, and mining), whereas the 2012 data exclude farming. The 2012 data also do not identify a stand-alone category of construction, making it difficult to calculate the extent to which construction employment has decreased.Industry sectors in the ROI that have experienced growth are public administration (309.7percent increase from 2000), wholesale trade (31.2percent increase), other services except public administration (21.1percent increase), professional and business services (15.5percent increase), and leisure and hospitality (10.4percent increase) (Table 19.3.7-9). The top 10 employers in Rock County provide an illustration of the diversity of the local economy, although manufacturing represents the smallest share of the individuals employed by the largest employers (Table 19.3.7-10). Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-139Rev. 0Based on comparison with the overall ROI (Rock County) employed labor force of 70,949 (seeTable19.3.7-8), the combined employment of the top 10 employers accounts for approximately 18percent of the total ROI employment (BLS, 2012a; Rock County Development Alliance, 2011).As shown in Table 19.3.7-10, the top employers in the city of Janesville include seven employers with greater than 500 employees: Mercy Health System, Janesville School District, Rock County Government, Wal-Mart/Sam's Club, GHC Specialty Brands, Blackhawk Technical College, and Woodman's Food Market, Inc. These largest employers in Janesville are in the medical, government, and retail/wholesale industries; none within the manufacturing sector. The largest manufacturing sector employers in Janesville are Seneca Foods Corporation, SSI Technologies, Inc., Prent Corporation, Simmons and HUFCOR, Inc. (Rock County Development Alliance,2011).19.3.7.2.1.3Poverty RatesIn 2000, poverty rates for individuals (7.3 percent) and families (5.1 percent) in the ROI were less than rates for both the state (8.7 percent for individuals and 5.6 percent for families) and the nation (12.4 percent and 9.2 percent). Compared to the ROI, state, and nation, poverty rates for individuals and families were lower in the city of Janesville (6.5 percent and 4.3 percent) and higher in the city of Beloit (12.5 percent and 9.6 percent). In 2010, the percent of individuals (12.8percent) and families (9.4percent) in the ROI living below the USCB poverty threshold was greater than the comparable rates for the state of Wisconsin (12.1percent and 8.1percent) and less than those for the nation (14.4percent and 10.5percent) (Table 19.3.7-11). While a larger percentage of individuals and families in the ROI, Janesville, Beloit, statewide, and nationwide now live below the poverty threshold than was the case in 2000, the cities of Janesville and Beloit experienced more marked increases in poverty between 2000 and 2010. In Janesville, the percent of individuals and families living below the poverty threshold more than doubled over 10years from 6.5 percent to 13.6 percent (individuals) and 4.3 percent to 10.4 percent (families). Poverty in Beloit in this same 10-year period also increased notably, with almost a quarter of individuals living below the poverty threshold (up from 12.5 percent in 2000), and 18 percent of families living below the poverty threshold, compared to 9.6 percent in 2000. The ROI experienced greater increases in poverty relative to the state and the nation, with reported rates of 7.3percent and 5.1percent (individuals and families) in 2000 that increased to 12.8percent and 9.4percent, respectively, in 2010 (see Table 19.3.7-11).19.3.7.2.2Housing Based on 2010 USCB data, the total number of housing units in the ROI is 68,392 with 62,406 occupied units and 5,986 vacant units. Additionally, the vacancy rate is 8.8percent, which is an increase from 5.7percent in 2000. The ROI housing vacancy rates are slightly higher than those for Janesville, which increased from 4.7 percent in 2000 to 7.9percent in 2010. The city of Beloit's vacancy rate (11.4 percent) is higher than vacancy rates in Janesville and the ROI. Beloit's vacancy rate in 2000 was 6.3 percent. Vacancy rates have also increased statewide in Wisconsin and nationally. The current vacancy rate of 8.8 percent in the ROI is less than that for the state (12.6percent) and the nation (12.7percent) (Table19.3.7-12). The 2010 median home value in the ROI is $140,300, which is less than the state and the national median home value ($171,000 and $187,500, respectively). Median home values in the Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-140Rev. 0cities of Janesville ($135,400) and Beloit ($90,500) are lower than the median home value in the ROI. When accounting for inflation, the ROI median home value increased by 12.8percent between 2000 and 2010, compared to 20.4percent increase for the state of Wisconsin and 23.8percent increase at the national level. These increases are significantly higher than those for Janesville and Beloit, which are 6.9 percent and 4.8 percent, respectively (seeTable19.3.7-12).19.3.7.2.3Transportation19.3.7.2.3.1Roads and Highways Major highways in the ROI and in proximity to the SHINE site are shown on Figures 19.3.7-2 and 19.3.7-3, respectively. Within the Rock County, there are three major interstate highways and several U.S. Highways (see Figure 19.3.7-2): *I-39
- I-43
- I-90 I-39 and I-90 share common pavement (signed as I-39/90) across the length of the county.
Additionally, Rock County is served by Interstate Highway 43 (I-43), which begins in Beloit and extends northeasterly toward Milwaukee and then north to Green Bay. In relation to the site,I-39/90 is located 2.2 mi. (3.5 km) to the east and I-43 is located approximately 6.9mi. (11.1km) to the southeast.The U.S. highways include US 14 and US 51. US 14 generally extends from east to west, whereas US 51 is oriented north to south. Both highways pass through Janesville in central Rock County.From the site, I-39/90 is accessible via US 51 and SH 11. Major highways/roadways and their pavement condition are listed below.*US 51, a minor arterial that is oriented north-south along the west side of the site is in good condition.*SH 11, a major collector that extends east-west just north of the site is in good condition. *I-39/90, a principal arterial that is oriented north-south about 2.2 mi. (3.5 km) east of the site, is in fair condition.*Town Line Road, a major collector that runs east-west about 2.7 mi. (4.3 km) south of the site, is in good condition.Traffic volumes, obtained from the Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WisDOT), are for 2010 and are listed below (WisDOT, 2010):*I-39/90 - 45,700 vehicles per day (vpd), south of SH 11
- I-39/90 - 50,400 vpd, north of SH 11
- US 51 - 9,000 vpd, south of SH 11*SH 11 - 8,400 vpd, east of US 51*SH 11 - 12,400 vpd, west of I-39/90 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-141Rev. 0*Town Line Road - 3,400 vpd, east of US 5119.3.7.2.3.2Transit Public transportation in the city of Janesville is provided by the Janesville Transit System, which operates a regular bus service Monday through Saturday on six routes inside Janesville (City of Janesville, 2012b). Additionally, the Beloit-Janesville Express operates on weekdays between the two cities. The route of the Beloit-Janesville Express passes directly to the west of the SHINE site on US 51. The nearest stops along this route are at Kellogg Avenue to the north and at Sunny Lane to the south (City of Janesville, 2012b). The Kellogg Avenue Route extends south from the Janesville Transfer Center to Kellogg Avenue, which is approximately 2.3 mi. (3.7 km) north of the SHINE site (City of Janesville, 2012c).19.3.7.2.3.3RailThe nearest railroad to the SHINE site is the Union Pacific Railroad, which is approximately 1.6mi. (2.6km) northeast of the site and is oriented in a northwest-to-southeast direction. The Union Pacific Railroad manages a rail yard just north of SH 11 and west of I-39/90 (see Figure19.3.7-3). No passenger rail service is currently available in Janesville (Vandewalle & Associates, 2009a). There is no direct access to rail from the site.19.3.7.2.3.4AirSWRA is a general aviation airport immediately west of the SHINE site off of US 51. The airport has three paved runways. The runways have a length of 7300 ft. (2225 m), 6701 ft. (2042 m), and 5,000 ft. (1524 m) long. The airport has more than 50,000 operations per year (landings and take-offs) and there are 94 aircraft based at the airport (Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, 2012b). The airport recently began a project to modernize, enlarge and increase the functionality of the 50-year old terminal building. Phase one of this four-phase project began in May 2012 at a cost of $1.46 million. This last phase of construction is expected to be complete by 2014/2015 (Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, 2012c).19.3.7.2.4Tax Payment InformationThe construction and operation of the SHINE facility results in the payment of taxes to political jurisdictions (Table 19.3.7-13). It is probable, over the course of construction and operation, that tax payments are directly or indirectly made by SHINE to many different jurisdictions, including multiple states, due to the likelihood that some materials used for construction and operational purposes are purchased from suppliers in other states where sales taxes are applied. As discussed in Subsection 19.3.7, it is assumed that the majority of the SHINE workforce resides within the ROI (Rock County). This includes current residents of Rock County who have been contributing to the local tax base as well as some individuals and families who are anticipated to relocate to Rock County and add to the local tax base. Thus the effects of tax payments associated with development and operation of the SHINE plant are expected to be greatest on the city of Janesville, Janesville School District, and Rock County, as well as the state of Wisconsin. The tax rates for these jurisdictions are discussed below.The state of Wisconsin has a flat corporate tax rate of 7.9 percent. Wisconsin assesses a variable tax rate on earned income. The income tax rate increases from 4.6 to 7.75percent depending on income level and marital status. Wisconsin has a statewide sales tax rate of Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-142Rev. 05percent. An additional 0.5 percent is added by Rock County as local sales tax. Property tax on owned property is assessed at the county and municipal levels. The property tax rates in Rock County vary among local school districts. Within the Janesville School District in the city of Janesville, the net property tax rate in 2011 was $25.0148 per $1,000 of assessed value. Of this net property tax rate, $6.4427 per $1,000 is allocated for the Rock County government, $7.0402 per $1,000 is allocated for the city of Janesville government (City of Janesville, 2012d), $10.1902 is allocated for the Board of Education, $1.8275 per $1,000 is allocated for the Blackhawk Technical College, $0.8612 per $1,000 is allocated for the Public Library System, $0.1738 per $1,000 is allocated for the state of Wisconsin, and a reduction of $1.5208 per $1,000 is applied due to state of Wisconsin tax credit. The SHINE site is located within the Janesville School District in the city of Janesville. 19.3.7.2.5Public ServicesThis subsection addresses the following public services within the ROI:*Public Water Supply and Wastewater Systems *Local Public Schools
- Public Recreat ional Facilities19.3.7.2.5.1Public Water Supply and Wastewater SystemsPublic Water SuppliesThis subsection provides a characterization of the existing public water supplies and waste water treatment systems within the ROI. All public water supplies in Rock County are from groundwater. Table 19.3.7-14 lists the nine major municipal water suppliers that each serve communities in Rock County. Six of the nine municipal water systems in Rock County have a wellhead protection plan, including Clinton, Evansville, Footville, Janesville, Milton, and Orfordville. Wellhead protection ordinances are in place for only Evansville and Janesville (USGS, 2007).The water systems serving the largest populations are those in Beloit and Janesville. In addition to the public water systems, numerous private wells provide drinking water to residents not connected to municipal water supplies. The Janesville Water Utility provides water supply for both public drinking water and for fire protection utilizing eight wells. The water supply system for the city of Janesville includes two water storage reservoirs and one water tower. According to the city of Janesville, the total pumping capacity of its eight groundwater wells is 29 Mgd (109.8 Mld). Average water usage is about 11 Mgd (41.6 Mld). Accordingly, the excess capacity of the Janesville water supply system is approximately 18 Mgd (68.1 Mld). Public water supplies within Wisconsin are monitored to ensure public health protection, whereas individual well owners are responsible for monitoring and testing private wells. The public water use index for Rock County is 80 (Table 19.3.7-15), which estimates how many people are served by public water supplies. A number greater than 50 means more people are served by public water versus private wells.
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-143Rev. 0Wastewater Treatment SystemsWaste water treatment is provided by local jurisdictions. Table 19.3.7-16 details public waste water treatment systems, their permitted capacities, and their average daily usage for each community in Rock County. Sewage within the city of Janesville is collected from about 300mi. (483km) of sewer main, and treated at a plant off Afton Road, near the City's south- west corner. The treatment plant has an average design peak flow of 25 Mgd (94.6 Mld). The average daily discharge flow is 13 Mgd (49.2 Mld). Accordingly, the excess capacity of the Janesville wastewater treatment system is approximately 12 Mgd (45.4 Mld) (Vandewalle & Associates, 2009a). 19.3.7.2.5.2Local Public SchoolsRock County is served by eight local public school districts, in addition to one state of Wisconsin facility (Table 19.3.7-17). Current student enrollment is 27,807. The Janesville School District has an enrollment of 10,325. Collectively, the school districts operate 39elementary schools, 11middle schools, and 15 high schools. Three additional schools are classified as elementary/, providing classes from kindergarten or first grade through 12 th grade (DPI, 2012). The closest public schools to the SHINE site, defined as those within 2.5 mi. (4 km), are units of the Janesville School district and are located to the north of the SHINE site: Janesville Academy for International Studies (20 enrollment), Jackson Elementary School (325 enrollment), Lincoln Elementary School (397 enrollment), and Edison Middle School (724 enrollment). Janesville Academy for International Studies is located at 2909Kellogg Avenue, Jackson Elementary School is located at 441 West Burbank Avenue, Lincoln Elementary School is located at 1821 Conde Street, and Edison Middle School is located at 1649 South Chatham Street (Janesville School District, 2012).Other educational institutions are located in the vicinity of the SHINE site. Private schools located within 2.5 mi. (4 km) of the SHINE site include Rock County Christian School (111enrollment), and Oakhill Christian School (69 enrollment). Higher education institutions located within 2.5 mi. (4 km) of the SHINE site include Blackhawk Technical College (Janesville Aviation Center and Janesville Central Campus), and the University of Wisconsin-Rock County.19.3.7.2.5.3Public Recreational FacilitiesFigure 19.3.7-4 and Table 19.3.7-18 identify the major recreational facilities within the ROI and provide information relative to their distance from the SHINE site. Rock County owns and maintains 888.2 ac. (359.4 ha) of park space (Design Perspectives Inc., 2009). The county parks are classified as regional parks, community parks, and trails. Other community and regional recreational facilities in the county are owned and maintained by the city of Janesville and the city of Beloit. Janesville maintains 64 improved parks, 10 of which are regional or community parks (City of Janesville, 2012f). Beloit's park system is comprised of 42 parks, including one regional park and four community parks (Vandewalle & Associates, 2006). The WDNR owns and maintains 17,000 ac. (6879.7 ha) of State Wildlife Areas, which are open to the public for recreational use, including seasonal hunting. As is illustrated in Figure 19.3.7-4, each of the State Wildlife Areas is located a minimum of 10mi. (16km) from the SHINE site (WDNR, 2009). Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-144Rev. 0Regional and community parks in the Rock County, Janesville, and Beloit park systems are identified on Table 19.3.7-18 and shown on Figure 19.3.7-4. Included is indication of the distance from each park to the SHINE site and the recreational purpose of each park in terms of active (recreation facilities such as ball fields and recreation centers) or passive (recreation facilities such as trails and picnic facilities). One park, Airport Park, is located within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the SHINE site. It is a two-acre (0.8-ha) passive use park with picnic tables, benches, and a picnic shelter (Design Perspectives Inc., 2009). Eight parks are located at distances between 1mi. and 5 mi. (1.6km and 8 km) from the SHINE site; they include a mix of passive and active recreational amenities (Table 19.3.7-18). Trails in the area of the SHINE site are primarily for recreational use. The city of Janesville manages the South Connector Trail, a multi-use trail that runs adjacent to the north of, and parallel to, SH 11 from west of the Rock River eastward to near the Union Pacific Railroad. There are no direct trail connections or marked bike routes to the SHINE site. Rock County also maintains 226 mi. (364 km) of snowmobile trails, with the nearest snowmobile trail located approximately 2.4 mi. (3.9 km) south of the site. Though not classified as public recreational facilities, there are two private golf facilities within the immediate area of the SHINE site. Glen Erin Golf Course (1417 W. Airport Road) is located immediately southwest of the site (adjacent to the south of SWRA), and Mid City Golf Range (4337 S. US 51) is located immediately south of the site. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-145Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-1 Rock County Labor Force Distribution by County of Employee ResidenceCounty of Employee ResidenceStateRock County Labor ForceNumberPercentRock CountyWI56,85082.9%Winnebago CountyIL4,0956.0%Dane CountyWI1,9902.9% Walworth CountyWI1,4552.1%Green CountyWI1,3251.9%Jefferson CountyWI1,0901.6% Milwaukee CountyWI2650.4%Boone CountyIL2500.4%Stephenson CountyIL850.1%
Reference:
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), 2012 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-146Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-2 Comparison of Estimated Major SHINE Labor Force Needs with Estimated Rock County Available Work ForceOccupationSHINE Peak Need(a)Estimate of Labor Force Availability in Rock County(b)Construction Phase Boilermaker24No DataCarpenter 45360Electrician55190Ironworker50No DataLaborer70340Equipment Operator/Eng. 26130Plumber/Pipefitter 7070Sheet Metal Worker 3080(c)Construction Supervisor 20160Total Construction Labor Force(d)420Operational PhaseOperation Support40340 first-line supervisors of production and operating workers Productions/Operations37110 industrial production managers Tech Support (e)40500 maintenance, 90 engineers, 2,000 craftspeopleTotal Operational Labor Force(d)150b) Rock County labor force estimate from BLS, 2011 unless otherwise notedc) Labor force estimates from BLS, 2009; no data available for 2011 d) SHINE total labor force estimate at peak month includes all labor categories e) Tech support subcategories include: maintenance (machinery maintenance workers and general maintenance and repair workers), engineers (industrial engineers and mechanical drafters), and craftspeople (janitors and cleaners, landscaping and groundskeepers, electricians, plumbers and pipefitters, industrial
References:
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), 2009 and BLS, 2011 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-147Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-3 Population and Growth Rates of Municipalities within Rock CountyMunicipalityPopulation 2000Population2010Observed Growth Rate (%)TownAvon5866083.8%Beloit 7,0387,6628.9%Bradford 1,0071,12111.3%Center1,0051,0666.1%Clinton8939304.1%Fulton 3,1583,2523.0%Harmony2,3512,5699.3%Janesville3,7503,434-8.4%Johnstown802778-3.0%La Prairie 929834-10.2%Lima1,3121,280-2.4%Magnolia 854767-10.2%Milton2,8442,9232.8%Newark 1,5711,541-1.9%Plymouth1,2701,235-2.8%Porter9259452.2%Rock3,3383,196-4.3%Spring Valley813746-8.2%Turtle2,4442,388-2.3%Union1,8602,09912.8%VillageClinton 2,1622,154-0.4%Footville 7888082.5%Orfordville 1,2721,44213.4%CityBeloit 35,77536,9663.3%Broadhead(a)N/A90Edgerton4,8915,3649.7%Evansville 4,0395,01224.1%Janesville 59,49863,5756.9%Milton5,1325,5468.1%Total Rock County152,307160,3315.3%a) 2000 data for Broadhead, Rock County is unavailable. The majority of Broadhead is located in Green County, WI.
References:
USCB, 2000a; USCB, 2010c Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-148Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-4 Resident Population Distribution, Growth Rates, and Projections for Rock CountyCountyPopulationProjected Population (a)200020102000-2010 Growth Rate (%)201520252035204520552015-2055 Projected Growth Rate (%)Rock County152,307160,3315.3165,354174,018182,644191,703201,21221.7a) The growth rate of 4.96 percent per ten year time period, calculated based on the projected ten year growth from 2025 and 2035 published projections, is extrapolated to determine projections for the years 2045 and 2055
References:
Rock County, 2009; USCB, 2000a; and USCB, 2010d Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-149Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-5 Estimated Transient Population within 5 mi. (8 km) of the SHINE Site (2010)Transient SourceNumber of FacilitiesRaw Population EstimateWeighted Population EstimateMajor Employers 149,8412,657Schools, Colleges, Universityies3214,8604,014Recreation Areas431,366451Medical Facilities21717717 Lodging Facilities3149149 Total11326,933 8,073(a)a)Total Weighted Population Estimate includes passengers, crew, and all employees of various companies at the SWRA which are not included in any individual transient source subtotal. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-150Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-6 Demographic (Race and Ethnicity) Characteristics of Rock CountyLocationYear Total PopulationPopulation by Race (%)Persons of Hispanic OriginWhiteMinority Population (including Hispanic Black or African AmericanAmerican Indian and Alaska NativeAsianNative Hawaiian and Other Pacific IslanderSome Other RaceCity of Janesville200059,49895.36.11.30.21.0012.6201063,57591.711.22.60.31.3025.4% Change6.9-3.65.11.30.10.3012.8City of Beloit200035,77575.628.115.40.41.20.14.69.1201036,96668.936.515.10.41.101017.1% Change3.3-6.78.4-0.30-0.1-0.15.48 Rock County 2000152,30791.010.84.60.30.801.83.92010160,33187.615.55.00.31.003.77.6% Change5.3-3.44.70.400.201.93.7State of WI20005,363,67588.912.75.70.91.701.63.6 20105,686,98686.216.76.31.02.302.45.9% Change6.0-2.74.00.60.10.600.82.3 Nation2000281,421,90675.130.912.30.93.60.15.512.5 2010308,745,53872.436.312.60.94.80.26.216.3% Change9.7-2.75.40.301.20.10.73.8
References:
USCB, 2000a and 2010a Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-151Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-7 Median Household and Per Capita Income Levels within RockCountyIncome2000 (a)2010% ChangeMedian Household City of Janesville$58,200$48,257-17.1City of Beloit$46,111$37,430-18.8Rock County$57,638$49,144-14.8State of WI$55,452$50,814-8.4Nation$53,177$51,222-3.7Per Capita City of Janesville$28,142$23,300-17.2City of Beloit$21,416$17,180-19.8Rock County$26,459$23,209-12.3State of WI$26,935$26,279-2.4Nation$27,336$26,942-1.4a)Adjusted for inflation to year 2010 dollars based on the BLS Consumer Price Index Inflation Calculator
References:
USCB, 2008-2010; USCB, 2000b; BLS, 2012b Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-152Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-8 Civilian Labor Force and Unemployment Rates within Rock County, 2002-201220022003200420052006200720082009201020112012 (a)Growth Rate (%)2002-12Rock CountyLabor Force82,43382,48882,72983,60884,66484,61983,45982,87480,96578,68778,132-5.2Employed77,42277,39178,07178,66580,41079,97978,28372,27471,89171,22370,949-8.4Unemployed5,0115,0974,6584,9434,2544,6405,17610,6009,0747,4647,18343.3 Unemployment Rate (%)6.16.25.65.95.05.56.212.811.29.59.2State of WisconsinLabor Force3,021,0683,033,6743,020,4023,035,8083,077,0963,096,9263,089,3763,115,3573,082,6763,062,2593,049,7021.0Employed2,860,9152,862,5872,868,3762,890,1172,932,4822,948,7252,939,7732,842,9162,821,8032,833,4312,819,901-1.4Unemployed160,153171,087152,026145,691144,614148,201149,603272,441260,873228,828229,80143.5Unemployment Rate (%)5.35.65.04.84.74.84.88.78.57.57.5United StatesLabor Force(b)144,863146,510147,401149,320151,428153,124154,287154,142153,889153,617154,7076.8Employed(b)136,485137,736139,252141,730144,427146,047145,362139,877139,064139,869142,0344.1Unemployed(b)8,3788,7748,1497,5917,0017,0788,92414,26514,82513,74712,67351.3Unemployment Rate (%)5.86.05.55.14.64.65.89.39.68.98.2a) Through March 2012. b) Numbers in thousands
Reference:
BLS, 2012a Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-153Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-9 Employment by Industry within Rock CountyEmployment Industry20002012(a)2000-2012 Change (%)NumberPercentNumberPercentRock CountyConstruction, Mining and Natural Resources (b)5,7387.52,0003.3-65.1Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting, and Mining 1,3141.7No dataNo data--Construction 4,4245.8No dataNo data--Manufacturing 22,64029.78,400 13.9-62.9Wholesale Trade2,5923.43,4005.631.2Retail Trade 9,27012.18,300 13.8-10.5Transportation, Warehousing, Utilities3,4994.62,6004.3-25.7Information 1,4972.01,1001.8-26.5Finance, Insurance, Real Estate3,0294.02,0003.3-34.0Professional and Business Services 3,7244.94,3007.115.5Education and Health Services14,19718.610,400 17.2-26.7Leisure and Hospitality5,1626.85,7009.510.4Other Services (except Public Administration) 2,8893.83,5005.821.1Public Administration 2,0992.78,60014.3309.7State of Wisconsin Construction, Mining and Natural Resources (b)237,0438.781,9003.0-65.4Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting, and Mining 75,4182.8No dataNo dataConstruction161,6255.9No dataNo dataManufacturing606,84522.2442,300 16.3-27.1Wholesale Trade 87,9793.2115,7004.331.5Retail Trade317,88111.6287,400 10.6-9.6Transportation, Warehousing, Utilities123,6574.597,4003.6-21.2Information 60,1422.246,0001.7-23.5Finance, Insurance, Real Estate168,0606.1155,5005.7-7.5Professional and Business Services179,5036.6280,900 10.456.5Education and Health Servic es548,11120.0416,000 15.3-24.1Leisure and Hospitality198,5287.3235,6008.718.7Other Services (except Public Administration)111,0284.1134,1004.920.8Public Administration 96,1483.5420,100 15.5336.9a) Through April 2012b) 2012 figures reflect non-farm employment and do not isolate "construction," contrasted to 2000 data.
References:
USCB, 2000b; Department of Workforce Development (DWD), 2012 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-154Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-10 Top 10 Employers within the ROI (Rock County), City of JanesvilleEmployerNumber of EmployeesPercentProduct/ServiceTop 10 Employers within Rock CountyMercy Health System (a)3,68729.0Medical ServicesBeloit Health System 1,48611.7Medical ServicesJanesville School District 1,36810.8Public EducationRock County 1,1709.2GovernmentHendricks Holdings (ABC et. al.) 8576.7Wholesale DistributorBeloit School District 8496.7Public EducationWal-Mart/Sam's Club(a)8556.7RetailGHC Specialty Brands 8436.6Wholesale DistributorBlackhawk Technical College 8256.5Educational Services Kerry Americas(a)7596.0Food ProductsTotal12,699100.0Top 10 Employers within the City of JanesvilleMercy Health System (a)3,68734.8Medical ServicesJanesville School District 1,36812.9Public EducationRock County 1,17011.1GovernmentWal-Mart/Sam's Club(a)8558.1RetailGHC Specialty Brands 8438.0Wholesale DistributionBlackhawk Technical College 8257.8Public EducationWoodman's Food Market, Inc.5415.1RetailLemans Corporation4504.3Wholesale DistributionJ.P. Cullen & Sons4324.1ConstructionSeneca Foods Corporation4153.9Food ProcessingTotal10,586100.0Top 5 Manufacturing Sector Employers within the City of JanesvilleSeneca Foods Corporation41526.0Food ProcessingSSI Technologies, Inc.38223.9Metal Components and SensorsPrent Corporation34221.4Plastic PartsSimmons23915.0MattressesHUFCOR, Inc.22013.8Accordion Doors & WallsTotal1,598100.0a) Employees located at multiple locations
Reference:
Rock County Development Alliance, 2011 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-155Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-11 Percent of Individuals and Families Living Below the Census PovertyThreshold within Rock CountyCategory2000 (%)2010 (%)IndividualsCity of Janesville6.513.6City of Beloit12.521.8 Rock County7.312.8 State of WI8.712.1Nation12.414.4Families City of Janesville4.310.4City of Beloit9.618.0 Rock County5.19.4 State of WI5.68.1 Nation9.210.5
Reference:
USCB, 2008-2010; USCB, 2000b Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-156Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-12 Housing Unit Characteristics within Rock CountyHousing Category200020102000-2010 ChangeCity of JanesvilleTotal Number of Units25,08327,4339.4%Number of Occupied Units23,89425,2595.7%Number of Vacant Units1,1892,17482.8% Vacancy Rate4.7%7.9%3.2%Median Value (a)$126,630$135,4006.9%City of BeloitTotal Number of Units14,26215,3307.5%Number of Occupied Units13,37013,5831.6%Number of Vacant Units 8921,74795.9% Vacancy Rate6.3%11.4%5.1%Median Value (a)$86,361$90,5004.8%Rock CountyTotal Number of Units62,18768,39210.0%Number of Occupied Units58,61762,4066.5%Number of Vacant Units3,5705,98667.7% Vacancy Rate5.7%8.8%3.1%Median Value (a)$124,350$140,30012.8%State of WisconsinTotal Number of Units2,321,1442,612,29912.5%Number of Occupied Units2,084,5442,282,5079.5%Number of Vacant Units236,600329,79239.4% Vacancy Rate10.2%12.6%2.4%Median Value (a)$142,078$171,00020.4% NationTotal Number of Units115,904,641131,210,60613.2% Number of Occupied Units105,480,101114,596,9278.6%Number of Vacant Units10,424,54016,613,67959.4% Vacancy Rate9.0%12.7%3.7%Median Value (a)$151,449$187,50023.8%a)Adjusted for inflation to year 2010 dollars based on the BLS Consumer Price Index Inflation Calculator
References:
BLS, 2012a, USCB, 2008-2010; USCB, 2000a; USCB, 2000b Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-157Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-13 Tax Rates in Rock County and State of Wisconsina)Includes County, City, Janesville School District Board of Education, and Other (Blackhawk Vocational Technical Adult Education (VTAE) - 1.8275, Public Library - 0.8612, State - 0.1738, State Tax Credit - -1.5208)
References:
City of Janesville, 2012d; Department of Revenue (DOR), 2011; and DOR, 2012LocationCorporate Tax Rate(%)Income Tax Rate(%)Property Tax Rate (Dollars per $1,000 value)Sales Tax Rate (%)CountyCity Board of EducationNet(a)Rock Countyn/an/a6.44277.040210.190225.01480.50State of WI 7.9 4.6-7.755.0 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-158Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-14 Major Municipal Water Suppliers in Rock County
Reference:
USGS, 2007MunicipalWater SystemWellheadProtection PlanWellheadProtection OrdinanceCity of BeloitNoNoClinton WaterworksYesNo Edgerton WaterworksNoNoEvansville WaterworksYesYesFootville WaterworksYesNo Fulton Utility DistrictNoNoJanesville Water UtilityYesYesMilton WaterworksYesNo Orfordville WaterworksYesNo Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-159Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-15 Rock County Community Water Supply Characteristics (2010) Groundwater PopulationSurface Water PopulationPopulation ServedCounty PopulationPublic Water Use Index122,5850122,585152,30780
Reference:
Wisconsin Department of Health Services, 2010 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-160Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-16 Public Wastewater Treatment Systems in Rock Countya) Vandewalle & Associates, 2009a
References:
USEPA, 2008 and Vand ewalle & Asso ciates, 2009aTreatment Facility/ Project Name Existing Total Flow(Mgd)Present Design Total Flow (Mgd)ExcessCapacity(Mgd)ExcessCapacity(Percent)Beloit WWTP9.0011.002.0018%Clinton STP 0.130.380.2566%Edgerton STP 0.530.700.1725% Evansville WWTP 0.450.600.1626%Footville STP 0.080.110.0328%Janesville WWTP (a) 13.0025.0012.0048%Milton STP 0.380.630.2540%Orfordville STP 0.120.400.2870%Consolidated Koshkonong STP0.420.600.1830% Plymouth #1STP0.020.030.0133%Beloit, Town0.450.650.2132% Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-161Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-17 Public School Enrollment (2012) within Rock County DistrictStudentEnrollmentNumber of SchoolsElementaryElementary/Secondary Middle SchoolHigh SchoolBeloit School District6,96711223Beloit Turner School District1,4612011Clinton Community School District1,1901011Edgerton School District1,7862011Evansville Community School District1,7752011Janesville School District10,32513036Milton School District3,3635011Parkview School District940 3011WI Department of Public Instruction00100Total, Rock County27,8073931115
Reference:
Department of Public Instruction (DPI), 2012 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-162Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-18 Recreation Facilities within Rock County (Sheet 1 of 2) ParkAmenitiesAcreageDistance from SHINE SitePassiveActiveac.hami.kmRegional Parks Rock CountyBeckman Mill County Park51.620.910.817.4Carver-Roehl Park5221.010.216.4 Gibbs Lake ParkX286.6116.013.621.9Happy Hollow ParkX191.277.41.93.1Lee ParkXX4016.211.318.2 Magnolia Bluff ParkX112.145.418.129.1Murwin ParkX4217.013.922.4City of JanesvilleNortheast Regional ParkX8735.27.411.9 Palmer ParkX16466.446.4Riverside ParkXX8735.26.310.1 Rockport ParkXX24699.63.45.5City of BeloitBig Hill Memorial ParkX197.279.84.77.6Community Parks Rock CountyAirport ParkX20.80.50.8 Avon ParkX176.916.827.0Koshkonong Lake AccessX12.75.115.424.8Ice Age ParkX3.41.48.814.2 Indianford ParkX1.20.512.820.6Royce Dallman ParkX2.30.915.324.6Schollmeyer ParkX10.45.58.9 Sugar River ParkX6.52.616.125.9Sweet-Allyn ParkXX3915.85.58.9 Walt Lindemann Sportsman's ParkXX104.06.911.1City of JanesvilleBond ParkX124.946.4 Kiwanis Community ParkX93.66.410.3Lustig ParkX3212.934.8Monterey ParkX4217.03.25.1 Optimist Community Park3514.25.18.2Traxler ParkX2710.94.67.4City of BeloitKrueger Recreation AreaX15.76.47.111.4 Leeson ParkX41.516.87.712.4Riverside ParkX24.910.17.712.4 Telfer ParkX28.811.76.310.1 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-163Rev. 0Table 19.3.7-18 Recreation Facilities within Rock County (Sheet 2 of 2) ParkAmenitiesLength (a)Distance from SHINE SitePassiveActivemi.kmmi.kmRock County TrailsSouth Connector TrailX4.06.40.81.3Ice Age Connector TrailX3.76.07.712.4Pelishak-Tiffany Nature TrailX6.09.79.715.6Hanover Wildlife Area 1X17.67.16.810.9a) Hanover Wildlife Area is measured in acres/hectares
References:
City of Janesville, 2012c; City of Janesville, 2012f, Design Perspectives Inc, 2009, and Vandewalle & Associates, 2006 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-164Rev. 019.3.8HUMAN HEALTHThis subsection describes the existing public and occupational health issues.19.3.8.1Maps of Potentially Sensitive Surrounding Facilities Figures 19.3.8-1 and 19.3.8-2 show distances from the proposed action to the following points or areas:*Nearest full-time resident.*Nearest sensitive receptors. -Educational facilities-Medical facilities -Community centers -Animal production facilities-Parks-Religious institutionsThe site boundary distances to these locations are summarized in Table 19.3.8-1. The nearest site boundary is approximately 300m (0.19mi.) east of the production facility building centerpoint (see Figure19.2.1-1).The nearest drinking water intake is an active, drilled, private well (Wisconsin unique well number MF461) located northwest of the site at 1112 W. Knilans Road, Janesville, Wisconsin, 53545.19.3.8.2Background Radiation Exposure The major sources and levels of background radiation exposure, both natural and man-made, are discussed in this subsection. Based on the information contained in the following subsections, there are no abnormal radiation hazards in the vicinity of the SHINE site; therefore, the background radiation exposure due to both natural and man-made sources is 6.2 millisievert per year (mSv/yr) (620 millirem [roentgen equivalent man] per year [mrem/yr]) (NRC, 2012a).19.3.8.2.1Natural SourcesThe U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) divides natural sources of radiation into three categories: cosmic, internal, and terrestrial. Cosmic radiation is the result of radiation received from extraterrestrial sources, such as the sun and other stars, that penetrate the Earth's atmosphere. Internal radiation is the result of naturally occurring potassium-40 (K-40) and carbon-14 (C-14) in all humans. Lastly, terrestrial radiation is the result of dose received from naturally occurring uranium, thorium, and radium found in soil and rock. Also, radon gas seeps through the ground and into the air where it is inhaled; this source represents the majority of the background radiation for an average member of the public (NRC, 2012b). Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-165Rev. 0Based on information in the following subsections, there are no natural features of the SHINE site vicinity that would place natural background radiation at levels higher than the United States average. Therefore, the public receives an average natural background dose of 3.1 mSv/yr (310mrem/yr) (NRC, 2012a).19.3.8.2.1.1Cosmic RadiationCosmic radiation exposure depends on the site elevation. The terrain in the vicinity of the SHINE site is relatively flat, and the site elevation is well within the national elevation average. Therefore, it is appropriate to use the average annual dose due to cosmic radiation, 0.31 mSV/yr (31 mrem/yr) (NRC, 2012a).19.3.8.2.1.2Internal Radiation There are no above-normal sources of radioactivity contained in the food and water consumed in Janesville, Wisconsin based on publicly available USEPA data (USEPA, 2009). The average annual dose due to internal radiation, 0.31 mSv/yr (31 mrem/yr), is applicable (NRC, 2012a). 19.3.8.2.1.3Terrestrial RadiationThe national average for terrestrial radiation, 2.48 mSv/yr (248 mrem/yr), which includes uranium, thorium, radium, and radon gas, is applicable to the vicinity of the SHINE site (NRC,2012a).19.3.8.2.2Man-Made SourcesMan-made sources of radiation consist of medical sources, consumer products, and nuclear power sources. Medical procedures (e.g., X-rays, whole body CT scans, nuclear medicine procedures) account for a vast majority of the man-made radiation received annually. Consumer products, such as smoke detectors, televisions, and combustible fuels, also contribute to man-made radiation dose. Lastly, nuclear fuel cycle facilities (from uranium mining and milling to the disposal of spent nuclear fuel), nuclear power plants, and the transportation of radioactive material contribute to man-made radiation dose (NRC, 2012c). Based on the information in the following subsections, there are no abnormal sources of radiation located in the vicinity of the SHINE site; therefore, the public receives an average dose due to man-made radiation sources of 3.1 mSv/yr (310 mrem/yr) (NRC, 2012a).19.3.8.2.2.1Medical SourcesThe area surrounding the SHINE site contains three medical facilities: First Choice Women's Health Center, Mercy Clinic South, and Mercy Hospital, which are all located in Janesville, Wisconsin (see Table 19.3.8-1). First Choice Women's Health Center does not provide services that utilize ionizing radiation. Mercy Clinic South provides imaging services to patients (MHS,2012a). Mercy Hospital provides modern medical services to patients that include imaging services, radiation oncology, and nuclear medicine (MHS, 2012b).Those members of the public who are employed at Mercy Hospital or Mercy Clinic South may receive a higher dose due to medical sources than that of the average citizen medical dose, an Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-166Rev. 0average total dose of 2.98 mSv/yr (298 mrem/yr), but the medical workers do not receive a dose in excess of the occupational limits set in 10 CFR 20, 0.05 Sv/yr (5 rem/yr) (NRC, 2012a).19.3.8.2.2.2Consumer Products Ionizing radiation dose from the use of consumer products will fluctuate based on the lifestyle of the individual in question; therefore, a best estimate of the average annual dose due to consumer products, 0.12 mSv/yr (12 mrem/yr), is used (NRC, 2012a). 19.3.8.2.2.3Nuclear Reactor Facilities The contribution to man-made radiat ion from nuclear reactor facilities in the proposed action area is small. There are no nuclear fuel cycle facilities in the area; however, I-39/90 is approximately 2 mi. (3.2 km) from the site boundary, so there may be some radiation received from the transportation of radioactive material along that roadway. Railroads surround the proposed action area on all but the southeast sides, so transportation of radioactive materials along the railroads may contribute additional doses. In addition, the SHINE site is located between two nuclear reactors: Exelon's Byron Station (a two-unit pressurized water reactor (PWR) with a total net electrical generation of 2336 megawatts [MWe]) and the University of Wisconsin Nuclear Reactor (UWNR) research facility (variable thermal power up to 1 MWt) (Exelon, 2012; UWNR, 2011a). Byron Station is located approximately 40 mi. (64 km) south-southwest of the project facility (Google, 2012). Based on off-site dose calculations from Byron Station, the dose to the public near the SHINE site is very low due to the distance between the site and Byron Station (TBEES, 2011). Similarly, the UWNR is approximately 37 mi. (60 km) north-northwest of the project facility, and the dose to the public is very low due to the distance between the UWNR and the SHINE site (Google, 2012; UWNR,2011b). 19.3.8.3Description of Radioactive and Nonradioactive Liquid, Gaseous, and Solid Waste Management Effluent Control SystemsThere are no radioactive materials currently stored on the site or within the vicinity of the SHINE site; therefore, there are no radioactive effluent control systems on or within the vicinity of the site. See Subsection 19.3.8.8 for a description of nearby nuclear reactor facilities' radioactive effluent monitoring programs.Nonradioactive liquid, gaseous, and solid waste effl uents from facilities in the vicinity of the SHINE site report hazardous effluents to the USEPA (USEPA, 2012e). 19.3.8.4Information on Radioactive and Nonradioactive Effluents Released to the EnvironmentThere are no radioactive materials stored on the site; therefore, there are no radioactive effluents released to the environment on-site. Mercy Hospital stores medical isotopes for use in their nuclear medicine program (MHS, 2012b). See Subsection 19.3.8.2.2.3 for a discussion of nearest operating nuclear reactor facilities' radioactive releases. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-167Rev. 0See Table 19.3.8-2 for a list of hazardous materials stored within 5 mi. (8 km) of the SHINE site. It is assumed that any of these materials could be released to the environment in the vicinity of the SHINE site.19.3.8.5Radioactive and Nonradioactive Hazardous Material Stored On-Site or within the VicinityThere are no radioactive materials currently stored on the site. Mercy Hospital stores medical isotopes for use in their nuclear medicine program (MHS, 2012b). There are no hazardous industrial materials stored on the site. However, since the SHINE site is currently used for agricultural purposes (see Subsection 19.3.4.1.1.3), chemical fertilizers and pesticides may have been used on the site. See Table 19.3.8-2 for a list of hazardous material stored within 5 mi. (8 km) of the SHINE site.19.3.8.6Current On-Site or Nearby Sources and Levels of Exposure to Members of the Public and Workers from Radioactive MaterialsThere are no existing radioactive materials currently stored on-site; therefore there is no exposure to the public. Mercy Hospital is the only facility in the vicinity of the SHINE site that possesses radioactive material. Patients at the hospital may be exposed to this radiation in a planned and controlled manner based on professionally prepared treatments. See Subsection 19.3.8.2.2.1 for the average annual radiation dose from medical facilities. There may be some radiation dose received from the transportation of radioactive material along I-39/90, which is located approximately 2mi. (3.2km) east of the site boundary. Railroads surround the proposed action area on all but the southeast sides, so transportation of radioactive materials along the railroads may contribute additional doses. Contributions from these sources are discussed in Subsection 19.3.8.2.2.3.19.3.8.7Historical Exposures to Radioactive Materials to Both Workers and Members of the PublicThere are no recordable incidents involving radioactive material in the vicinity of the SHINE site (USEPA, 2012e). Any historical exposure to radioactive material would come from treatment in the Mercy Hospital nuclear medicine department. Patients at the hospital may have been historically exposed to this radiation in a planned and controlled manner, based on professionally-prepared treatments.19.3.8.8Description of Nearby Operatin g Facilities' Effluent Monitoring ProgramsExelon's Byron Station submits an annual radiological environmental operating report to the NRC, and the most recent results of the radiological environmental monitoring program are approximately the same as those found during the pre-operational studies conducted at Byron Station. Liquid effluents from Byron Station are released to the Rock River in controlled batches after radioassay of each batch. Gaseous effluents are released to the atmosphere and are calculated on the basis of analyses of weekly grab samples and grab samples of batch releases Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-168Rev. 0prior to the release of noble gases as well as continuously-collected composite samples of iodine and particulate radioactivity sampled during the course of the year. The results of effluent analyses are summarized on a monthly basis. Airborne concentrations of noble gases, iodine-131 (I-131), and particulate radioactivity in off-site areas are calculated using isotopic composition of effluents and meteorological data. C-14 concentration in off-site areas is calculated based on industry-approved methodology for estimation of the amount released and meteorological data. (TBEES, 2011)Environmental monitoring is conducted by sampling at indicator and control (background) locations in the vicinity of Byron Station to measure changes in radiation or radioactivity levels that may be attributable to station operation. If significant changes attri butable to Byron Station are measured, these changes are correlated with effluent releases. An environmental monitoring program is conducted which also includes all potential pathways at the site. Gaseous pathways include ground plane (direct), inhalation, vegetation, meat, and milk. Liquid pathways include potable water and freshwater fish. The critical pathway for 2010 gaseous dose was vegetation. The critical pathway for 2010 liquid dose was freshwater fish. (TBEES, 2011)The UWNR effluent monitoring program uses Landauer Luxel brand area monitors located in areas surrounding the reactor laboratory. Liquid effluents are monitored, recorded, and discharged to the sanitary sewer from the fac ility. Exhaust effluents are monitored, recorded, and discharged through the UWNR stack. Solid waste is monitored, recorded, and transferred to the UW Broad Scope license for ultimate disposal in accordance with the UWNR radioactive materials license. Quantities of released effluents are reported in the UWNR annual operating report. (UWNR, 2011b)19.3.8.9Relevant Occupational Injury Rates and Occupational Fatal Injury Rates Occupational injury and fatal injury rates for occupations relevant to the construction, operation, and decommissioning of the SHINE facility are discussed in this subsection. Recent BLS data, which lists the national incidence rates of nonfatal occupational injuries and illnesses by industry, was consulted to estimate relevant occupational injury rates for the SHINE project. The incidence rate is defined as the number of injuries and illnesses per 100 full-time workers. For this estimate the incidence rate of the total number of recordable cases was used. During the construction and decommissioning phases, the total number of recordable cases for construction workers in the construction industry is 3.9 per 100full-time workers. During the operation phase, SHINE employees work in environments found in multiple industries, therefore, the total number of recordable cases for all industries (3.8 per 100full-time workers), is used to estimate the occupational injury rate for SHINE employees. (BLS, 2012c)Comparable BLS data exists for national occupational fatal injury rates. The BLS defines fatal injury rates as the number of fatal occupational injuries per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers. For the construction industry, the fatal injury rate is estimated to be 8.9 per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers. As discussed above, SHINE employees work in varying environments, so the fatal injury rate for all industries (3.5 per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers) is used to estimate the occupational fatal injury rate for SHINE employees. (BLS, 2012d) Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-169Rev. 0Table 19.3.8-1 Distance to Nearest Agricultural and Urban FacilitiesFacility Type Location of InterestDistance to SHINE Site BoundaryResidentialNearest Full-Time Resident0.33 mi. (0.53 km) ParkAirport Park0.30 mi. (0.48 km)Paw Print Park1.16 mi. (1.87 km) Burbank Park1.38 mi. (2.22 km)MedicalFirst Choice Women's Health Center1.37 mi. (2.20 km) Mercy Clinic South1.58 mi. (2.54 km) Mercy Hospital4.21 mi. (6.78 km)EducationalRoessel Aviation0.78 mi. (1.26 km) Blackhawk Technical College Aviation Center0.89 mi. (1.43 km) Rock County Christian School1.14 mi. (1.83 km) Jackson Elementary School1.28 mi. (2.06 km)Community Kids Learning Centers1.36 mi. (2.19 km)Community CenterCaravilla Education and Rehabilitation Comm
Center1.62 mi. (2.61 km)Religious InstitutionsIglesia Hispania Pentecostes0.35 mi. (0.56 km)Summit Baptist Church1.37 mi. (2.20 km) Animal ProductionDairy Production0.51 mi. (0.82 km)Horse Pasture0.52 mi. (0.84 km) Goat Production0.69 mi. (1.11 km)MacFarland Pheasants, Inc.0.86 mi. (1.38 km)Beef Production Area0.97 mi. (1.56 km) Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-170Rev. 0Table 19.3.8-2 Chemicals Used/Stored Within Five Miles of the Site(Sheet 1 of 4)List of ChemicalsNo. 2 Diesel FuelNo. 2 Fuel Oil 1,2,3-Propanetriol10-34-0 Ammonium Polyphosphate Solution2,2-Dimethypropane - 1,3-Diol 2-Ethylhexnol 2-Phenoxyethanol 4,4-Diphenylmethane Diisocyanate77-80% Calcium Chloride AC-101 Acetic Acid
Acrylamide Copolymer AdogenAlkyl Dimethylamine C1295Aminoethylethanolamine Anhydrous Ammonia Ammonium Hydroxide Solution (29%) Ammonium Polyph, 4%N 10%P205 10%K20 1%S, .25Ammonium Polyphosphate Potassium ChlorideAmmonium Polyphosphate Potassium Hydro Ammonium Polyphosphate Potassium Hydroxide, 6-24-6 Ammonium Polyphosphate Potassium Solution Ammonium Polyphoste Potassium ChlorideAnionic Asphalt EmulsionAmmonium Thiosulfate
Aromatic Polyester Polyol
ArosurfBattery Acid Battery Electrolyte Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-171Rev. 0Table 19.3.8-2 Chemicals Used/Stored Within Five Miles of the Site (Sheet 2 of 4)List of Chemicals Benzoic Acid Benzyl Chloride Biodiesel ChlorineD-36 Condensate Treatement Diary Acid #5W De-icing Fluid
Diesel Fuel Diethyloxyester Dimethylammonium ChlorideDiethanolamine Diethyl Sulfate
Diethylene Glycol Diethylene TriamineDihydrogenated Tallowmethyl AmineDimethyl C12 Amine 95% Dimethyl C16 Amine 95%
Dimethyl Sulfate DimethylamineopropylamineDXP 5522-048DXP 5522-131 DXP 5558-66 DXP 5536-094
Ethyl AlcoholEthyl MercaptanEthylene Oxide Fatty Acid C8-C18 Fatty Alcohol C12-C18Fertilizer RinsatcFertilizer, Commercial BlenD Liquid N-P-K Furfuryl Alcohol Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-172Rev. 0Table 19.3.8-2 Chemicals Used/Stored Within Five Miles of the Site (Sheet 3 of 4)List of ChemicalsGasolineGlyphosphate
HerbicideHubercarb Q200 (Calcium Carbonate) Hydrogen Hydrogen Peroxide
INDULIN 747IsopropanolJet Fuel Lauric Acid 1299 Liquified Petroleum Propane
Metam-SodiumMethoxypolyglycol Basic Methyl Chloride Methyldiethanolamine
N-Butyl Alcohol Nitric Acid Oleic AcidP&G Code 10020418 P&G Code 65163 Pesticides/Insecticides Peracetic AcidPhosphoric AcidPolyethylene Glycol POLYHEED 997
Polyol Potassium ChloridePotassium HydroxidePropylene Glycol Propylene Oxide Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.3-173Rev. 0Table 19.3.8-2 Chemicals Used/Stored Within Five Miles of the Site (Sheet 4 of 4)List of ChemicalsPropaneQUESTAR CAF
REWOCOROS AC 100 US REWODERM S 1333REWOPAL 12 REWOQUAT (WE 18, E US, WE 28 US, WE 16, CQ 100) REWOTERIC AM TEG Road Saver Sealants Sodium Bisulfate Sodium Bisulfite Sodium Hydroxide Sodium Hypochlorite Soft Tallow DiesterSolvent Blend 19205Sorbitan Trioleate
Stearic Acid
Styrene Sulfuric AcidTEGO IL IMESTEGO AMID S 18 TEGOTENS EC 11 TEGOSOFT PBE Triethanolamine UreaVarious Oils
Varamide Varine OVariquatVarisoft Varonic Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTable of ContentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-iRev. 0SECTION 19.4IMPACTS OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION, OPERATIONS, AND DECOMMISSIONINGTable of Contents SectionTitlePage19.4IMPACTS OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION, OPERATIONS, AND DECOMMISSIONING..................................................................................19.4-119.4.1LAND USE AND VISUAL RESOURCES..................................................19.4-119.4.2AIR QUALITY AND NOISE.......................................................................19.4-619.4.3GEOLOGIC ENVIRONMENT....................................................................19.4-3119.4.4WATER RESOURCES..............................................................................19.4-3419.4.5ECOLOGICAL RESOURCES...................................................................19.4-40 19.4.6HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES.............................................19.4-4919.4.7SOCIOECONOMICS.................................................................................19.4-50 19.4.8HUMAN HEALTH......................................................................................19.4-61 19.4.9WASTE MANAGEMENT...........................................................................19.4-8119.4.10TRANSPORTATION.................................................................................19.4-8319.4.11POSTULATED ACCIDENTS.....................................................................19.4-92 19.4.12ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE...................................................................19.4-10419.4.13CUMULATIVE EFFECTS..........................................................................19.4-111 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-iiRev. 1List of Tables NumberTitle19.4.2-1Isotope Production Process - Gaseous Effluents19.4.2-2Standby Diesel Generator - Emissions19.4.2-3Emissions from Production Facility Building - Natural Gas-Fired Boiler19.4.2-4Emissions from Administration Building - Natural Gas-Fired Heater19.4.2-5Emissions from Support Facility Building - Natural Gas-Fired Heater19.4.2-6Emissions from Waste Staging & Shipping Building - Natural Gas-Fired Heater19.4.2-7Emissions from Diesel Generator Building - Natural Gas-Fired Heater19.4.2-8Total Annual Emissions19.4.2-9SHINE Facility Release Point Characteristics 19.4.2-10Pollutant Impacts Compared to the SIL19.4.2-11Pollutant Impacts Compared to the NAAQS19.4.2-12Typical Noise and Emissions from Construction Equipment19.4.5-1Summary of Impacts to 2006 Land Use/Land Cover(a)19.4.7-1Projected ROI Labor Availability and On-site Labor Requirements at Peak Month of Construction, Operations and Decommissioning Schedules19.4.7-2Summary of Traffic Impacts during Construction and Operations19.4.7-3Summary of the Effects of Mitigative Measures on Traffic ConditionsduringOperations19.4.8-1Summary of Major Chemical Inventory and Quantity 19.4.8-2Chemical Storage Area Characteristics19.4.8-3Potential Occupational Hazards19.4.8-4This table number not used 19.4.8-5Annual Total Effective Dose Equivalent to the Public at Bounding Dose Receptors Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-iiiRev. 0List of Tables(Continued) NumberTitle19.4.8-6Environmental Monitoring Locations19.4.8-7Administrative Dose Limits 19.4.10-1Population Density, Exposed Population, and the Adjustment Factor for Transportation Route to Andrews, Texas 19.4.10-2Population Density, Exposed Population, and the Adjustment Factor for Transportation Route to Clive, Utah19.4.10-3Population Density, Exposed Population, and the Adjustment Factor for Transportation Route to Hazelwood, Missouri19.4.10-4Population Density, Exposed Population, and the Adjustment Factor for Transportation Route to North Billerica, Massachusetts19.4.10-5Incident-Free Radiological Dose Summary (Person-Rem/Year) 19.4.11-1SHINE Hazardous (Toxic) Chemical Source Terms and Concentrations 19.4.12-1Minority and Low-Income Population Statistics for Block Groups within a 5-Mi. Radius of the SHINESite19.4.13-1Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Projects and Other Actions Considered in the Cumulative Effects Analysis19.4.13-2Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Projects and Other Actions Retained for the Cumulative Effects Analysis19.4.13-3Cumulative Impacts on Environmental Resources, Including the Impacts of the Proposed Project Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of FiguresSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-ivRev. 0List of Figures NumberTitle19.4.1-1Conceptual Rendering of SHINE Facility19.4.1-2SHINE Facility Construction Grading Plan19.4.8-1Location of Environmental Monitors19.4.10-1Population Density for Transportation Route to Andrews, Texas 19.4.10-2Population Density for Transportation Route to Clive, Utah19.4.10-3Population Density for Transportation Route to Hazelwood, Missouri19.4.10-4Population Density for Transportation Route to North Billerica, Massachusetts19.4.12-1Low Income Populations in the Vicinity of the SHINE Site19.4.13-1Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Projects and Other Actions Retained for the Cumulative Effects Analysis Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-vRev. 0Acronyms and AbbreviationsAcronym/Abbreviation Definition µg/m3micrograms per cubic meter/Qrelative atmospheric concentration ac.acreacfmactual cubic feet per minute ALARAAs Low As Reasonably Achievable AMSLabove mean sea level BLSBureau of Labor Statistics BMPbest management practice Btubritish thermal unitBtu/hrBtu per hour Btu/scfBtu per standard cubic foot Bu.bushelCCelsiusCAMcontinuous air monitor CEDEcommitted effective dose equivalent CEQCouncil on Environmental Quality CFRCode of Federal Regulations Ci/yrCuries per year COcarbon monoxide CO2carbon dioxide CO2eCO2 equivalentD/Qground level deposition factor dBAdecibels Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-viRev. 1Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition DBAdesign basis accident DOEU.S. Department of Energy DORWisconsin Department of Revenue DOTU.S. Department of Transportation DPIWisconsin Department of Public Instruction DSSIDiversified Scientific Services, Inc. EDEeffective dose equivalent EJEnvironmental Justice ESFengineered safety feature FFahrenheit FRFederal Register ft.feetft/secfeet per second GHGgreenhouse gas GISGeographic Information Systemgpdgallons per daygrams/bhp-hrgrams per brake horsepower-hour H1Hhigh, first high H2Hhigh, second high hahectareHATHazard Analysis Team HAZOPSHazard and Operability Study Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-viiRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd) Acronym/AbbreviationDefinition HChydrocarbons HEPAhigh-efficiency particulate air hr.hourHVACheating, ventilation, and air conditioningI-129iodine-129I-131iodine-131 IAIowaIEinitiating event ILIllinoisINIndianaISAIntegrated Safety Analysis ISCIndustrial Source Complex ISGInterim Staff Guidance JSDJanesville School District keffneutron multiplication factorkmkilometer km2square kilometerKr-85krypton-85L/cylliters per cylinder lb/hrpounds per hour lb/MMBtupounds per million Btu lb/yrpounds per year Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-viii Rev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd) Acronym/AbbreviationDefinition lb.poundLEUlow enriched uranium LNBlow NOx burnersLOSlevel of service lpdliters per day LSAlow specific activity mmeterm/smeter per second MAMassachusetts MARmaterial-at-risk MEBmass and energy balance MEImaximally exposed individual Mgdmillion gallons per day MHAmaximum hypothetical accident mi.mileMldmillion liters per dayMMBtu/hrmillion Btu per hour MOMissouriMo-99molybdenum-99 mremmilliremmrem/yrmillirem per year mSvmillisievert mSv/yrmillisievert per year NAAQSNational Ambient Air Quality Standards Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-ixRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd) Acronym/AbbreviationDefinition NAVD 88North American Vertical Datum 1988 NENebraskaNEPANational Environmental Policy Act of 1969 NESHAPNational Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants NHRPNational Register of Historic Properties NLCDNational Land Cover Database NO2nitrogen dioxide NOxnitrogen oxideNPDESNational Pollutant Discharge Elimination SystemNRNatural ResourcesNRCU.S. Nuclear Regulatory CommissionNSPSNew Source Performance Standards NWSNational Weather ServiceNYNew York O3ozoneOHOhioOKOklahomaOSHAOccupational Safety and Health Administration PAPennsylvania PCSprimary cooling system PHAPreliminary Hazard Analysis PMparticulate matter Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-xRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd) Acronym/AbbreviationDefinition PM10particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than 10 microns PM2.5particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than 2.5 micronsPOTWpublically owned treatment worksPPEpersonal protective equipmentPrHAProcess Hazard AnalysisPSARPreliminary Safety Analysis ReportPSBprimary system boundaryPSDPrevention of Significant DeteriorationPVVSprocess vessel vent system RCARadiologically Controlled AreaRCRAResource Conservation and Recovery Actremroentgen equivalent manrem/srem per secondROIregion of influence RPCSradioisotope process facility cooling system RPFRadioisotope Production Facility rpmrevolutions per minute RPSreactivity protection system RVZ1RCA ventilation system Zone 1 RVZ2RCA ventilation system Zone 2 RVZ3RCA ventilation system Zone 3 SACTISeasonal/Annual Cooling Tower Impact Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-xiRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd) Acronym/AbbreviationDefinition SCASsubcritical assembly system scfstandard cubic foot scf/hrstandard cubic foot per hour scfmstandard cubic feet per minute SDGstandby diesel generatorsec.secondSHINESHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. SH 11State Highway 11 SHPOState Historic Preservation Office SILSignificant Impact Level SOsulfur oxides SO2sulfur dioxideSPspecial purpose district SPCCSpill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure SSCsstructures, systems, and components SWPPPStorm Water Pollution Prevention Plan T/yrtons per year TBPtri-n-butyl phosphate TEDEtotal effective dose equivalent TIFTax Increment FinancingTLDthermoluminescent dosimeter TSVtarget solution vessel TXTexas Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-xiiRev. 0Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd) Acronym/AbbreviationDefinition U.S.United States UREXuranium extraction US 14U.S. Highway 14 US 51U.S. Highway 51 USCBU.S. Census Bureau USEPAU.S. Environmental Protection Agency USFWSU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service UTUtahVOCvolatile organic compound WCSWaste Control Specialists WDNRWisconsin Department of Natural Resources WHSWisconsin Historical Society WIWisconsin WIAAQSWisconsin Ambient Air Quality Standards WPDESWisconsin Pollutant Discharge Elimination System WYWyomingXe-133xenon-133 yd.yardyryear Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-1Rev. 0CHAPTER 1919.4IMPACTS OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION, OPERATIONS, AND DECOMMISSIONINGThis chapter provides an analysis of the impacts of construction, operation and decommissioning of the SHINE facility. Overall impact rankings are given to each environmental resource evaluated. Unless otherwise defined, criteria followed the guidance given in NRC Impact Rankings 10 CFR 51 Subpart A, Appendix B, Table B-1, Footnote 3 as follows: *SMALL (S) - Environmental effects are not detectable or are so minor that they will neither destabilize nor noticeably alter any important attribute of the resource.*MODERATE (M) - Environmental effects are sufficient to alter noticeably, but not to destabilize, important attributes of the resource.*LARGE (L) - Environmental effects are clearly noticeable and are sufficient to destabilize important attributes of the resource.19.4.1LAND USE AND VISUAL RESOURCESThis subsection assesses the impacts of construction and operation on land use and visual resources for the SHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. (SHINE) site and region. As described in Subsection19.3.1, the land use for the site and region is analyzed using the National Land Cover Database 2006 (Fry et al, 2011). Impacts include effects from activities associated with construction and operation, including excavation, grading, placement of fill material, temporary staging and construction laydown, construction of permanent features, and potential operational disturbances. 19.4.1.1Land UseThis subsection discusses the land use impacts from construction and operation of the SHINE facility. 19.4.1.1.1Site and RegionAs described in Subsections19.3.1 and19.3.5, the SHINE site consists of a 91.27-acre(ac.) (36.94-hectare[ha]) parcel that has been historically farmed and is routinely disturbed by the disking, plowing, herbicide application and harvesting activities associated with row crop production. The region surrounding the SHINE site is defined in Subsection19.3.1.1.2 as the area within a 5-mile(mi.) (8-kilometer[km]) radius of the site centerpoint. The entire region is located within Rock County, Wisconsin. The potential construction-related land use impacts to the SHINE site and near off-site areas are based on the SHINE facility construction grading plan (Figure 19.4.1-2). Activities such as earthmoving, excavation, pile driving, erection, batch plant operation, and construction-related traffic generate potential disturbances to land use during the construction phase of the SHINE project. Construction-related direct impacts to the site and near site areas are limited to land previously utilized for agricultural/cultivated crop production. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-2Rev. 0Of the 91.27ac. (36.94ha) comprising the SHINE site, construction permanently converts 25.67ac. (10.39ha) of agricultural/cultivated crops to industrial facilities (Table19.4.1-1). Permanent conversions to industrial facilities include the construction of facility buildings, employee parking lot, facility access road/driveway, stormwater detention area, and access road drainage ditches. Direct construction impacts also include the temporary impact of 14.54ac. (5.88ha) of agricultural lands on-site used for the construction parking area, construction material staging or lay down area, and temporary disturbance from water and sewer line installation, as well as, the temporary indirect impact of 0.62ac. (0.25ha) of off-site agricultural lands immediately adjacent to the northern boundary of the site for temporary disturbance from water and sewer line installation. Temporary impact areas are either returned to agriculture or restored with either cool season grasses or native prairie. The loss of agricultural/cultivated crops to industrial facilities is minor when compared to the 25,236ac. (10,213ha) of agricultural land remaining within a 5-mi. (8-km) radius of the site (seeTable19.4.1-1). Furthermore, lands on-site not utilized for development of industrial facilities are returned to agriculture or restored using cool season grasses or native prairie species. As such, impacts to land use from construction and operations are SMALL.19.4.1.1.2Special Land UsesAs discussed in Subsection19.3.1.1.3, there are no federal special land use classification areas within the region of the SHINE site, but there are two state special land use areas in the region, with neither area located on-site. Permanent and temporary impacts from construction and operation of the facility occur on-site and in near off-site areas, but not within either state 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.19.4.1.1.3Agricultural Resources and FacilitiesThe agricultural resources and facilities on-site and within the region of the SHINE site are described in Subsection19.3.1.1.4. Both prime farmland and farmland of state-wide importance occur within the site boundaries, with approximately 41,950ac. (16,977ha) of the area within the region having soils classified as prime farmland and farmland of state-wide importance (see Subsection19.3.1.1.4). Based on the SHINE facility site layout (Figure19.2.1-1), the direct and indirect impacts from construction and operation of the facility occur on-site and near off-site, impacting 25.67ac. (10.39ha) of agricultural/cultivated crops on-site and 0.62ac. (0.25ha) of agricultural/cultivated crops near off-site (see Table19.4.1-1). As described in Subsection19.3.1.1.4, the potential relative value of the farmland for all 91.27ac. (36.94ha) comprising the SHINE site is 13,771bushels (Bu.) of grain corn or 3947Bu. of soybeans, while the 10-year production estimate average for Rock County, Wisconsin, is 22,075,540Bu. of grain corn and 3,786,415Bu. of soybeans. No other agricultural resources within the region of the SHINE site are located on-site or near off-site, as discussed in Subsection19.3.1.1.4, and therefore, will not be impacted by construction and operations-related impacts.The loss of on-site agricultural lands, including prime farmland and farmland of state-wide importance, and the subsequent loss of potential crop production to industrial facilities, is minor when compared to the amount of agricultural land, land designated as prime farmland or farmland of state-wide importance, and potential crop production remaining within the region surrounding the site (see Table19.4.1-1 and Subsection19.3.1.1.4). Furthermore, lands on-site not utilized for development of industrial facilities are returned to agriculture or restored using Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-3Rev. 0cool season grasses or native prairie species. As such, direct and indirect impacts to agricultural resources and facilities from construction and operations are SMALL.19.4.1.1.4Mineral ResourcesAs described in Subsection19.3.1.1.5, important mineral resources within the region include sand, gravel, and crushed stone. Two sand and gravel operations occur within the region of the SHINE site, but neither is located on-site. Permanent and temporary impacts from construction and operation 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 and operations of the facility are SMALL. Impacts to mineral resources are discussed further in Subsection19.4.3. 19.4.1.1.5Major Population Centers and InfrastructureSubsection19.3.1.1.6 summarizes the major population centers and infrastructure located within Rock County, which include the major population centers of Janesville and Beloit, several major transportation corridors, and the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport. While US51 and the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport are located just west of the SHINE site, none of the major population centers or infrastructure are located on-site. Permanent and temporary impacts from construction and operations of the facility occur on-site and immediately adjacent to the northern boundary of the site. Therefore, construction and operations-related direct and indirect impacts on major population centers and infrastructure are SMALL.19.4.1.1.6Impacts from Decommissioning Construction of the SHINE facility is expected to begin in 2015. Following the cessation of operations, the facility will be decommissioned. Decommissioning activities, however, are similar to construction activities and involve heavy equipment to dismantle buildings and remove roadway and parking facilities. Resultant land uses following decommissioning are undetermined but may consist of agricultural lands or open space. As such, direct and indirect impacts from decommissioning are anticipated to be similar to the impacts associated with construction and SMALL.19.4.1.2Visual ResourcesThe visual setting of the area affected by the construction and operation of the SHINE site is described in Subsection19.3.1.2. Illustrations of the bounding condition of the SHINE facility superimposed on the current viewshed are shown on Figure19.4.1-1.The existing site is composed entirely of land used for agricultural purposes and has no existing architectural features, established structures, or natural or built barriers, screens or buffers. Consequently, the SHINE facility alters the on-site condition and partially obstructs views of the existing landscape. However, the visual setting of the site is generally flat and uniform in landform with low vegetation diversity and a low visual quality rating (see Subsection19.3.1.2). Bounding dimensions of the production facility building for visual impact assessment include a height of 86 feet (ft.) (26 meters [m]), a length of 416ft. (127m), and a width of 167 ft. (51m). The high bay footprint has bounded dimensions of 58ft. (18m) wide by 190ft. (58m) long. The facility's main building has an exhaust vent stack that under the bounding condition extends to Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-4Rev. 096ft. (29m) above grade. Figure19.4.1-1 presents a conceptual rendering of the facility and the arrangements on-site based upon bounded dimensions. As discussed in Subsection 19.4.2.1.2.2.5, plume visibility from the production process is expected to be minimal. Additionally, the facility does not utilize cooling towers, radar towers or other large structures that visibly intrude upon the existing landscape. Based upon these site characteristics and the bounded dimensions of the facility as illustrated in Figure 19.4.1-1, facility structures have a relatively low profile, so any impacts to the viewshed are SMALL. The operation of the SHINE facility results in minor increases in noise as described in Subsection19.4.2. However, noise levels are localized to the SHINE site and not elevated above background noise emissions from US51, immediately adjacent to the site. Therefore, noise emissions from the site do not create audible intrusions that are out of character with the setting around the SHINE site.As described in Subsection19.3.1.2, two large warehouses are located immediately adjacent to the southern border of the site that support local agricultural operations and provide storage for large farming equipment. The viewshed to the west of the site across US51 is a light industrial development landscape that consists of the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport and its associated facilities, which include the airport control tower and several large warehouses and hangers. Additionally, the viewshed to the south includes several stacks associated with power generation facilities. Together with the buildings and structures to the south and west, the SHINE facility does not significantly alter the visual setting. Therefore, impacts to visual resources from construction and operation of the SHINE facility are SMALL. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewLand Use and Visual ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-5Rev. 0Table 19.4.1-1 Summary of Impacts to Land Use/Land CoverNLCD 2006 Land Cover ClassPermanent Site ImpactsTemporary Site ImpactsTotal Land Cover within theRegion (a)Percentac.haac.haac.haOpen Water7963221.6Developed, Open Space0.180.07304312316.1Developed, Low Intensity5858237111.7Developed, Medium Intensity19687963.9Developed, High Intensity9924012Barren43170.1Deciduous Forest329813356.6Evergreen Forest68280.1 Mixed Forest100Shrub/Scrub5052041Grassland10494252.1 Pasture/Hay5896238611.7Cultivated Crops25.67(b)10.39(b)14.54(b)5.88(b)25,23610,21350.2Woody Wetlands7222921.4Emergent Herbaceous Wetland7873181.6Total(c)28.8510.4614.545.8850,26220,339100a)
Reference:
Fry et al., 2011. b)Cultivated Crops on the SHINE site are entirely prime farmland and farmland of state-wide importance.c)Total may add up to more or less than 100 percent due to rounding. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-6Rev. 019.4.2AIR QUALITY AND NOISEThis subsection addresses the direct physical impacts of construction and operation on the communities within the vicinity of the SHINE site. Direct physical impacts include the effects from air emissions and noise. This evaluation indicates the magnitude of potential impacts and whether mitigation measures are required. 19.4.2.1Air Quality19.4.2.1.1Impacts from Construction Construction activities result in localized increases in air emissions. Earthmoving, excavation, clearing, pile driving, erection, batch plant operation, and construction-related traffic generate fugitive dust and fine particulate matter that potentially impact both on-site workers and off-site residents of the community. Vehicles and engine-driven equipment (e.g., generators and compressors) generate combustion product emissions such as carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides and, to a lesser extent, sulfur dioxides. Painting, coating, and similar operations also generate emissions from the use of volatile organic compounds.People living near or working at or near construction sites may be subject to the physical impacts of construction activities. Activities associated with the use of construction equipment may result in varying amounts of dust, air emissions, noise, and vibration. The magnitude and area of extent of the impacts from these emissions depends on atmospheric conditions at the time of the activity. The magnitude of these potential impacts is typically related to the specific construction activities that occur at a given site, the nature and effectiveness of implemented environmental controls, and the proximity of the site to populated areas. Contractors, vendors, and subcontractors are required to adhere to appropriate federal and state occupational health and safety regulations. These regulations set limits to protect workers from adverse conditions, including air emissions. On-site equipment use and traffic due to constructi on activities can also result in local increases in emissions. Subsection19.4.7 provides information regarding the type and volume of traffic generated by the SHINE facility during construction. While guidance from the Final ISG Augmenting NUREG-1537 suggests that emissions from on-site and o ff-site vehicle use (including fugitive dust) be estimated, SHINE believes that this information is not necessary to evaluate the impacts of the SHINE facility given the absence of near off-site receptors, the short term duration of such emissions, and the classification of the regional air quality as "attainment." Analysis of on-site and off-site vehicle use, including fugitive dust, are more appropriate for projects requiring a Conformity Analysis in non-attainment areas. Because construction equipment use and generated traffic volumes are relatively minor compared to other regional traffic generated emissions, and because the SHINE site is largely surrounded by agricultural fields and other undeveloped areas associated with the airport, potential air quality impacts from construction are limited. Implementation of controls and limits at the source of emissions on the construction site result in reduction of impacts off-site. For example, the dust control program reduces dust due to construction activities to minimize dust reaching site boundaries. Transportation and other off-site activities result in emissions from vehicle usage. Off-site transportation activities generally occur on improved surfaces, limiting fugitive dust emissions. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-7Rev. 0Specific mitigation measures to control fugitive dust may include any or all of the following:*Stabilizing construction roads and spoil piles.*Limiting speeds on unpaved construction roads.
- Periodically watering unpaved construction roads.*Performing housekeeping (e.g., remove dirt spilled onto paved roads).
- Covering haul trucks when loaded or unloaded.
- Minimizing material handling (e.g., drop heights, double-handling).*Phased grading to minimize the area of disturbed soils.*Re-vegetating road medians and slopes.While emissions from construction activities and equipment are unavoidable, implementation of mitigation measures minimize impacts to local ambient air quality and the nuisance impacts to the public in proximity to the project. The mitigation may include any or all of the following:*Implementing controls to minimize daily emissions such as reducing engine idle time, using cleaner fuels (e.g., ultra low sulfur diesel fuel or biodiesel), installing pollution control equipment on construction equipment (e.g., diesel oxidation catalysts and particulate matter filters), and curtailing or controlling the time of day construction activities are performed.*Performing proper maintenance of construction vehicles to maximize efficiency and minimize emissions.In summary, air emission impacts from construction are SMALL because emissions are controlled at the source where practicable; maintained within established regulatory limits designed to minimize impacts; and located a significant distance from the public.19.4.2.1.2Impacts from OperationSection19.2 provides information regarding the cooling and heating dissipation systems and the waste systems for the SHINE facility. The design of the new plant includes a cooling system that does not require the use of either mechanical or natural draft cooling towers. The SHINE site is located in Rock County, Wisconsin, which is part of the Rockford (Illinois)-Janesville-Beloit (Wisconsin) Interstate Air Quality Control Region (40Code of Federal Regulations [CFR]81.71, Natural Resources [NR]404.03 Wisconsin Administrative Code) (Section14.4.3.2.2). The Clean Air Act and it s amendments establish National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ambient pollutant concentrations that are considered harmful to public health and the environment. Similarly, Wisconsin has established the Wisconsin Ambient Air Quality Standards (WIAAQS) (NR404.03 Wisconsin Administrative Code). Primary standards set limits to protect public health and secondary standards set limits to protect public welfare such as decreased visibility, and damage to animals, crops, vegetation, and buildings. The principal pollutants for which NAAQS have been set are carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), lead, sulfur dioxide (SO 2), particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than 10 microns (PM 10), particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than 2.5 microns (PM2.5), and ozone (O 3). One or more averaging times are associated with each pollutant for which the standard must be attained.
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-8Rev. 0Areas having air quality as good as, or better than, the NAAQS are designated as attainment areas. Areas having air quality that is worse than the NAAQS are designated as nonattainment areas. Rock County is designated as better than national Standards for SO 2 and unclassifiable/ attainment for CO, 1-hour (hr.) ozone, 8-hr. ozone (1997 and 2008 standards), NO 2, PM2.5, and lead (2008 standard) (40CFR81, SubpartC, §350). Rock County is near (but not part of) the Milwaukee-Racine PM 2.5 (2006) and 8-hr.ozone nonattainment areas (Subsection19.3.2.2). Walworth County separates Rock County from the nonattainment area.The nearest Class I area is Rainbow Lake, a U.S. Forest Service site about 311mi. (500km) north of Janesville, Wisconsin (Subsection19.3.2.2). Rainbow Lake is not a federally mandated Class I area (40CFR81, SubpartD). A Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) source within 31mi. (50km) of the Rainbow Lake Class I area must perform a significance analysis for the increase in emissions. In addition, any PSD source that locates within approximately 124mi. (200km) of a Class I Area, must notify the applicable Federal Land Manager. Since Rainbow Lake is well beyond the distance limits, the additional analysis and notification are not required.19.4.2.1.2.1Gaseous EffluentsGaseous effluents at the SHINE facility are from two types of processes: isotope production and fuel combustion. 19.4.2.1.2.1.1Isotope Production Gaseous effluents from the SHINE isotope production process originate from two main sources: Mo-99, Xe-133, and I-131 production and purification and uranium recycling. Process off-gases are treated in two separate, but connected, systems: the target solution vessel (TSV) off-gas system and the process vessel vent system (PVVS).Tritium gas is the accelerator target in the accelerator-based neutron source used in the production process. Maintenance operations on the accelerator will result in the release of tritium gas that will be exhausted by the ventilation system.The TSV off-gas system is dedicated to treating only the off-gas from the TSVs, with each TSV being equipped with its own system. The PVVS treats gases from the following sources: vent streams from process vessels in contact with streams containing fissile or radioactive materials, thermal denitration off-gas, after initial caustic scrubbing, and off-gas from the uranium oxidation furnace.The SHINE production facility utilizes a ventilation scheme for the process operating areas that is typical for nuclear processing facilities of this type. The operating areas are divided into zones, with each zone representing a specific hazard, and being subject to specific constraints, in terms of the potential for radioactive contamination or dose to the facility workers. Gaseous effluents resulting from the production process are summarized in Table19.4.2-1. These values are based on a 50-week per year operating schedule. There are no emissions of carbon monoxide, lead, ozone, or particulate matter (PM). Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-9Rev. 019.4.2.1.2.1.2Fuel CombustionSeveral combustion sources at the SHINE facility contribute to the gaseous effluents. These combustion sources are a natural gas-fired boiler that is used for the production facility building, natural gas-fired heaters in the administration building, support facility building, waste staging and shipping building, and the standby generator building. In addition to these natural gas-fired heaters, a diesel-fired standby diesel generator (SDG) is present at the facility. Each of these sources vents emissions to the outside through an associated stack. The boiler, heaters, and generator all emit CO, nitrogen oxides (NO x), PM, SO 2, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and carbon dioxide (CO 2), as summarized in Tables19.4.2-2 to 19.4.2-7. Total annual emissions are presented in Table 19.4.2-8.19.4.2.1.2.2Evaluation of Emission Impacts on Air Quality19.4.2.1.2.2.1Vehicle and Other Emissions During the operations phase, vehicular air emissions occur from the commuting workforce and from routine deliveries to/from the SHINE facility. As described in Subsection19.4.7, the volume of traffic generated during operations is considerably lower than that expected during construction. Additionally, the lands on the developed SHINE site are either developed surfaces (buildings, paved parking/access road) or consist of either agricultural or landscaped uses. Limitation of routine vehicle uses to paved areas reduces the emissions of fugitive dust. Impacts from vehicular air emissions and fugitive dust are far less than during the construction phase. Impacts during the operations phase are therefore, SMALL.The AERMOD modeling system was used to assess the impacts of pollutants expected to be generated by the new plant from the production unit and five natural gas-fired heaters. A SDG is only operated for limited periods of time for testing and therefore is not modeled. A March 2012 Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) memorandum on dispersion modeling of intermittent sources, states "In conjunction with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) document cited previously, dispersion modeling for intermi ttent units is not performed for any of the state or federal ambient air quality standards or increments." (WDNR, 2012a). 19.4.2.1.2.2.2Release Point CharacteristicsEmissions and stack characteristics for each emission source are based on the design parameters, assumptions, and emission factors. Exhaust characteristics for the SDG are estimated based on heat input to the source, fuel consumption, and combustion calculations assuming 25percent excess combustion air. Exhaust gas temperatures for the SDG are based on data in the CATC175-20 Diesel Engine Technical Data Sheet, and the calculated exhaust gas flow rates are benchmarked against exhaust flow data included in the CAT technical data sheet. Exhaust characteristics for the production facility building natural gas-fired boiler are estimated based on heat input to the source, fuel consumption, and combustion calculations assuming 25percent excess combustion air. Exhaust gas temperatures for the natural gas-fired boiler are based on temperature data provided by boiler vendors for other similar projects. Exhaust from the natural gas-fired boiler is vented to the atmosphere through a stack that is separate from the Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-10Rev. 0process stack, which is designed primarily to vent gaseous effluents from the SHINE isotope production process. Stack characteristics for the indirect-fired heaters are based on information available from equipment vendors for packaged indirect-fired heaters. Vertical convection stack vents equipped with a rain cap are assumed for each natural gas-fired heater for all buildings except the production facility. No rain cap is assumed for the main production facility. Each stack is assumed to be 5ft. (1.5m) higher than the highest point of the roof of the building. Natural gas heater information sources referenced for this evaluation include those by Reznor (Reznor, 2002) and Hastings (Hastings, 2011). Process-related and natural gas boiler exhaust flows are released through separate stacks. Release point characteristics for the process-related, boiler, and natural gas-fired heater gaseous effluents are presented in Table19.4.2-9.19.4.2.1.2.2.3Gaseous Effluent Control Systems Emission calculations included in this evaluation are intended to provide bounding values for emissions from the SHINE facility. As such, emission calculations assume that emissions are limited using standard combustion controls, but do not assume the installation of post-combustion control systems.The SHINE facility generates gaseous effluents resulting from process operations and the ventilation of operating areas. The gaseous effluent from ventilation of operating areas includes the following control systems: *The Zone 1 exhaust airstream passes through two stages of HEPA filtration and a single stage activated carbon bed prior to discharge from the stack.*The Zone 2 and Zone 3 exhaust airstreams pass through two stages of HEPA filtration prior to discharge from the stack.*Additional controls may be implemented as required by local permit conditions. Acid gases from the thermal denitration process pass through a scrubber before being emitted to the atmosphere. All the gaseous effluents from the production process are vented to the atmosphere through the main stack on the production facility building.The diesel generator specified for the SHINE facility is required to meet all applicable New Source Performance Standards (NSPS, 40CFRPart 60 SubpartIIII) and National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP, 40CFRPart63 Subpart ZZZZ). The NSPS and NESHAP standards applicable to the diesel generator depend upon several design parameters and operating variables which have not yet been established, including the year the engine is manufactured, size of the engine, displacement liters per cylinder(L/cyl), speed (revolutions per minute [rpm]), annual hours of operation, and classification of the facility as a major or area source of hazardous air pollutants. Therefore, diesel engine emissions for this evaluation are based on published emissions data for a CATC175-20 engine, which are expected to be typical of emissions from large diesel-fired engines with no post-combustion emission control systems. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-11Rev. 0Emissions of NO x from the natural gas-fired boiler are controlled using low NO x burners (LNB), which are standard equipment on most new boilers manufactured in the United States. LNBs limit NOx formation by controlling both the stoichiometric and temperature profiles of the combustion flame in each burner flame envelope. This control is achieved with design features that regulate the aerodynamic distribution and mixing of the fuel and air, yielding reduced oxygen in the primary combustion zone, reduced flame temperature, and reduced residence time at peak combustion temperatures. The combination of these techniques produces lower NO x emissions during the combustion process. Post-combustion air quality control systems are not anticipated for the natural gas-fired boiler, as natural gas is an inherently clean fuel with minimal SO 2 and PM emissions.Emissions from the natural gas-fired heaters are controlled using combustion controls and properly designed and tuned burners. Gas burners come in a great variety of shapes, sizes, and designs. Typical gas burners found in indirect-fired heaters are the ribbon-port type, which vary in length and in port sizes, and may employ a single ribbon or many ribbons depending on the volume of gas to be burned (Reznor, 2002). The emission calculations assume properly designed and tuned burners, with a proper balance of primary air and secondary air to ensure complete combustion. Post-combustion air quality control systems are not anticipated for the natural gas-fired heaters, as natural gas is an inherently clean fuel with minimal SO 2 and PM emissions.19.4.2.1.2.2.4Dispersion Modeling Assumptions and Results19.4.2.1.2.2.4.1Model AssumptionsSince there are no cooling towers associated with the SHINE facility, there are no estimates of fogging, icing, plume shadowing, and salt deposition from the Seasonal/Annual Cooling Tower Impact (SACTI) model.To estimate the impacts of non-radiological pollutants from the process, boiler, and heaters, the AERMOD Modeling System is used. The AERMOD system is a state-of-the-science dispersion model system that the USEPA promulgated in 2005 to replace the Industrial Source Complex (ISC) model. The AERMOD system is composed of a terrain preprocessor (AERMAP, version 11103), a tool to develop building downwash parameters for AERMOD (BPIPPRM, version 04274), and the dispersion model (AERMOD, version 12345).Although the SHINE facility has a standby diesel generator, the emissions from this source are not included in the dispersion modeling because the generator is considered an intermittent unit. The WDNR issued a policy statement on March 6, 2012, as discussed above, exempting intermittent operating units. Since this modeling demonstration is an assessment of potential impacts and not for the purposes of an air permitting, 5 years of preprocessed meteorological data for Madison, Wisconsin (available from the WDNR web site) wa s used in place of processing 5 years of National Weather Service (NWS) data from Janesville. Comparing the location of the NWS instrumentation at the Madison airport (Dane County Regional Airport) and Janesville airport (Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport), some differences in the processed meteorological input to AERMOD can be expected, but not enough to cause an exceedance of a federal or state ambient air quality standard. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-12Rev. 0The stacks associated with the heaters in all buildings except the production building are designed to have rain caps, which restricts the vertical flow. AERMOD has two ways to model this situation: modify the source characteristics or use the non-default beta option to define the type of source. For this modeling demonstration, the former method is used so the modeling is conducted in accordance with AERMOD's regulatory default options.For this modeling demonstration, an assumption was made, based on information contained on the SHINE facility site layout (Figure 19.2.1-1) that a fence encircles the entire property boundary (fence line), forming a continuous physical barrier restricting public access to the SHINE site. Ambient air is defined as "-that portion of the atmosphere, external to buildings, to which the general public has access" (40CFR50.1(e)). If plant property is accessible to the public (exclusive of the workforce), then impacts from facility emissions are required to be modeled at those locations.AERMOD analyses were performed using a number of bounded conditions. Since the boiler and heater stacks are subject to downwash, the actual stack diameter and exit temperature are used, but the exit velocity is set to a nominally low value, such as 0.001meter per second (m/s). This value is used on modeling the SHINE facility stacks associated with the heaters in all buildings except the production building. The stack associated with heating of the production building is modeled without a rain cap.The modeling results assume full-time operations for the year of the natural gas-fired heating system in each building (8760 hr.). A proposed operating schedule of the heating system, limiting operations of those units to about 5600 hr. per year (with no heating from June through August and a limited schedule in the month prior to and the month after the summer months), was not modeled. Additionally, the emission rate used for the modeling assumed a 25percent design margin on the heating load. These assumptions provide a bounding analysis on the expected impacts from the facility.19.4.2.1.2.2.4.2AERMOD Model ResultsA Significant Impact Level (SIL) establishes the concentration below which a pollutant impact is presumed not to cause or contribute to a violation of a NAAQS or WIAAQS. If pollutant concentrations do not exceed the SIL, then no further modeling (i.e., a compliance demonstration) is required (unless the WDNR would require additional modeling). The estimated highest impacts for each pollutant and averaging time are compared to the individual SILs in Table19.4.2-10. Based on this assessment the impacts for all pollutants and averaging times are less than the SIL except for the 1-hr. and annual NO 2 standard. The 1-hr. and annual NO 2 impacts, which do exceed the respective SILs, are about 53 percent and 26 percent of the
respective NAAQS.To assess potential impacts of the SHINE facility operation relative to the NAAQS, the concentration estimates are added with background concentrations and are compared to the NAAQS standards for each pollutant and averaging time (Table19.4.2-11). Most background concentrations were obtained from a WDNR draft memorandum on regional background concentrations (WDNR,2011a). A background concentration for the 1-hr. NO 2 impacts was obtained from a WDNR technical support document (WDNR, 2 010) and a background Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-13Rev. 0concentration for the 1-hr. SO 2 impacts was obtained from a document that identifies procedures to be followed by Region 5 states in conducting modeling (Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium, 2011).Table19.4.2-11 shows that none of the pollutants exceed the NAAQS for the SHINE facility alone, or in combination with background concentration. Both the 24-hr. and annual PM 2.5 values are approximately 85 percent of the NAAQS, but most of this is due to the background concentration. Additionally, neither PM2.5 averaging period exceeds their respective SIL. Comparing the impacts to the PSD increment shows that the impacts from the SHINE facility alone are orders of magnitude smaller than the PSD increment.In summary, the initial AERMOD analysis with the assumptions described above for emissions from the process, boiler, and heaters shows that none of the pollutants exceed the NAAQS, and do not result in a modeled exceedance of the USEPA SILs for any pollutant and averaging time, except for 1-hr. and annual NO 2 impacts. 19.4.2.1.2.2.4.3 Potential Maximum Concentration Since AERMOD can directly estimate concentrations that are more precise, normalized concentrations are not presented. The SILs establish the concentration below which a pollutant impact is presumed not to cause or contribute to a violation of an ambient air quality standard. The SILs are shown in Table19.4.2-10 along with the highest concentration estimates at points within a reasonable area that could be impacted (a square area 4 km x 4 km [2.5 mi. x 2.5 mi.] in size). Highest impacts range from the fence line to about 325ft. (100m) from the fence line.Pollutant impacts at points of maximum individual exposure will be less than the maximum impacts at the fence line for each averaging time. The nearest residence is about 0.33mi (0.53km) to the north-northwest from the proposed SHINE site. A church is about 0.35mi (0.56km) to the south-southeast. For all pollutants and averaging times except for the 1-hr. and annual NO 2, the maximum concentration anywhere within a reasonable area is less than the SIL. Applying AERMOD without limitations on the operating schedule, the 1-hr. NO 2 impacts at the residence and at the church are 35.4micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m
- 3) and 29.7µg/m 3, respectively. For the annual NO 2 exposure, the impacts are 0.36 µg/m 3 and 0.21 µg/m 3 for the residence and church, respectively. As is demonstrated in Table19.4.2-11, no impacts exceed the primary ambient air quality standards that have been established to protect public health, including the health of sensitive populations such as children, the elderly, and those with respiratory problems. Therefore, pollutant impacts within a reasonable area that could be impacted and at points of the maximum individual exposure are SMALL.19.4.2.1.2.2.5Plume Visibility CharacteristicsThe plume from the production process should not be visible. All process exhaust passes through two stages of tested high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filters in series. The HEPA filters remove all visible particulate from the exhaust air stream. The vapors are removed with Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-14Rev. 0process off-gas treatment systems and all of the exhaust air passes through a single stage activated carbon bed prior to discharge from the stack.Plume visibility from the natural gas-fired boiler and heaters is expected to be minimal. Because natural gas is a gaseous fuel, filterable PM emissions which generally contribute to plume visibility are expected to be very low. PM emissions associated with natural gas combustion are usually larger molecular weight hydrocarbons that are not fully combusted; thus increased PM emissions can result from poor air/fuel mixing or maintenance problems (USEPA, 1995). With proper burner maintenance and tuning, opacity associated with the natural gas-fired boiler and heaters is expected to be minimal.White, blue, and black smoke can be emitted from diesel-fired engines (USEPA, 1995). Liquid particles can appear as white smoke in the exhaust during an engine cold start, idling, or low load operation. These emissions are formed in the quench layer adjacent to the engine's cylinder walls, where the temperature is not high enough to ignite the fuel. Blue smoke can be emitted when lubricating oil leaks into the combustion chamber and is partially burned. Proper maintenance is the most effective method of preventing blue smoke emissions from all types of internal combustion engines. The primary constituent of black smoke is agglomerated carbon particles or soot. Proper engine maintenance and combustion controls will minimize particulate matter emissions and limit opacity from the SDG. Opacity is expected to be less than 5percent at all times excluding, potentially, periods of startup.19.4.2.1.2.3Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Greenhouse gases trap heat in the atmosphere, absorbing and emitting radiation in the thermal infrared range. The most important of these gases are CO 2, methane, nitrous oxide, and fluorinated gases. Greenhouse gases (GHG) are reported as CO 2 equivalent (CO 2e) and refer to the global warming potential of the greenhouse gas or gases being emitted.Activities associated with the proposed SHINE site that are expected to contribute to the greenhouse gases include: *Construction activities at t he SHINE site resulting in principally emissions of CO 2; GHG emissions associated with construction activities include the commuting of the construction workforce and operation of construction equipment at the site. *Plant operation activities associated with the operation of plant equipment and the operations workforce. *Decommissioning activities associated with the decommissioning workforce and decommissioning equipment.*Life cycle activities related to the mining, processing, and transport of materials and waste storage should also be considered as part of the GHG inventory.As noted in Subsection19.3.2.5, SHINE will develop a comprehensive program to avoid and control GHG emissions associated with the SHINE facility. It is expected that this program will include elements such as developing a GHG emission inventory, investigating and implementing methods for avoiding or controlling the GHG emissions identified in the inventory, encouraging car pooling or other measures to minimize GHG emissions due to vehicle traffic during construction and operation of the SHINE facility, and conducting periodic audits of GHG control procedures and implementing corrective actions when necessary.
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-15Rev. 019.4.2.1.2.4Mitigative MeasuresEmission-specific strategies and measures will be developed and implemented to ensure compliance within the applicable regulatory limits defined by the National Primary and Secondary Ambient Air Quality Standards (40CFRPart50) and National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (40CFRPart61). Contractors, vendors, and subcontractors are required to adhere to appropriate federal and state occupational health and safety regulations. These regulations set limits to protect workers from adverse conditions, including air emissions. Implementation of controls and limits at the source of emissions on the construction site result in reduction of impacts off-site. 19.4.2.1.3Impacts of DecommissioningDecommissioning is the removal of a nuclear facility from service and to reduce residual radioactivity to a level that permits release of the property for unrestricted use and termination of the license. During the decommissioning phase, activities, equipment usage and their associated emissions are expected to be similar, but less than that of the construction phase as decommissioning activities are less extensive than construction. Therefore, impacts during the decommissioning phase are SMALL.19.4.2.1.4Required PermitsAs described in Subsection19.1.2, several air quality permits are required to support the construction and operation of the SHINE facility. Table19.1.2-1 indicates that an Air Pollution Control Construction Permit pursuant to the Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapter NR406, and an Air Pollution Control Construction Permit pursuant to the Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapter NR407 are required.After the greenhouse gases are quantified, as noted in Subsection 19.4.2.1.2.3, a determination will be made as to whether the proposed SHINE facility will be subject to regulation. 19.4.2.2NoiseThis subsection provides an assessment of noise impacts from construction, operation and decommissioning of the SHINE facility. 19.4.2.2.1Impacts of Construction Typical noise levels from equipment commonly used during construction are listed on Table19.4.2-12. On-site noise level exposure is controlled through appropriate training, personal protective equipment, periodic health and safety monitoring, and industry best practices. Practices such as maintenance of noise limiting devices on vehicles and equipment, controlling access to high noise areas, duration of emissions, and/or shielding high noise sources near their origin limit the adverse effects of noise on workers. Non-routine activities with potential adverse impacts on noise levels are limited and use best industry practices that further limit adverse effects. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-16Rev. 0The City of Janesville has no published ordinance governing noise emissions from developed land uses. As a point of reference, Rock Township has published noise level limits for properties outside of the M-1 Light Industrial District, the M-2 Heavy Industrial District, and the SP Special Purpose District. The SHINE site falls within the B1 Local Commercial District zoning boundary (TownofRock,2006). The protective level for B1 Local Commercial zoning is 79 decibels (dBA) (TownofRock,2008). No distinction is made between day and night noise level limits.As shown in Table19.4.2-12, noise levels for construction equipment range from 80 to 88dBA at 50ft. (15m) to 50 to 58dBA at 1500ft. (457 m). These data indicate that noise levels attenuate rapidly with distance (30dBA over a distance of 1450ft. [442m]). Based on the natural attenuation of noise levels over distance, the bounding condition construction noise level is below the Rock Township standard between 50 and 500ft. (15 and 457m) from its source. As is evident in Figures 19.3.1-1 and 19.3.1-7, the SHINE site is relatively isolated from potential sensitive noise receptors, the closest residences, churches and recreation areas are between 1700 and 2100ft. (518 and 640m) from the SHINE site. Thus, the impact of noise from construction of the new site on nearby residences, churches and recreational areas is SMALL.Traffic associated with the construction workforce traveling to and from the SHINE site also generates noise. The increase in noise relative to background conditions is most noticeable during the shift changes in the morning and late afternoon. The 451vehicles and 14heavy vehicles are dispersed in shifts, with the largest shift working during the day. Additionally, posted speed limits, traffic control and administrative measures, such as staggered shift hours, are employed that reduce traffic noise during the weekday business hours. Therefore, potential noise impacts to the community are intermittent and limited primarily to shift changes. The impact from noise from construction-related traffic to nearby residences and recreat ional areas is SMALL.Potential indirect impacts may be anticipated to off-site areas associated with the roadway network and adjacent lands beyond the site boundary. Noise related impacts may result from an increased traffic volume and resultant increases in traffic generated noise as discussed above. Noise levels during shift changes in these off-site areas are not notable as these residences are currently located within a roadway network that is characterized by traffic volumes that exhibit traffic noise.In summary, noise control practices at the construction site and the additional attenuation provided by the distance between the public and the site, limits noise effects to the public and workers during construction so that its impact is SMALL and temporary.19.4.2.2.2Impacts of Operation External noise emission from the SHINE facility during operation is primarily limited by the walls and other physical barriers of the facility itself. Noise generated during operations relates primarily to vehicular movements associated with employees and with truck deliveries. Traffic associated with the operation of the SHINE facility also generates noise. The increase in traffic relative to background traffic conditions is most evident during the morning and afternoon drive time when workers are going to and leaving work. Approximately 118work-related vehicles per day are expected to access the site once the site is operational. As discussed in Subsection19.3.7.2.3.1, existing (2010) traffic volume on US51 is 9000vehicles per day. The work-related trips generated by the SHINE facility are insignificant in the existing traffic flow. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-17Rev. 0Therefore, potential noise impacts to the community from noise from operations-related traffic to nearby residences and recreational areas are SMALL.Normal operations also include stationary external equipment (a standby diesel generator, heating, ventilation, and air conditioning [HVAC] equipment) that represent a lesser component of noise emission and are more limited in operation. The standby diesel generator is operated intermittently (i.e., for periodic testing and for asset protection during a loss of offsite power), and is therefore not part of normal operations. HVAC equipment is an expected noise source that is a characteristic of normal summer operations.Potential indirect impacts to off-site areas are associated with the roadway network and adjacent residences and lands beyond the site boundary. Noise related impacts may result from an increased traffic volume and resultant increases in traffic generated noise as discussed above. Noise levels during shift changes in these off-site areas are not notable as these residences are currently located within a roadway network that is characterized by traffic volumes that exhibit traffic noise. The intermittent increase in traffic volume associated with shift changes, and the natural noise attenuation over distance results in noise levels that attenuate to levels below the local standards for continuous noise levels. Therefore, noise impacts resulting from normal operations are SMALL.19.4.2.2.3Impacts of DecommissioningDecommissioning is the removal of a nuclear facility from service and reduction of residual radioactivity to a level that permits release of the property for unrestricted use and termination of the license. During the decommissioning phase, activities, equipment usage and the noise associated with their operation are expected to be similar or less than that of the construction phase. Therefore, impacts during the decommissioning phase are SMALL. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-18Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-1 Isotope Production Process - Gaseous Effluentsa)Based on 50 weeks operationEffluentRate NOX< 6000 pounds per year (lb/yr)
(a)CO, lead, O 3, PMnoneSulfuric acid (H 2SO4)< 50 lb/yr (a)krypton-85 (Kr-85)< 120 Curies per year (Ci/yr)iodine-131 (I-131)
<1.5 Ci/yrxenon-133 (Xe-133)< 17,000 Ci/yr tritium (H-3)< 4400 Ci/yr Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-19Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-2 Standby Diesel Generator - Emissionsa) AP-42 from USEPA, 1995b) Assuming 96 hours operation per yearPollutantEmission Rates(grams/bhp-hr)Source (a)Annual Emissions (T/yr)(b)Hourly Emissions (lb/hr)Equivalent Heat Input Emission Factor(lb/MMBtu)CO0.52CAT C175-20 Diesel Engine Technical Data Sheet0.367.50.17 NOx 5.07CAT C175-20 Diesel Engine Technical Data Sheet3.5273.31.68PM0.04CAT C175-20 Diesel Engine Technical Data Sheet0.0260.550.013Hydrocarbons
(VOC)0.17CAT C175-20 Diesel Engine Technical Data Sheet0.122.510.058 SO20.015Calculated based on maximum fuel sulfur content of 50 ppm0.010.220.005 CO2497AP-42 (10/96) Table 3.4-13457187165 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-20Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-3 Emissions from Production Facility Building - Natural Gas-Fired BoilerPollutantEmission FactorUnitsSource (a)Annual Emissions(b)Hourly Emissions(T/yr)(lb/hr)(lb/MMBtu) CO84lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1 (7/98)10.372.47 0.082 NOx50lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1 (7/98)6.221.480.049 PM10 (filterable) 1.9lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.250.060.0020 PM10 (total)7.6lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.920.220.0073 VOC 5.5lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.670.160.0053 SO2 0.6lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.080.0180.0006 CO2 120,000lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)14,8223529117.6Design Firing Rate: 30.0MMBtu/hrEstimated based on preliminary building sizing and materials of construction plus 25% design marginHeating Value for Natural Gas:1,020Btu/scfAP-42 Table 1.4-1 Maximum Fuel FiringRate:29,412scf/hrCalculated (Firing Rate/Heating Value)a)AP-42 from USEPA, 1995b) Based on 50 weeks per year Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-21Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-4 Emissions from Administration Building - Natural Gas-Fired Heatera)Exhaust characteristics for the indirect-fired heaters were based on information available from equipment vendors for packaged indirect-fired heaters.b)AP-42 from USEPA, 1995c)Based on 50 weeks per year
References:
Hastings, 2011; Reznor, 2002 PollutantEmission FactorUnitsSource (b)Annual Emissions (c)Hourly Emissions(T/yr)(lb/hr)(lb/MMBtu) CO(Residential Furnace)40lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1 (7/98)0.050.0110.038 NOx(Residential Furnace)94lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1 (7/98)0.110.0270.093 PM10 (filterable) 1.9lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.0020.00050.002 PM10 (total) 7.6lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.0090.00220.008 VOC 5.5lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.0070.00160.006 SO2 0.6lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.0010.000170.0006 CO2 120,000lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)143.234.1117.6Estimated Heating Load:233,278Btu/hrEstimated based on preliminary building size and materials of constructionDesign Firing Rate:290,000Btu/hrHeating load plus a design margin of approximately 25% to provide bounding valueHeating Value for NaturalGas:1,020Btu/scfAP-42 Table 1.4-1Firing Rate:284.3scf/hrCalculated (Firing Rate/Heating Value) Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-22Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-5 Emissions from Support Facility Building - Natural Gas-Fired Heatera)Exhaust characteristics for the indirect-fired heaters were based on information available from equipment vendors for packaged indirect-fired heaters.b)AP-42 from USEPA, 1995c)Based on 50 weeks per year
References:
Hastings, 2011; Reznor, 2002PollutantEmission FactorUnitsSource (b)Annual Emissions (c)Hourly Emissions(T/yr)(lb/hr)(lb/MMBtu) CO(Residential Furnace)40lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1 (7/98)0.0670.0160.038 NOx(Residential
Furnace)94lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1 (7/98)0.160.0390.093 PM10 (filterable) 1.9lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.0030.00080.002 PM10 (total) 7.6lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.0130.00310.007VOC 5.5lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.0100.00230.005 SO2 0.6lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.0010.000250.0006 CO2 120,000lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)207.549.4117.6Estimated Heating Load:337,317Btu/hrEstimated based on preliminary building size and materials of constructionDesign Firing Rate:420,000Btu/hrHeating load plus a design margin of approximately 25% to provide bounding valueHeating Value for NaturalGas:1,020Btu/scfAP-42 Table 1.4-1Firing Rate:411.8scf/hrCalculated (Firing Rate/Heating Value) Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-23Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-6 Emissions from Waste Staging & Shipping Building - Natural Gas-Fired Heatera)Exhaust characteristics for the indirect-fired heaters were based on information available from equipment vendors for packaged indirect-fired heaters.b)AP-42 from USEPA, 1995c)Based on 50 weeks per year
References:
Hastings, 2011; Reznor, 2002PollutantEmission FactorUnitsSource(b)Annual Emissions(c)Hourly Emissions(T/yr)(lb/hr)(lb/MMBtu) CO(Residential Furnace)40lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1(7/98)0.0290.0070.039NOx(Residential Furnace)94lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1(7/98)0.0710.0170.094PM10 (filterable) 1.9lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2(7/98)0.0010.00030.002 PM10 (total) 7.6lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2(7/98)0.0050.00130.007 VOC 5.5lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2(7/98)0.0040.00100.006 SO2 0.6lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2(7/98)<0.0010.0000110.0006 CO2 120,000lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2(7/98)89.021.2117.8Estimated Heating Load:141,597Btu/hrEstimated based on preliminary building size and materials of constructionDesign Firing Rate:180,000Btu/hrHeating load plus a design margin of approximately 25% to provide bounding
valueHeating Value for NaturalGas:1,020Btu/scfAP-42 Table 1.4-1Firing Rate:176.5scf/hrCalculated (Firing Rate/Heating Value) Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-24Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-7 Emissions from Diesel Generator Building - Natural Gas-Fired Heatera)Exhaust characteristics for the indirect-fired heaters were based on information available from equipment vendors for packaged indirect-fired heaters.b)AP-42 from USEPA, 1995c)Based on 50 weeks per year
References:
Hastings, 2011; Reznor, 2002PollutantEmission FactorUnitsSource (b)Annual Emissions (c)Hourly Emissions(T/yr)(lb/hr)(lb/MMBtu) CO(Residential Furnace)40lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1 (7/98)0.0130.0030.042 NOx(Residential
Furnace)94lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-1 (7/98)0.0290.0070.097 PM10 (filterable) 1.9lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)< 0.0010.00010.001 PM10 (total) 7.6lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.0020.00050.007 VOC 5.5lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)0.0020.00040.006 SO2 0.6lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)< 0.0010.000040.0006 CO2 120,000lb/106 scfAP-42Table 1.4-2 (7/98)35.78.5118.1Estimated Heating Load: 57,987Btu/hrEstimated based on preliminary building size and materials of constructionDesign Firing Rate: 72,000Btu/hrMaximum heat input required plus 25% design marginHeating Value for NaturalGas:1,020Btu/scfAP-42 Table 1.4-1Firing Rate: 70.6scf/hrCalculated (Firing Rate/Heating Value) Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-25Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-8 Total Annual Emissionsa) Includes 3 T/yr (6,000 lb/yr) NO x emissions from process stackPollutantAnnual Emissions (T/yr)CO10.9NOx 13.1 (a)PM (total)0.98HC (VOC)0.81SO20.09CO215,642 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-26Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-9 SHINE Facility Release Point Characteristics(Sheet 1 of 2)Production Facility BuildingStack DataUnitsBoilerProcessExhaust Flowacfm14,45053,251Exhaust Temperature oF585104Heightfeet above grade 6666Diameterfeet1.674.67Exhaust Velocityfeet/sec110.451.9Stack Base Elevationfeet above mean sea level821821Administration Building Stack DataUnitsValueDescriptionHeightfeet above grade21Based on Administration Building height of 16 feet and heater exhaust height of 5 feet above roofExhaust OrientationVerticalAssumed vertical with rain capDiameterinches5.0Typical exhaust vent outlet for 200,000 to 300,000 Btu/hr heaterExhaust Fan Flow acfm180Approximate full load exhaust gas flow rate based on natural gas combustionExhaust Temperature oF160Assumed for indirect-fired natural gas heaterExhaust Velocityft/sec22CalculatedStack Base Elevationfeet AMSL817Support Facility Building Stack DataUnitsValueDescriptionHeightfeet above grade26Based on support facility building height of 21 feet and heater exhaust height of 5 feet above roofExhaust OrientationVerticalAssumed vertical with rain capDiameterinches6.0Typical exhaust vent outlet for >300,000 Btu/hr heaterExhaust Fan Flowacfm260Approximate full load exhaust gas flow rate based on natural gas combustionExhaust Temperature oF160Assumed for indirect-fired natural gas heaterExhaust Velocityft/sec22CalculatedStack Base Elevationfeet AMSL822 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-27Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-9 SHINE Facility Release Point Characteristics(Sheet 2 of 2)Waste Staging and Shipping BuildingStack DataUnitsValueDescription Heightfeet above grade23Based on Administration Building height of 18 feet and heater exhaust height of 5 feet above roofExhaust OrientationVerticalAssumed vertical with rain capDiameterinches4.0Typical exhaust vent outlet for <200,000 Btu/hr heaterExhaust Fan Flowacfm120Approximate full load exhaust gas flow rate based on natural gas combustionExhaust Temperature oF160Assumed for indirect-fired natural gas heaterExhaust Velocityft/sec23CalculatedStack Base Elevationfeet AMSL824Diesel Generator Building Stack DataUnitsValueDescriptionHeightfeet above grade22Based on Diesel Generator Building height of 17 feet and heater exhaust height of 5 feet above roofExhaust OrientationVerticalAssumed vertical with rain capDiameterinches4.0Typical exhaust vent outlet for <200,000 Btu/hr heaterExhaust Fan Flowacfm60Approximate full load exhaust gas flow rate based on natural gas combustionExhaust Temperature oF160Assumed for indirect-fired natural gas heaterExhaust Velocityft/sec11CalculatedStack Base Elevationfeet AMSL823 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-28Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-10 Pollutant Impacts Compared to the SILa)A recent court decision (US Court of Appeals, For the District of Columbia Circuit), January 22, 2013, Sierra Club vs. EPA (No.10-1413) vacated the PM 2.5 SIL and remanded it to EPA. The SILs for other pollutants remain in effect.b)Values represent the highest predicted impacts for each pollutant and averaging time.PollutantAveraging PeriodMaximum Predicted Impact (µg/m 3)(b)YearSIL(µg/m3)CO1-hr.30200920008-hr.152007500NO21-hr.64.65-yr7.5Annual2.320071SO21-hr.0.235-yr7.93-hr.0.1420082524-hr.0.07420085Annual0.008520071PM1024-hr.0.925-yr5Annual0.095-yr1PM2.5 (a)24-hr.0.755-yr1.2Annual0.095-yr0.3 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-29Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-11 Pollutant Impacts Compared to the NAAQSa) 5-yr indicates an average over the 5 modeled yearsb) Primary standards except SO 2 3-hr., which is a secondary standardc) H1H is the high, first high and H2H is the high, second high concentration of ranked concentrations at all receptors d) NOx modeled; assume a 100% conversion rate of NO x to NO2e) 6th highest value over 5 yearsf)Although there is a SIL for the annual PM 10 impacts, there is no NAAQS standardg) 24-hr. and Annual standards revoked June 22, 2010 (75 FR 35520)PollutantAveraging PeriodRankPredicted Impact (µg/m3)Year(a)Bkgd. Conc.(µg/m3)Total Conc. (µg/m3)NAAQS(b)(µg/m3)% of NAAQSPSD Increment (µg/m3)CO1-hr.H2H(c)2820091363139140,0003None8-hr.H2H(c)1320081191120410,00012None NOx(as NO2)(d)1-hr.98th %47.45-yr55102.418854NoneAnnualH1H(c)2.3200724.126.41002625 PM10(f)24-hr.H6H(e)0.75-yr47.047.71503230 PM2.524-hr.98th %0.545-yr28.929.435849AnnualH1H(c)0.095-yr10.210.312864 SO2(g)1-hr.99th %0.195-yr1313.21967None3-hr.H2H0.14200843.243.313003512 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAir Quality and NoiseSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-30Rev. 0Table 19.4.2-12 Typical Noise and Emissions from Construction Equipmenta)Rock Township, Wisconsin, Noise Limits:M-1 Light Industrial, M-2 Heavy Industrial and SP Special Purpose District: 79 dBAAll other districts: 72 dBA
Reference:
California Energy Commission, 2009Equipment TypeNoise Level in dBA (a)At 50 FeetAt 500 FeetAt 1500 FeetEarthmoving Loaders886858 Dozer886858 Tractor806050 Grader856555 Trucks866656 Shovels846454
Materials Handling Concrete pumps/mixers816151 Derrick and mobile cranes836353 Stationary Portable Generator846454Impact Paving breaker806050Light Duty VehiclesNANANA Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewGeologic EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-31Rev. 019.4.3GEOLOGIC ENVIRONMENTPotential impacts to geologic and soil resources during the construction, operation, and decommissioning of the proposed facility include large-scale hazards and local hazards. The large-scale hazards include earthquakes, volcanic activity, landslides, subsidence, and erosional processes. Local hazards are associated with site-specific properties of the soil and bedrock and include soil disturbances due to excavation, exposure of contaminated soil during excavation, blasting of bedrock (if required for construction), volume of material excavated or used during construction, impacts to rare or unique geologic resources, and impacts to rock/mineral/energy rights.19.4.3.1Impacts of Large-Scale HazardsAs noted in Subsection 19.3.3, the probability of large-scale impacts due to geologic factors is low. The seismologic regime (Subsection 19.3.3.5) of the region demonstrates that the site is located in one of the lowest earthquake hazard regions of the country. The lack of earthquakes in the region is associated with a lack of tectonic and volcanic activity, as discussed in Subsections 19.3.3.2 and19.3.3.6.2. The geologic environment features that are associated with landslides, subsidence, and erosional processes are discussed in Subsections 19.3.3.3 and 19.3.3.4. While landslides and subsidence can occur, the risk for subsidence or landslides within Rock County is not considered high. In addition, no sinkholes have been reported in the county in recent years. The primary soils present at the SHINE site are classified as slightly erodible and the secondary soils at the site are classified as moderately erodible. No soils present at or near the site are classified as highly erodible soils. Consequently, impacts relative to the geologic environment are SMALL.19.4.3.2Other Impacts on Soils and Geology The construction of the facility will include the excavation of the Radiologically Controlled Area (RCA) to an approximate depth of approximately 39ft. (11.9m) below a final grade of 826.0 ft. (251.8m). The resulting final elevation of the base of the excavation is 787 ft. (239.9 m). The maximum frost depth is 4ft. (1.2m) below ground surface, and all underground utilities will be designed accordingly, with a preliminary estimation of utility excavation depth of 5ft. (1.5m) below ground surface. No evidence of "recognized environmental conditions" as described in ASTM E 1527-05 were found to exist at the SHINE site, nor were any samples collected during the groundwater monitoring (as described in Subsection 19.3.4.3, Table 19.3.4-9) found to contain contamination indicating the presence of contaminated soil above the groundwater.An analysis of the geology of Rock County indicates that it is similar to the geology of much of southern Wisconsin and northern Illinois in that it comprises glacial sediments and limestone which are not unique or rare geological resources in the region (Olcott, Perry G., 1969). Historic mineral production in Rock County has included the mining of sand, gravel, and crushed and broken limestone, with no precious- or base-metal mineral resources mapped or discovered within Rock County (Olcott, Perry G., 1969). In addition, no extraction of energy resources occurs at the site. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewGeologic EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-32Rev. 0As noted in Subsection 19.3.4.1.2.2, bedrock at the SHINE site is at a depth greater than 220 ft. (67m) below ground surface. The deepest excavation planned is approximately 39 ft. (11.9m) below ground surface which eliminates the need for blasting to support excavations.Figure 19.4.1-2 provides an illustration of the SHINE facility construction grading plan. Excavation depth of the RCA is bounded at approximately 39ft. (11.9 m) below finished grade. For estimation of excavation quantities, a depth of 5 ft. (1.5m) below finished grade was used for the ancillary buildings. Direct impacts associated with excavation and topsoil removal for underground utilities and site grading has also been estimated. The total amount of material to be excavated at the SHINE site is 278,000 cubic yards (212,550 cubic meters). Additional assumptions made in preparing the estimate include:*Twenty-five percent margin for bounding considerations.*Frost depth is 4 ft. (1.2 m), and ancillary building foundations will be at a minimum depth of 5 ft. (1.5 m).*The bearing material at the final depth of excavation is suitable for supporting the design load, eliminating the need for over-excavation.*An allowance for a 12-inch (30.5-centimeter) thick mudmat was included at the bottom of excavations within the RCA, with the total depth of the excavation, including mudmat allowance, not to exceed approximately 39ft. (11.9m) below ground surface*Excavated slopes are stable on a slope of 1.5 horizontal to 1 vertical.*An 8-ft. (2.4m) wide bench is included in the excavation for slope stability concerns.*The excavation is 10 ft. (3.05 m) wider at the base of the excavation around the sides of the RCA to allow for the erection of forms and to provide a working area.*Below 1 ft. (0.3 m) of topsoil, the underlying material is essentially homogenous.Preliminary plans call for materials excavated during site grading and construction to be stockpiled on-site and used as backfill. Topsoil and other materials not suited for use as structural fill will be stockpiled on-site and placed as non-structural fill. A sediment and erosion control plan is required and mitigates the potential indirect impacts associated with the release of sediment or other runoff constituents to off-site areas.Based on the above assumptions, the estimated quantity of geologic material required for the completion of this project, exclusive of concrete acquired from commercial concrete mixing plants for construction of the buildings, is:*Backfill: 74,000 cubic yards (56,580 cubic meters) around structures in main excavation (reuse of suitable material excavated on-site);*Topsoil: 10,000 cubic yards (7645 cubic meters), acquired from on-site sources.*Granular road base: 7600 cubic yards (5810 cubic meters).*Asphaltic pavement: 2200 cubic yards (1682 cubic meters).
- Gravel surfacing: 8500 cubic yards (6499 cubic meters).*Underground utilities: 3500 cubic yards (2676 cubic meters) for backfill (reuse of suitable material excavated on-site).
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewGeologic EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-33Rev. 0*Site grading: 10,000 cubic yards (7645 cubic meters), to be acquired from material excavated on-site.In order to reduce impacts, on-site materials will be utilized as appropriate and no off-site borrow areas are anticipated. Consequently, direct impacts to the geologic environment are SMALL and no indirect (off-site) impacts are identified.No impacts have been identified due to large scale or local hazards which require mitigation measures beyond compliance with local building codes. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-34Rev. 019.4.4WATER RESOURCES19.4.4.1Hydrology19.4.4.1.1Surface Water19.4.4.1.1.1Facility Construction No surface water features such as creeks, streams or ponds are present on or in the immediate area surrounding the SHINE site. As a result, there are no direct effects to surface water
resources. Federal, state and local regulations and permit procedures provide minimum requirements for stormwater management during construction activities to prohibit adverse impacts on surface water, or stormwater. A sediment and erosion control plan is required and mitigates the potential indirect impacts associated with the release of sediment or other runoff constituents to off-site areas. An assessment of stormwater runoff patterns in the vicinity of the SHINE site indicates that the drainage area upstream of the site is approximately 100 ac. (40.4 ha), based on City of Janesville 2-ft. (0.6-m) contour interval mapping. Due to the area being very flat (0 to 1 percent slopes), having high-permeability subsoils, and being continuously tilled for agricultural use, no dendritic flow patterns develop. In addition, because of the flat terrain, it is difficult to accurately identify the exact drainage area, and tilled rows in the fields could direct flow to other basins. Runoff from this area is diverted around the site using appropriate measures as required by state and local authorities. There are no impoundments or significant detention/retention areas on the site currently that provide detention/reduction of storm runoff. Construction-phase dewatering is not required, because the measured groundwater level is well below the deepest excavation. Thus, there is no effect on surface water quantity or flow characteristics due to drawdown of groundwater or discharge of construction phase dewatering effluent. Consequently, indirect impacts of construction of the SHINE facility on surface water are SMALL. 19.4.4.1.1.2Facility OperationsAs is described in Section 19.2, all water used at the SHINE site is obtained from the City of Janesville municipal water supply system and all sanitary waste water is discharged directly to the City of Janesville sanitary sewer system. Additionally, the facility is designed to have zero liquid discharge from the radiologically controlled area (RCA). Consequently, there is no use or release of water from the facility to the adjacent environment that would affect surface water hydrologic systems. Direct impacts to surface water from plant operations are, therefore, SMALL. The SHINE facility site layout is illustrated in Figure 19.2.1-1. The site plan includes a low degree of impervious areas that are associated with rooftops, paved drives, and parking lots, etc. Additionally, the impervious surfaces are not "directly connected," and stormwater instead flows across or through pervious areas as it drains across the site. These pervious areas, including vegetated swales, provide control of stormwater quantity (volume and peak rate) as well as quality. The state requirements (Wisconsin Administrative Natural Resources Code, Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-35Rev. 0ChaptersNR 151 and NR 216); the City of Janesville requirements (Ordinances Chapter 15, Sections 15.05 [construction erosion and sediment control]; and 15.06 [post-construction stormwater management]) for maintenance of on-site infiltration and phosphorous removal by use of best management practices (BMPs) will be met or exceeded.SHINE has coordinated with the City of Janesville stormwater staff regarding requirements for stormwater management. As a result of that coordination, the stormwater plan for the site incorporates the use of vegetated drainage swales for control of both stormwater quantity and quality. No retention or detention "pond" is to be constructed at the site to avoid larger water surface areas (even during temporary periods of storm runoff), thereby avoiding the potential for glare from the surface that might affect aircraft at the adjacent Southwestern Wisconsin Regional Airport. The absence of permanent or occasional water, as well as food sources, also minimizes frequenting of the site by waterfowl, such as Canada geese, which could otherwise be a concern for both the airport (bird aircraft hazard) and for stormwater quality due to the introduction of fecal material, a common concern for urban stormwater management ponds in the region.Most areas of the site that are not impervious are either landscaped with native vegetation, cool-season grasses, or continue agricultural row-crop production. Use of native vegetation rather than turf grass eliminates or greatly reduces irrigation needs and maintains a low surface runoff and natural (i.e., higher than turf grass) evapotranspiration condition. All of these practices result in minimal impact to surface water downstream of the site, or even a reduction in surface runoff, compared to the current row-crop agricultural use which involves annual tillage practices. During operation, dewatering is not required because the measured groundwater level is well below the deepest basement. Thus, there is no effect on surface water quantity or flow characteristics due to drawdown of groundwater or discharge of operation phase dewatering effluent. Indirect impacts of site runoff on surface waters are, therefore, SMALL. 19.4.4.1.1.3Facility DecommissioningAs described above, no surface water features are present on or in the immediate area surrounding the SHINE site. As a result, there are no direct effects from decommissioning to surface water resources. Federal, state and local regulations and permit procedures provide minimum requirements for stormwater management during decommissioning activities to prohibit adverse impacts on surface water, or stormwater. A stormwater pollution prevention plan, including a sediment and erosion control plan, is required and mitigates the potential indirect impacts associated with the release of sediment or other runoff constituents to off-site areas. There are no impoundments or significant detention/retention areas on the site currently, or as a component of the site plan, that provide retention of storm runoff. During decommissioning, dewatering is not required because the measured groundwater level is well below the deepest basement. Thus, there is no effect on surface water quantity or flow characteristics due to drawdown of groundwater or discharge of decommissioning phase dewatering effluent. Consequently, indirect impacts of decommissioning of the SHINE facility on surface water are SMALL. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-36Rev. 019.4.4.1.2Groundwater19.4.4.1.2.1Construction, Operations and DecommissioningThe construction of the facility includes the excavation of the RCA to an approximate depth no greater than approximately 39 ft. (11.9m) below final grade of 827.0 ft. (252.1m) (Section 19.4.3.2). The resulting final elevation of the base of the excavation is 788 ft. (240m), more than 20 ft. (6m) higher than the measured high groundwater elevation of 765.92 ft. (233.45m). All elevations are referenced to North American Vertical Datum 88 (NAVD 88). Consequently, there is no direct impact to groundwater flow. All water used by the SHINE facility is obtained from the City of Janesville municipal water supply system and all sanitary wastes are discharged directly to the City of Janesville sanitary sewer system. No groundwater withdrawals and no groundwater returns are required during the construction, operation, or decommissioning of the facility, with no direct or indirect impacts to groundwater. Consequently, direct and indirect impacts to groundwater are SMALL. 19.4.4.2Water Use19.4.4.2.1Surface WaterAll water used at the SHINE site during construction, operation, and decommissioning is obtained from the City of Janesville municipal water supply system and all waste water discharges go directly to the City of Janesville sanitary sewer system. Additionally, the facility is designed such that there is no liquid discharge from the RCA. Consequently, there is no use or release of water from the facility to the adjacent environment that would affect surface water hydrologic systems. Direct impacts to surface water from plant operations are, therefore, SMALL.19.4.4.2.2GroundwaterConstruction, operation, and decommissioning activities do not involve the use of groundwater. Any water utilized on-site is obtained from the City of Janesville Public Water Utility. Consequently, direct impacts of water use on groundwater are SMALL. The average estimated water usage by the SHINE facility during operations is 6070 gallons (22,977 liters) per day and a consumptive water use of 1560 gallons (5905 liters) per week. As noted in Subsection 19.3.4.2.2, the Janesville Water Utility provides water supply for both public drinking water and for fire protection, utilizing eight wells. The water supply system for the City of Janesville includes two water storage reservoirs and one water tower. According to the City of Janesville, the total pumping capacity of its eight groundwater wells is 29 million gallons per day (Mgd) (109.8million liters per day [Mld]). Average water usage is about 11Mgd (41.6Mld) with a maximum recorded daily demand of 25.8Mgd (97.7 Mld). Accordingly, the excess capacity of the Janesville water supply system is approximately 3.2Mgd (12.1 Mld). Because there is excess capacity within the Janesville water supply system, potential indirect effects from the demand from the SHINE facility are also SMALL. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-37Rev. 019.4.4.3Water QualityPotential surface water and groundwater quality impacts of site construction and operation are discussed in this section.19.4.4.3.1Surface Water19.4.4.3.1.1Facility Construction and DecommissioningNo surface water features are present on or in the immediate area surrounding the SHINE site. As a result, there are no direct effects to water quality. Potential indirect surface water quality impacts from facility construction and decommissioning are similar to those of construction of any typical industrial or commercial facility in the area. Erosion and sediment control for ground disturbing activities will meet or exceed the regulatory requirements, including Clean Water Act National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) regulations and Wisconsin regulations (NR 151.11). In addition to soil erosion and sedimentation, potential release of other potential construction activity pollutants (petroleum products, adhesives , paint, etc.), is minimized by SHINE's waste management and minimization program (Subsection 19.4.8.1.2.3 and 19.2.5.6). 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.Construction- and decommissioning-phase dewatering is not required because the measured groundwater level is well below the deepest excavation. Thus, there is no effect on surface water quality due to drawdown of groundwater or discharge of construction phase and decommissioning phase dewatering effluent. Therefore, indirect impacts to water quality from construction and decommissioning are SMALL.19.4.4.3.1.2Facility Operation As described in Subsection 19.4.1.1, meeting the requirements of state and local stormwater management requirements minimizes potential impacts associated with site development. One of the most significant indicators of urban stormwater quality is imperviousness. The site has a low percentage of imperviousness (Figure 19.2.1-1) and the impervious areas discharge to vegetated pervious areas where treatment of runoff occurs, including infiltration, filtering, and biological uptake of pollutants. According to state permitting requirement at NR151.12, SHINE must complete a detailed simulation of hydrology and pollutant discharges with and without use of stormwater BMPs to show 80 percent removal of total suspended solids by the BMPs to be implemented. As appropriate and as required by permit, the SHINE site design will maintain a minimum site infiltration amount, defined as either: (1)at least 60percent of the pre-development infiltration based on average annual rainfall, or (2)at least 10percent of the 2-year, 24-hour duration storm runoff. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-38Rev. 0Approximately 53.75 ac. (21.75 ha) of the total site may remain in row-crop agricultural use where applications of chemicals in accordance with best agricultural practices would continue. Alternatively, all or a portion of the existing agricultural use area of the site may be converted to native vegetation, reducing chemical applications and other associated existing agricultural practices that have a higher potential for affecting surface water quality.Additionally, extensive use of native landscaping or cool-season grasses at the site minimizes the need for applications of herbicides, pesticides, and fertilizer at the site. Small areas of turf grass are maintained, and applications of any of these chemicals or fertilizers are performed in a manner consistent with product label instructions to minimize potential impacts. The oil stored on-site, which assumes a bounding value of an approximately 30,000-gallon (113,562 L) underground storage tank containing fuel oil for the standby generator, requires a Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan in accordance with 40 CFR Part 112. The SPCC Plan details requirements for oil spill prevention, preparedness, and response to prevent oil discharges to navigable waters and adjoining shorelines. The implementation of the SPCC Plan prevents releases from the aboveground oil storage from impacting surface waters.During operation, dewatering is not required because the measured groundwater level is well below the deepest basement. Thus, there is no effect on surface water quality due to drawdown of groundwater or discharge of operation phase dewatering effluent. Therefore, impacts to water quality from operation of the SHINE facility are SMALL.19.4.4.3.2Groundwater 19.4.4.3.2.1Construction, Operation, and DecommissioningPossible indirect impacts on groundwater quality can occur during construction, operation or decommissioning if spills from vehicles, equipment, or storage areas penetrate hard surfaces (asphalt or concrete) or are accidentally released to pervious surfaces and migrate to groundwater prior to detection and remediation of the release. All equipment and material storage areas are in compliance with appropriate regulations requiring secondary containment of stored liquids and materials. Oil storage associated with the operation of the facility includes an approximately 30,000-gallon (113,562 L) underground storage tank containing fuel oil for the standby diesel generator. Fuel storage associated with the construction/decommissioning is within secondary containment and the implementation of the SPCC Plan prevents releases from migrating through the subsurface and impacting groundwater. Measured groundwater levels are below the deepest excavation during construction and decommissioning, and below the base of the lowest basement, which prevents any direct impacts to groundwater. Because of the depth of groundwater below the SHINE site, and the use of appropriate management and control measures as stated above, direct and indirect impacts to groundwater quality are SMALL. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Water ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-39Rev. 019.4.4.4MonitoringThe facility is eligible for a WPDES stormwater discharge permit exclusion under Wisconsin Administrative Code NR 216.21(3). The stormwater discharge permit exclusion does not include any stormwater monitoring requirements. Because of the absence of direct impacts to surface water, the low potential for indirect impacts, and the use of management measures and controls to prevent releases to surface water, no surface water monitoring activities are planned for the site.Because of the absence of direct impacts to groundwater, the low potential for indirect impacts, and the use of management measures and controls to prevent releases to groundwater, no non-radiological groundwater monitoring activities are planned for the site. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-40Rev. 019.4.5ECOLOGICAL RESOURCESThis subsection addresses the impacts of construction and operation on the ecological resources on and within the vicinity of the SHINE site. The impacts discussed below are based on the characterization and description of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems within the SHINE site and near site region from Subsection 19.3.5. The region surrounding the SHINE site is defined in Subsection19.3.1.1.2 as the area within a 5 mi (8-km) radius of the site centerpoint and is located entirely within Rock County, Wisconsin. The ecological resources described in Subsection19.3.5 are based on recorded information provided by resource agencies (WDNR and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [USFWS]) and supplemental quarterly field surveys conducted in 2011 and 2012. Although the region is defined as the area within a 5 mi (8-km) radius of the site centerpoint, protected species information was provided by the USFWS and WDNR within a 6 mi (9.7 km) radius of the site.Impacts include effects from activities associated with construction and operation, including excavation, grading, placement of fill material, temporary staging and construction laydown, construction of permanent features, and potential operational disturbances. This evaluation indicates the magnitude of potential impacts and whether mitigation measures are required.As described in Subsection 19.3.5, the SHINE site consists of a 91.27-ac. (36.94ha) parcel that has been farmed for the past several decades and is routinely disturbed by the disking, plowing, herbicide application and harvesting activities associated with row crop production. Ecological resources at the SHINE site, therefore, are limited by the active agricultural practices on the site and by a complete lack of surface water resources. Because baseline conditions consist solely of agricultural land lacking native terrestrial or aquatic habitat, post construction ecological monitoring and maintenance plans are not deemed necessary. 19.4.5.1Impacts from Construction This subsection describes the potential construction-related ecological impacts to the SHINE site and near off-site areas based on the SHINE facility site layout (see Figure 19.2.1-1). Activities such as earthmoving, excavation, erection, batch plant operation, and construction-related traffic generate potential disturbances to ecological resources during the construction phase of the SHINE project. Direct and indirect impacts associated with construction-related disturbance to the site and near-site areas is limited to the agricultural lands on-site. Figure 19.2.1-1 depicts the proposed buildings for site construction. Given the agricultural nature of the site, land clearing is not necessary. Furthermore, the project does not involve clearing along stream banks, dredging, disposal of dredged material, or waste disposal areas. On the 91.27-ac. (36.94 ha) SHINE site, direct impacts from construction permanently converts 25.67ac. (10.39ha) of agricultural lands to industrial facilities. Although the entire site is in agricultural production, 0.18 ac. (0.07 ha) of permanent impacts are technically mapped as Developed, Open Space (Table 19.4.5-1). Permanent conversion to industrial facilities include the construction of facility buildings, employee parking lot, facility access road/driveway, stormwater detention area, access road drainage ditches, and US 51 drainage ditches. Construction impacts also include the temporary impact of 14.54 ac. (5.88 ha) of agricultural Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-41Rev. 0lands used for the construction parking area, construction material staging or lay down area, and temporary disturbance from water and sewer line installation. Temporary impact areas are either returned to agriculture or restored with either cool season grasses or native prairie. Construction impacts are summarized in Table 19.4.5-1. 19.4.5.1.1Places and Entities of Special InterestThere are no places or entities of special interest on-site, including wetlands. Habitats of special interest off-site include wetlands and endangered resources identified by the WDNR near the SHINE site. As described in Subsection 19.3.5.6, mapped wetland land cover within a 5-mi. (8-km) radius includes just 722 ac. (292 ha) of woody wetlands and 787 ac. (318ha) of emergent herbaceous wetlands (see Table19.3.1-1). None of these wetland resources are impacted by construction at the SHINE site. As part of a WDNR endangered resources review letter, six habitats of special interest were identified near (within 6mi. [9.6km]) the SHINE site (WDNR, 2012b) including dry prairie, dry-mesic prairie, mesic prairie, Southern dry-mesic forest, Southern mesic forest, and wet prairie (see Subsection 19.3.5.4.1). These habitats are not located on the SHINE site and none of these habitats near the site are either directly or indirectly impacted by construction. Happy Hollow County Park (southwest of the site) was also identified by WDNR near the SHINE site but is not impacted by construction. As discussed in Subsection 19.3.5.4.3, Rock County is located along a principal route of the Mississippi Flyway and, therefore, the natural habitats along the Rock River are particularly useful to migrating birds for resting, feeding and foraging. As stated in Subsection19.3.5.5, the Rock River is 1.9 mi. (3.1 km) southwest of the SHINE site. Although the site may be used occasionally for resting or foraging by migratory birds, habitat on-site and in adjacent lands are dominated by agricultural and developed uses that are not considered high value or important ecological systems. Although the project permanently converts 25.67 ac. (10.39 ha) of agricultural lands to industrial facilities, this direct impact is not significant when compared to the vast amount of agricultural land remaining in the region (see Table 19.4.5-1).In summary, impacts to places and entities of special interest from construction are SMALL because such ecological resources are not present on-site and because the identified off-site resources are distant from the site and are not impacted by construction on the SHINE site. Specific mitigation measures and management controls are not needed.19.4.5.1.2Aquatic Communities and Wetlands There are no streams, ponds, wetlands, or other aquatic communities present on the SHINE site. Because the site lacks wetlands and aquatic resources, and because dewatering of groundwater in excavations is not anticipated, any potential construction-related impacts to wetlands and aquatic resources are limited to indirect off-site impacts associated with runoff and siltation. As stated in Subsection 19.3.5.5, the nearest water feature is a small intermittent stream 1.6 mi. (2.6 km) south of the site and the Rock River is 1.9 mi. (3.1 km) southwest of the site. However, this intermittent stream receives drainage from lands east of the SHINE site and does not receive runoff from the site. Runoff from the site flows southwest toward the Rock River. However, because of the high infiltration rate of the soils on the SHINE site, no organized stream channel and associated aquatic habitats are present. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-42Rev. 0BMPs are used in accordance with the SWPPP, as required by the WDNR, to prevent sediment runoff and subsequent siltation in receiving streams during construction. Because of the absence of on-site aquatic communities and wetlands, the distance to off-site streams, the high infiltration rate of the soils near the SHINE site, and the implementation of BMPs on-site, direct and indirect impacts to aquatic communities and wetlands from construction are SMALL. Specific mitigation measures and management controls are not needed.19.4.5.1.3Terrestrial CommunitiesAs summarized in Table 19.4.5-1, direct construction impacts permanently convert 25.67 ac. (10.39 ha) of agricultural lands to industrial facilities including the construction of facility buildings, employee parking lot, facility access road/driveway, vegetated stormwater drainage swales, access road drainage ditches and US 51drainage ditches. Construction impacts also include the direct temporary impact of 14.54ac. (5.88ha) of agricultural lands used for the construction parking area, construction material staging or lay down area, and temporary disturbance from water and sewer line installation. Temporary impact areas are either returned to agriculture or restored with either cool season grasses or native prairie. The terrestrial communities on the SHINE site and near site areas are described in Subsection19.3.5.7. Wildlife potentially affected by construction includes bird, mammal and/or herpetofauna species that occasionally use the site as a travel corridor or for foraging or resting. Given the routine agricultural disturbance and lack of water resources on-site, wildlife occurrence on the SHINE site is relatively infrequent. Mammals were not commonly observed on-site. Their use of the site is sporadic given the lack of cover, shelter, and water supply. Furthermore, there were no amphibians or reptiles observed on the SHINE site. With the dominance of agriculture on the SHINE site and lack of other wildlife habitat, wildlife use on the SHINE site is minimal. The minor loss of agricultural lands to industrial facilities is not significant when compared to the 25,236 ac. (10,213 ha) of agricultural land remaining within a 5-mi. (8-km) radius of the site (seeTable 19.4.5-1). Furthermore, lands on-site not utilized for development of industrial facilities are returned to agriculture or restored using cool season grasses or native prairie species. As such, impacts to wildlife and terrestrial communities from construction are SMALL. Specific mitigation measures and management controls are not needed.White-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus), eastern cottontail (Sylvilagus floridanus), and Canada goose are identified in Subsection 19.3.5 as recreationally valuable game species observed on-site. Their use of the site, however, is infrequent given the lack of cover, shelter, and water supply. As such, impacts to recreationally important species from construction are SMALL and specific mitigation measures and management controls are not necessary. 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. The number of bird collisions with construction equipment, such as cranes, or new structures has not been quantitatively assessed. However, based on the findings of NUREG-1437 which demonstrated that the effects of avian collisions with existing structures at nuclear power plants is SMALL, the impacts of such collisions during the construction phase are considered SMALL and specific mitigation measures and management controls are not needed. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-43Rev. 0Wildlife 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, Ron, 2009). Amphibian and bat species, however, are generally lacking from the SHINE site due to the lack of appropriate habitat. In addition, artificial lighting could create or exacerbate an avian-collision hazard if tall cranes are illuminated for work during nighttime construction. According to Ogden, a large proportion of migrating birds affected by human-built structures are songbirds, apparently because of their propensity to migrate at night, their low flight altitudes, and their tendency to be trapped and disoriented by artificial light, making them vulnerable to collision with obstructions (Ogden, L.J.E., 1996). For any nighttime construction at the SHINE site, BMPs such as light source shielding and appropriate directional lighting are used to mitigate the hazards to wildlife associated with artificial nighttime illumination. Based on the general lack of appropriate habitat at the SHINE site for amphibians, bats, and most bird species, and the BMPs to mitigate effects to wildlife, the direct and indirect impacts of artificial illumination at nighttime during the construction phase are SMALL thus specific mitigation measures and management controls are not needed.19.4.5.1.4Invasive SpeciesAlthough several "restricted" or "prohibited" weedy invasive species were observed in various land cover types off-site, as discussed in Subsection 19.3.5.8, no invasive species listed by the WDNR were observed on the SHINE site. Disturbanc e associated with construction activities such as earthmoving and excavation, however, can create conditions for opportunistic invasive species to become established. Temporary impact areas and other areas not permanently converted to industrial uses are either returned to agriculture or restored with either cool season grasses or native prairie species. Invasive species are controlled in areas restored to agriculture as has been done in agricultural fields on-site for the past several decades. If restored to cool-season lawn or native prairie, invasive species are controlled through mowing or similar maintenance activities. Thus, the invasive species impacts from construction are considered SMALL and monitoring or maintenance plans are not anticipated at this time. 19.4.5.1.5Protected SpeciesConsultation letters from the WDNR and USFWS were acquired to provide information regarding ecological resources near (within 6 mi. [9.6 km]) the SHINE site (WDNR, 2012b; USFWS, 2012). This consultation process was used to obtain agency input regarding threatened and endangered species, sensitive habitats, and other ecological characteristics for the site and near-site areas. A list of threatened/endangered species or species of special concern identified within 6 mi. (9.6km) of the SHINE site is provided in Table 19.3.5-7. Terrestrial and aquatic listed species include five fish species, five mussel species, one turtle species, and 27 plant species as identified in Subsection 19.3.5.11. WDNR identified the Blanding's turtle (Emydoidea blandingii) as state threatened and potentially occurring near the site. Blanding's turtles were not observed during field reconnaissance. Given the absence of wetlands and open water habitat on the site or its immediate near-site environs, Blanding's turtles are not expected to occur on-site. Agency consultation did not identify any state or federally listed species on the SHINE site. Furthermore, no designated critical habitat was identified on-site or within 6 mi. (9.6 km) of the
SHINE site. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-44Rev. 0The listed fish, mussel and turtle species inhabit aquatic areas such as rivers, streams, ponds, and/or wetlands which are absent from the site. BMPs are used in accordance with the SWPPP, as required by the WDNR, to prevent sediment runoff and subsequent siltation in receiving streams during construction. As stated in Subsection 19.3.5.5, potential receiving streams such as the Rock River are distant from the SHINE site. The use of proper BMPs combined with the distance to the nearest receiving waters and the high infiltration rate of the soils near the SHINE site minimizes impacts to protected species during construction. As such, construction-related impacts to the nearest receiving waters would be negligible and essentially would eliminate the potential for impacts to protected aquatic species.The listed plant species inhabit forests or woodlands, riparian areas, and prairies. These habitat types are absent from the agricultural SHINE site and none of the listed plant species were observed during field reconnaissance surveys on-site. In addition, protected plants were not observed in riparian areas of nearby streams. Thus, construction would not impact protected woodland or prairie plants on or near the site. As discussed in Subsection 19.3.5.5, receiving streams and their associated riparian zones are distant from the SHINE site. Because of the absence of on-site aquatic communities and wetlands, the distance to off-site streams, the high infiltration rate of the soils near the SHINE site, and the implementation of BMPs on-site, direct and indirect impacts to any protected plant species associated with riparian areas from construction are SMALL. As such, construction-related impacts to protected species on the SHINE site or in near off-site areas are SMALL. Specific mitigation measures and management controls are not needed.19.4.5.2Impacts from OperationsThis subsection provides a description of the potential impacts of operation of the SHINE facility on terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. 19.4.5.2.1Places and Entities of Special Interest Places and entities of special interest, as described in Subsection 19.3.5.4, include a description of communities and habitats of special interest, other sensitive or susceptible areas, and important ecological systems. Communities and habitats of special interest near the SHINE site (within 6 mi. [9.6km]) include wetlands, six endangered resources (habitats) identified by the WDNR, and state designated natural areas of Rock County. Other sensitive or susceptible areas near the SHINE site include Happy Hollow County Park (southwest of the site). Important ecological systems near the SHINE site include the Mississippi Flyway. Due to the complete conversion of the lands of the SHINE site and its immediate environs to cultivated fields or other developed uses, none of the described places and entities of special interest are present either on-site or in adjacent off-site areas. Habitats of the SHINE site and adjacent lands are dominated by agricultural and developed uses and are not considered to be high value or important ecological systems. Although air emissions from natural gas heating facilities are expected, such emissions are not expected to impact agricultural lands on-site or communities and habitats of special interest off site. Additionally, the SHINE facility does not utilize cooling towers. Consequently, there are no operational impacts associated with drift (i.e., gaseous or particulate emissions to the air from cooling towers). Herbicide application for lawn maintenance is minimal and is only used on the SHINE site, thus operational impacts to off-site areas identified as places and entities of special Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-45Rev. 0interest are minimized. The operation of the SHINE facility results in a localized minor increase in noise but noise levels are similar to that of the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport that is immediately adjacent to the SHINE site. Thus, operation impacts to the off-site areas identified as places and entities of special interest are SMALL. Mitigation measures and management controls are not needed.19.4.5.2.2Aquatic Communities and Wetlands Aquatic resources and wetlands near the SHINE site are described in Subsections 19.3.5.5 and 19.3.5.6, respectively. Aquatic resources near the SHINE site include the Rock River and an unnamed stream which is a tributary of the Rock River. In accordance with Subsection 19.3.5.5, the Rock River is 1.9 mi. (3.1 km) from the SHINE site. There are no aquatic resources or water bodies present on the SHINE site and there are no jurisdictional wetlands identified on the
SHINE site.The SHINE facility does not withdraw water from any surface water body or from groundwater. Rather, water is provided by the Janesville Public Water Supply. Thus, there are no operational impacts associated with impingement or entrainment of aquatic biota. Furthermore, the SHINE facility does not discharge directly into the Rock River or any other nearby water body thus avoiding any pollutant or thermal affects to aquatic resources. In addition, a vegetated on-site detention swale is used to control stormwater runoff which, when combined with the distance to the nearest off-site water bodies minimizes runoff and siltation to off-site receiving streams. Thus, operational impacts on aquatic communities or wetlands are SMALL. Specific mitigation measures and management controls are not needed.19.4.5.2.3Terrestrial Communities Terrestrial plant communities are characterized in Subsection 19.3.5.7.1 for the SHINE site and areas in proximity of the SHINE site. The terrestrial communities of the site and areas in proximity to the site are mainly agricultural areas cultivated for crops, hay, and pasture. No federal or state-listed threatened, endangered or special concern plant species have been observed on or in the proximity of the SHINE site. Herbicide application is occasionally used around buildings and driveways as part of lawn maintenance activities to c ontrol weedy species. Thus, operational impacts to plant communities are SMALL.Wildlife communities for the SHINE site and near site areas are described in Subsection19.3.5.7.2. With the dominance of agriculture on the SHINE site and lack of other wildlife habitat, wildlife use is on the SHINE site is minimal. Additionally, there are no known occurrences of threatened or endangered species on the SHINE site. Thus, operational impacts to wildlife are SMALL.The SHINE facility and associated buildings do not result in significant bird mortality from bird collisions, though infrequent bird collisions with buildings resulting in mortality can occur. As is discussed in Subsection 19.4.1 most buildings on the SHINE site have a relatively low profile. Consequently, effects on bird populations from collisions with build ings are minimized. Therefore, the operational impacts to bird species and populations from collisions are SMALL. Specific mitigation measures and management controls are not needed. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-46Rev. 0The operation of the SHINE facility results in a localized minor increase in noise (Subsection19.4.2). But noise levels are localized to the SHINE site and not elevated above background noise emissions from US 51 immediately adjacent to the SHINE site. Thus, operation impacts to wildlife from noise are SMALL. Specific measures and controls are not needed.19.4.5.2.4Invasive Species There were nine "restricted" or "prohibited" weedy invasive species observed off-site in various land cover types including developed lands, agricultural lands, and riparian corridors. Information on these species can be found in Subsection 19.3.5.8. No invasive species listed by the WDNR (neither restricted nor prohibited) were observed on the SHINE site. Additionally, there are no existing plans to implement invasive species management/control activities at the facility. Thus, operational impacts associated with invasive species are SMALL. Specific measures and controls are not needed.19.4.5.2.5Protected SpeciesA list of threatened/endangered species or species of special concern identified near the SHINE site is provided in Table 19.3.5-7. Terrestrial and aquatic listed species include five fish species, five mussel species, one turtle species, and 27 plant species. WDNR identified the Blanding's turtle (Emydoidea blandingii) as state threatened and potentially occurring near the site. Blanding's turtles were not observed during field reconnaissance. Given the absence of wetlands and open water habitat on the site or its immediate near-site environs, Blanding's turtles are not expected to occur on-site. Agency consultation did not identify any state or federally listed mammal, bird, or insect species within 6 mi. (9.6km) of the SHINE site. Furthermore, no designated critical habitat was identified on-site or within 6 mi. (9.6 km) of the SHINE site.The listed fish, mussel and turtle species inhabit aquatic areas such as rivers, streams, ponds, and/or wetlands. Because these habitats are absent from the site, these species are not expected to occur on the SHINE site. Furthermore, the lack of intake and discharge structures on the Rock River or any other nearby water body avoids operational impacts to the aquatic habitats of protected species. The listed plant species inhabit the three general habitat types of forests/woodlands, riparian areas, and prairies. There is no forested, riparian, or prairie habitat on the SHINE site nor were any of the listed plant species observed during any of the vegetation surveys within the site or near the site. Furthermore, the entire SHINE site is composed of agricultural land and does not include the preferred habitat of the listed species. In accordance with Subsection 19.3.5.5, the nearest receiving stream and associated riparian areas are more than a mile from the SHINE site. Although protected plant species were not observed in nearby riparian areas during field reconnaissance, these are areas where protected plant species could become established. The use of appropriate stormwater controls comlow enrichedbined with the distance to the nearest receiving stream minimizes impacts to any protected plant species that could potentially be associated with near site riparian areas. As such, operational impacts to protected species on the SHINE site or in near off-site areas are SMALL. Specific mitigation measures and management controls are not needed. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-47Rev. 019.4.5.3Impacts from DecommissioningConstruction of the SHINE facility is expected to begin in 2015. Following the cessation of operations the facility will be decommissioned. Decommissioning activities, however, are similar to construction activities, and involve heavy equipment to dismantle buildings and remove roadway and parking facilities. As such, impacts from decommissioning are anticipated to be similar to the impacts associated with construction and SMALL. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Ecological ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-48Rev. 0Table 19.4.5-1 Summary of Impacts to 2006 Land Use/Land Cover (a)a)2006 Land Use/Land Cover is the most recent data availableb)Total may add up to more or less than 100 percent due to rounding. c)
Reference:
Fry et al., 2011NLCD 2006 Land Cover ClassPermanent Site ImpactsTemporary Site ImpactsTotal Land Cover Within the Region (c)ac.haac.haac.haPercentOpen Water7963221.6Developed, Open Space0.180.07304312316.1Developed, Low Intensity5858237111.7Developed, Medium Intensity19687963.9Developed, High Intensity9924012.0Barren43170.1Deciduous Forest329813356.6Evergreen Forest68280.1 Mixed Forest100.0Shrub/Scrub5052041.0Grassland10494252.1 Pasture/Hay5896238611.7Cultivated Crops25.6710.3914.545.8825,23610,21350.2Woody Wetlands7222921.4 Emergent Herbaceous Wetland7873181.6Total(b)28.8510.4614.545.8850,26220,339100.0 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-49Rev. 019.4.6HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES19.4.6.1Impacts to Historic PropertiesAs is described in Subsection 19.3.6.3, no on-site historic properties are associated with the SHINE site. No archaeological sites or evidence of cultural resources were identified within the survey area. The Wisconsin Historical Society (WHS) has also reviewed the findings of the Phase I archaeological survey and has indicated that no further consultation with the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) regarding the SHINE facility is required (WHS, 2012).As discussed in Subsection 19.3.6.4, SHINE initiated consultation with 13 federally recognized tribes regarding the proposed development. A single response letter was received from the Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska who indicated that they have cultural properties of interest in the project area, but had no concerns regarding the project. However, they did indicate the desire to be contacted in the event burial sites or other cultural materials were discovered during construction. Follow-up calls were made to representatives of the remaining 12 tribes; however, no return calls to SHINE were received. Prior to construction, SHINE will develop a Cultural Resource Management Plan that will contain procedures governing notification and management of cultural resources during both construction and operations.The nearest listed National Register of Historic Properties (NRHP) property is the Hugunin House located approximately 1.1 mi. (1.7 km) from the SHINE site (see Figure19.3.6-1). No direct impacts occur to this property by either construction or operational activities. Additionally, given the distance of the listed property and the low profile of the proposed structures on the SHINE site, no visual or other indirect impacts occur. Therefore, potential impacts to historic and archaeological resources are SMALL. Due to the absence of historic cemeteries and prehistoric mounds within the boundaries of the SHINE site, the potential for the presence of human burials or human remains is SMALL. However, if human burials or human remains are identified at any time, work will immediately stop with no further disturbance of the human remains. If human remains are discovered, the construction personnel will contact a representative of SHINE. The representative of SHINE will contact the appropriate local law enforcement and the WHS and communicate that human remains have been discovered. If the human remains are determined to be archaeological in nature, the WHS in conjunction with SHINE will determine what further actions will be taken.Other past, present and reasonably foreseeable Federal and non-Federal projects identified in the immediate area around the SHINE site include the planned development of lands immediately north of the site as part of the Janesville Tax Increment Financing District No. 35 Project Plan (City of Janesville, 2012a). However, because no historic properties are impacted by the SHINE site, no additional cumulative impacts historic and cultural resources would occur. Consequently, potential cumulative impacts of the SHINE project are SMALL. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-50Rev. 019.4.7SOCIOECONOMICSThis subsection describes potential impacts to the socioeconomic environment, including transportation system impacts associated with the construction, operation and decommissioning of the SHINE facility. The evaluation of potential socioeconomics impacts addresses potential changes in the regional population, economy, housing availability, and public services. The evaluation of transportation system impacts addresses routes and modes that are involved with transporting materials, workers, and equipment to the SHINE site. 19.4.7.1Socioeconomics Impacts This subsection evaluates impacts to the population, housing, public services (i.e. water supply), public education, and tax-revenues in the region of influence (ROI), Rock County, that result from constructing, operating, and decommissioning the SHINE facility. Potential impacts of constructing the facility are attributable to the size of the construction workforce, the expenditures needed to support the construction program, and the tax payments made to political jurisdictions. Because direct impacts are those that occur on-site, the only direct impacts are associated with the presence of the workforce at the SHINE site. All other socioeconomic impacts are considered to be indirect, as they occur off-site. The analysis presented in this subsection is based on the bounding parameters for the projected workforces for construction, operation, and decommissioning. As noted in Table 19.4.7-1, the peak on-site construction phase (contractor) workforce is 420workers, and the maximum on-site operational phase workforce is 150 workers. This analysis assumes a 24-month schedule of construction-related activities. Decommissioning is estimated to start in the year 2046, and will involve a peak month on-site workforce of 261
workers.19.4.7.1.1Population ImpactsThe ROI population is 160,331 (USCB, 2010a). Growth projections show that the population in 2015 is 165,354, and the population in 2045 is 191,703 (see Table 19.3.7-4). The analysis of population impacts considers the population growth potential due to the SHINE workforce requirements for construction, operational and decommissioning phases. As shown in Table 19.4.7-1, a large construction trade workforce is available in the ROI for the major labor categories (those for which a peak labor force need of at least 20workers is projected). Therefore, the potential for large numbers of trade workers moving into the ROI is lessened by the extent to which the estimated local labor force meets construction workforce needs. Because the ROI labor force in the construction trades is demonstrated to be abundant relative to construction workforce requirements (except for boilermakers and iron workers for whom data are not available from the Bureau of Labor Statistics [BLS]), it is estimated that approximately 60percent of the required construction workforce for these trades come from within the ROI. It is conservatively assumed that 20 percent of the required boilermakers and iron workers are available from within the ROI. Similarly, based on the large ROI labor force in the major occupation categories, it is expected that approximately 60 percent of the required operations workforce comes from within the ROI. Furthermore, due to the more specialized nature of some trades required for the decommissioning workforce, it is expected that just over 50 percent of that workforce comes from within the ROI (estimates based on current ROI labor force levels). Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-51Rev. 0The estimated numbers of construction workers, operational workers and decommissioning workers that are available locally, and the estimated labor force deficiencies by occupation are shown in Table 19.4.7-1. These estimates show that 248 out of the peak requirement of 420construction workers are present within the ROI labor force. Therefore, 172 construction workers come either from the labor force of the surrounding 50-mi. (80km) radius or relocate from outside the 50-mi. (80-km) radius. The 172 construction workers estimated to be not available within the ROI labor force equates to 41 percent of the peak month construction workforce. Based on analysis of the overall Rock County labor force as shown in Table19.3.7-1, it is estimated that 17 percent of the existing labor force commutes to Rock County from other counties. Consistent with this estimate, it is assumed that 17 percent of the 172 construction workers to be added to the ROI labor force reside in counties outside of Rock County and commute to the ROI. The remainder, 143 construction workers and their families, are assumed to relocate to reside within the ROI. The average household size in the ROI is 2.5persons per household (USCB, 2010a). Therefore, 143 workers relocating to the various communities within the ROI increases the population in the ROI by approximately 358 people. This estimated population increase constitutes 0.22 percent of the ROI's population of 160,331. Therefore, the impact of the construction of the SHINE facility on population is SMALL.Table 19.4.7-1 shows the estimate that 88 out of the required 150 permanent operations workers are available in the ROI. It is assumed that 17 percent of the additional required 62operations workers commute to Rock County from adjacent counties, and that the other 51workers and their families relocate to reside in the ROI. Using the ROI average of 2.5persons per household, the total population increase in the various communities within the ROI due to operational workforce requirements is 128 people. This estimated population increase constitutes 0.08 percent of the projected 2015 population of the ROI. Therefore, the impact of the operation of the SHINE facility on population is SMALL.An estimated 132 of the required 261 decommissioning workers are available in the ROI (see Table19.4.7-1). It is assumed that 17 percent of the additional required 129 decommissioning workers commute to Rock County from adjacent counties, and that the other 107decommissioning workers and their families relocate to the ROI. Based on the ROI average of 2.5persons per household, the ROI population increases by 268 due to the decommissioning workforce. This estimated population increase constitutes 0.14 percent of the projected population of the various communities within the ROI at the end of the 30-year license period. Therefore, the impact of decommissioning of the SHINE facility on population is SMALL.19.4.7.1.2Housing ImpactsSubsection 19.3.7.2.2 and Table 19.3.7-12 provide a summary of the 2010 USCB data concerning availability of housing in the ROI that is used as a basis for estimating the number of housing units that may be available to accommodate housing demands resulting from construction, operation and decommissioni ng. NUREG-1437 presents criteria for the assessment of housing impacts based on the discernible changes in housing availability, prices, and changes in housing construction or conversions. These criteria are:*SMALL: Small and not easily discernible change in housing availability; increases in rental rates or housing values equal or slightly exceed the statewide inflation rate; and no extraordinary construction or conversion of housing. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-52Rev. 0*MODERATE: Discernible but short-lived change in housing availability; rental rates or housing values increase slightly faster than state inflation rate with rates realigning as new housing added; and minor and temporary conversions of non-living space to living space.*LARGE: Very limited housing availability; rental rates or housing values increase well above normal inflation rate for state; and substantial conversions of housing units and overbuilding of new housing units. In 2010, there were 5986 vacant housing units in the ROI (see Table 19.3.7-12). This amount of housing available within the ROI at the time the portion of the construction workforce that is non-resident moves into the area is substantially greater than the total estimated demand for housing due to construction of the SHINE facility. For purposes of analysis, the estimates of 143workers relocating to the ROI for construction phase peak, 51 workers relocating to the ROI to meet operational workforce needs, and 107 workers relocating to the ROI to meet decommissioning workforce needs equates to a total of 301 additional households in the ROI. The 5986 vacant housing units in Rock County in 2010 equal approximately 20 times the total estimated demand for housing. There is clearly an adequate supply of vacant housing to accommodate the requirements of new families for temporary or permanent housing. Further, the decommissioning workforce, which represents approximately one-third of the estimated housing demand, does not relocate to the ROI until the end of the 30-year licensing period.The potential impacts on housing are SMALL due to the large number of available vacant housing units in the ROI and the relatively small requirements for the construction, operations and decommissioning workforce. 19.4.7.1.3Public Services Impacts Public services impacts analys is as directed by Final IS G Augmenting NUREG-1537 concerns water supply facilities. NUREG-1437 presents criteria for the assessment of public services impacts based on the ability to respond to the level of demand and need for additional capacity. These criteria are:*SMALL: Little or no change occurs in ability to respond to level of demand and therefore there is no need to add capital facilities.*MODERATE: There is overtaxing of facilities during peak demand.*LARGE: Existing service levels are substantially degraded and additional capacity is needed.Construction of the SHINE facility requires quantities of potable water to support the needs of the construction work force. During construction and operations, the Janesville Water Utility supplies water to the SHINE site, including potable water uses, fire protection uses, and typical construction uses (e.g. dust suppression and concrete mixing). The average per capita water usage in the United States is 90 gallons per day (gpd) (340.7 liters per day [lpd]) per person including personal use, bathing, laundry and other household uses (USGS, 2012). At a conservatively assumed 30gpd (113.6 lpd) for each construction worker who is on-site for 8 to 12 hours per day, an on-site workforce of 420 needs 12,600 gpd (47,696 lpd) for potable and sanitary use. As discussed in Subsection19.3.7.2.5.1, the Janesville Water Utility has excess Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-53Rev. 0water capacity of 18 Mgd (68.1 Mld). Therefore, impacts on public water supply by the on-site construction workforce are SMALL.The impact to the local water supply systems from SHINE-related population growth can be estimated by multiplying the amount of water that is required per capita by the estimated number of individuals who relocate to the ROI. Subsection 19.3.7.2.5.1 describes the public water supply systems in the area, permitted capacities, and current demands. The average per capita water usage in the United States is 90 gpd (340.7 lpd) per person including personal use, bathing, laundry and other household uses (USGS, 2012). The estimated total construction and operation-related population increase within the ROI of 486 people (construction and operations workforces and their families) increases consumption by 43,740 gpd (165,574 lpd). The excess public water supply capacity in Janesville is 18 Mgd (68.1 Mld). Therefore, impacts to the municipal water supplier due to the estimated population increase are SMALL.Public wastewater treatment facilities are directly related to public water supply facilities. The impact to the local wastewater treatment systems from SHINE-related population increases can be determined by calculating the amount of water that is used and disposed of by these individuals. The average person in the United States uses 90 gpd (340.7 lpd) (USGS, 2012). All wastewater from the SHINE facility is disposed of and treated by the City of Janesville wastewater treatment facilities. The total construction and operation-related population increase of 486 people requires 43,740gpd (165,574 lpd) of additional wastewater treatment demand. The excess treatment capacity in the City of Janesville is 12 Mgd (45.4 Mld). Therefore, based on this excess treatment capacity, impacts to wastewater treatment facilities are SMALL.19.4.7.1.4Public Education ImpactsSchools and student populations are discussed in Subsection 19.3.7.2.5.2. For the ROI, the numbers and types of schools and the numbers of students by district are summarized in Table19.3.7-17. NUREG-1437 presents criteria for the assessment of public education impacts based on changes in student enrollment and the number of teaching staff and classrooms. These criteria are:*SMALL: Project-related enrollment increase is less than or equal to 3 percent, there is no change in the school system's ability to provide educational services, and no additional teaching staff or classroom space is needed.*MODERATE: Student enrollment increases between 4 and 8 percent, and there is an increase in the number of teachers or classrooms.*LARGE: Student enrollment increases by more than 8 percent and current institutions are not adequate to accommodate the influx of students. The Janesville School District (JSD) is the largest school district in the ROI by measure of student enrollment, and the public schools in the ROI that are in closest proximity to the SHINE site are units of the JSD. According to its current Strategic Plan, the JSD is officially seeking to grow its student enrollment. More specifically, it is the JSD Board of Education's goal to increase the net open enrollment gain/loss by 15 percent in the 2011-12 school year (JSD,2011a.). The student to teacher ratio is a common evaluation factor with regards to the capacity of a school, or school district, to accommodate student enrollment growth. In the JSD, the reported ratio is 12.8 students per licensed teacher full time equivalency which compares to the WI Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-54Rev. 0statewide ratio of 13.3 students per teacher full time equivalency (DPI, 2012a). The JSD's school enrollment for the 2011-2012 school year was 10,325 (DPI, 2012b). The district could increase its student enrollment by 412 students without adding any licensed teachers and still not exceed the statewide ratio. A 3percent increase in student enrollment would equate to an additional 310 students.The student age cohort (age 5 to 18) accounts for 20percent of the ROI total population (USCB,2010a and USCB, 2010b). The combination of estimated population increase due to construction workforce and operational workforce requirements results in a net construction and operations related population increase of 486 which contributes 97school-aged children within the ROI. If all students are added in the JSD, enrollment would neither exceed 3percent nor cause the JSD to exceed the statewide student to teacher ratio. No professional staff or classroom additions are needed. Beginning in 2046, an estimated population increase of 268 associated with decommissioning workforce demand contributes 54 school-aged children, assuming the student aged population remains 20percent of the total population. No professional staff or classroom additions would be needed based on that level of increased enrollment. Therefore, the level of impact to the local public education system is SMALL. 19.4.7.1.5Tax Revenue Related ImpactsThe U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) defined the magnitude of license renewal-related tax impacts based on previous case-study analysis as described in NUREG-1437 as:*SMALL if the payments are less than 10percent of revenue of the taxing jurisdiction.*MODERATE if the payments are between 10 and 20percent of revenue of the taxing jurisdiction.*LARGE if the payments are greater than 20percent of revenue of the taxing jurisdiction.Additionally, the NRC determined that if a facility's tax payments are projected to be a dominant source of the community's total revenue, new tax-driven land-use changes are LARGE. This is especially true where the community has no pre-established pattern of development or has not provided adequate public services to support and guide development in the past.Tax revenues associated with the construction, operation and decommissioning of the SHINE facility include payroll taxes on wages and salaries of the construction and operations work forces, sales and use taxes on purchases made by SHINE and the construction, operations and decommissioning workforces, and property taxes on owned real property and improvements. Increased tax collections are a benefit to the state, county and municipal-level jurisdictions as well as school districts.19.4.7.1.6Personal and Corporate Income TaxesWorkforce payroll taxes (federal and state) are generated by construction, operations and decommissioning activities and purchases as well as taxes generated by workforce expenditures. State tax payments are distributed throughout the ROI and extend beyond the ROI, based on the expectation that some construction, operations and decommissioning employees reside outside of Rock County. The relocation of workers to Rock County and Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-55Rev. 0surrounding counties, including some expected to relocate to Wisconsin from other states, results in an increase in payroll taxes paid to Wisconsin.19.4.7.1.7Sales Taxes Workers commuting to the SHINE site from within and outside of the ROI contribute sales tax revenues to the State of Wisconsin and to Rock County and any other counties where they live. The vast majority of sales tax revenues from the ROI are collected by the State, as Rock County's sales tax rate is very low. But the ROI does experience an increase in the amount of sales taxes collected, reflecting the concentration of re-located workers. Sales tax revenues also result from direct purchases by SHINE for materials, equipment and services supporting the construction project, long term operations, and decommissioning. The distribution of these tax revenues is determined by the business locations of the material and service providers and likely reflects a broad area including the ROI and beyond to multiple states. The amount of sales taxes collected over a potential 30-year operating period that are attributable to the SHINE facility is significant, but is relatively minor when compared to the total amount of taxes collected in the ROI.19.4.7.1.8Property TaxesThe SHINE facility is located in the City of Janesville in Rock County. As such, property taxes are paid to Janesville and Rock County as well as the JSD. These jurisdictions all provide public services that benefit SHINE's business and employees. It is SHINE's intent to enter into a Tax Increment Financing (TIF) agreement with the City of Janesville. The TIF agreement allows SHINE to make payments in lieu of taxes to Janesville for a period of 10years at the outset of the license period. These payments, estimated to total $600,000 per year, will be directed to offset infrastructure expenses associated with the SHINE development. During the ten year TIF time period, SHINE pays property taxes based on the assessed value of the property prior to improvements, estimated to be $35,000 per year. Following the 10-year TIF time period, property taxes paid by SHINE are based on the assessed value of real property and improvements, using the property tax rates in place at that time. Comparison of the estimated annual SHINE property tax payment (after expiration of the 10-year TIF time period) with the individual property tax revenues of Janesville and Rock County (using 2010 data available from Wisconsin Department of Revenue [DOR]) and the Janesville School District Board of Education shows that the annual portion of total property tax revenues paid by SHINE equates to approximately 0.30percent of total Rock County general property tax revenues, 0.66 percent of total Janesville general property tax revenues, and 0.99 percent of total Janesville School District general property tax revenues (DOR, 2012 and JSD, 2011b). The effect of property taxes paid by the construction, operations and decommissioning workforces is dispersed across the ROI and beyond. Construction workers commuting to the SHINE site from their homes continue to pay existing property taxes. Workers relocating to the ROI also contribute to increased property tax revenues.19.4.7.1.9Summary of Tax ImpactsOverall tax revenues generated by construction, operation and decommissioning of SHINE will be significant in absolute dollars across the lifetime of the facility, even with consideration of the TIF agreement that allows payment in lieu of taxes for 10years. However, the overall tax revenues are relatively small in comparison to the established tax base of Janesville and Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-56Rev. 0RockCounty. The maximum increase in property tax revenues after expiration of the TIF agreement is expected to be substantially less than 10 percent of the total tax revenue at the city and county levels. Therefore, total tax revenues from SHINE result in SMALL positive impacts at the community level. 19.4.7.1.10Other Socioeconomics Related ImpactsSocioeconomics related impacts in addition to those specifically described above include the potential for supportive business expansion and associated land use changes in the Janesville community as a result of the investments from SHINE. Land use changes due to housing needs are not expected due to the large number of existing vacant housing units. Potential land use changes include those to provide for expansion of existing small businesses or locations for new small businesses that might support SHINE and SHINE employees. If realized, such business expansions and/or new business developments are likely to occur in the southern area of the City of Janesville near the SHINE site in locations where conditions are appropriate for business development, including within the TIF district to the north of the SHINE site. Any such land use changes are subject to local zoning regulations and associated impacts on socioeconomic conditions are expected to be SMALL. 19.4.7.1.11Mitigation Measures to Minimize Socioeconomic ImpactsAs described in the subsections above, the socioeconomic impacts on the ROI resulting from construction, operation, and decommissioning of the SHINE facility are SMALL and no mitigation measures are required to minimize socioeconomic impacts.19.4.7.2TransportationConstruction-related and operations-related effects on the transportation network are provided in this subsection. The effects on the local transportation infrastructure as a result of construction and operations are measured against the existing traffic conditions and the future no-build traffic conditions in Table 19.4.7-2. All goods and services to support the SHINE facility will reach the site using existing roadway networks. 19.4.7.2.1Construction/Modification of Transportation InfrastructureA traffic analysis was performed to assess the construction-period traffic conditions and the post-development operations-related traffic conditions at the SHINE site. The construction entrance to the site is located along US 51. The peak construction traffic volume is estimated to be 14heavy vehicles (dump truck/deliveries) and 451 vehicles (pick-up trucks and cars) per day in 2015. A summary of the effect of construction traffic volumes on the transportation infrastructure is provided in Table 19.4.7-2. The level of construction-related traffic does not affect the level of service anywhere in the transportation infrastructure and no modifications to the infrastructure are necessary. Based on this projected level of construction traffic to and from the site, the level of impact to the transportation infrastructure is SMALL. The traffic analysis also assesses the traffic associated with the operations of the SHINE facility after construction is complete, which is assumed to be in 2016. The entrance to the site is located along US 51 with 75 percent of site-related traffic assumed to be coming from and going to the north and 25percent to/from the south. The traffic volume generated by employees working at the facility is estimated to be 118 vehicles per day. A summary of the effect of these Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-57Rev. 0operations volumes on the transportation infrastructure is provided in Table19.4.7-2. The operation of the facility results in a slight degradation in the level of service (from a level of service [LOS] C to an LOS D) at the intersection of US51 and State Highway11 (SH11) during the morning peak hour resulting in an increased delay at the intersection. This can be easily mitigated by optimizing the signal timing at the intersection to accommodate a greater turning movement from westbound SH11 to southbound US 51 as demonstrated in Table 19.4.7-3. Additionally, the nearby Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport does not need to modify current infrastructure in order to accommodate additional air traffic caused by shipments to and from the SHINE facility. Consequently, there are no impacts to airport facilities. Because traffic conditions during construction are not degraded, and the minor reduction in LOS at SH 11, the transportation impacts are considered to be SMALL and mitigable. 19.4.7.2.2Transportation Routes for Conveying Materials and Personnel to the Site The construction and operation of the SHINE facility does not alter any existing transportation routes for conveying materials and/or personnel to the site. Therefore, the impacts to transportation routes are considered to be SMALL.19.4.7.2.3Traffic Patterns ImpactsThe construction and operation of the SHINE facility does not alter any existing traffic patterns to and from the site. Therefore, the impacts to traffic patterns are considered to be SMALL.19.4.7.2.4Mitigation Measures to Minimize Transportation ImpactsAs mentioned above, the operation of the SHINE facility results in a slight degradation in the LOS at the signalized intersection of US 51 and SH 11. Specifically, the westbound SH 11 to southbound US 51 left-turning movement is affected during the morning peak hour. This condition can be easily mitigated by optimizing the signal timing for this turning movement. A summary of the effect of this mitigated condition is provided in Table 19.4.7-3. By optimizing signal timing for this movement at the intersection, the level of service for the intersection can be improved to its existing level. There are no other transportation infrastructure mitigation requirements in the vicinity of the SHINE site. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-58Rev. 0Table 19.4.7-1 Projected ROI Labor Availability and On-site Labor Requirements at Peak Month of Construction, Operations and Decommissioning SchedulesOccupation SHINE Peak Need(a)Estimate of Labor Force by Occupation in Rock County (b)Available Labor Force in Rock County(c)Rock County Labor Force Deficiency(d)Estimated AvailableNeeded for SHINEConstruction PhaseBoilermaker24ND5519 Carpenter4536072450Electrician55190383817Ironworker50ND101040 Laborer7034068682Equipment Operator/Eng.2613026260Plumber/Pipefitter7070141456Sheet Metal Worker3080(e)161614Construction Supervisor 2016032200Other30ND6624TOTAL420248172TOTAL, Percent 5941Operational PhaseOperation Support 4034034346Productions/Operations37110111126Tech Support 402590(f)259400Other33ND3330TOTAL1508862TOTAL, Percent 5941Decommissioning Phase Carpenter2036072200Ironworker 20ND4416Laborer100340686832Equipment Operator/Eng.2013026200Plumber/Pipefitter3070141416Radiation Technicians30ND6624Other41ND0NA41Total261132129Total, Percent 5149a)Peak month estimated need of labor categories where need is greater than or equal to 20b)Rock County labor force estimate from BLS, 2011 unless otherwise notedc)Left column: Estimated available construction and decommissioning labor force based on 20 percent of BLS estimated labor force; Available operational labor force based on 10percent of BLS estimated labor force. Right column: Total reflects the total estimated labor force available to meet the SHINE Peak Need.d)Rock County labor force deficiency determined by subtracting estimated Available Labor Force from SHINE Peak Neede)Labor force estimates from BLS, 2009; no data available for 2011 f)Tech support subcategories include: maintenance (machinery maintenance workers and general maintenance and repair workers), engineers (industrial engineers and mechanical drafters), and craftspeople (janitors and cleaners, landscaping and groundskeepers, electricians, plumbers and pipefitters, industrial machinery mechanics, and machinists)ND = No data, NA = Not available
References:
BLS, 2009; BLS, 2011. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-59Rev. 0Table 19.4.7-2 Summary of Traffic Impacts during Construction and Operationsa) LOS degraded during operations only due to greater volume during peak hour. Total construction traffic volumne higher, but not at peak hourExisting Level of Service Summary - Weekday Peak-HourIntersections ExistingConditions - AM ExistingConditions - PMLOSDelayLOSDelaySH 11 at County Highway GC23.3 sec.C22.4 sec.US 51 at Highway 11C27.6 sec.C25.6 sec. US 51 at Town Line RdB10.2 sec.B10.4 sec.Future (2015) No-Build Level of Service Summary - Weekday Peak-HourIntersectionsFuture No-Build - AM Future No-Build - PMLOSDelayLOSDelaySH 11 at County Highway GC24.1 sec.C22.8 sec. US 51 at Highway 11C29.3 sec.C26.3 sec. US 51 at Town Line RdB10.5 sec.B10.6 sec.Future (2015) Construction Level of Service Summary - Weekday Peak-HourIntersections Future Construction Phase - AMFuture ConstructionPhase - PMLOSDelayLOSDelaySH 11 at County Highway GC24.0 sec.C22.9 sec. US 51 at Highway 11C31.7 sec.C26.3 sec.US 51 at Town Line RdB10.5 sec.B10.6 sec.US 51 at SHINE siteA0.4 sec.A0.9 sec.Future (2016) Operations Level of Service Summary - Weekday Peak-HourIntersectionsFuture OperationsPhase - AMFuture OperationsPhase - PMLOSDelayLOSDelaySH 11 at County Highway GC24.3 sec.C23.3 sec. US 51 at Highway 11 D(a)42.9 sec.C26.5 sec.US 51 at Town Line RdB10.5 sec.B10.7 sec. US 51 at SHINE siteA1.1 sec.A1.5 sec. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewSocioeconomicsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-60Rev. 0Table 19.4.7-3 Summary of the Effects of Mitigative Measures on Traffic ConditionsduringOperationsFuture (2016) Build-Out Mitigated Level of Service Summary - Weekday Peak-HourIntersectionFuture OperationsPhase (Mitigated) - AM Future Operations Phase(Mitigated) - PMLOSDelayLOSDelaySH 11 at County Highway GC20.5 sec.C23.3 sec.US 51 at Highway 11 (a)C27.9 sec.C26.5 sec.US 51 at Town Line RdB10.5 sec.B10.7 sec.US 51 at Project SiteA1.1 sec.A1.5 sec.a) Mitigation consists of signal improvements only Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-61Rev. 019.4.8HUMAN HEALTH19.4.8.1Nonradiological ImpactsThe following subsections discuss the potential nonradiological public and occupational hazards as they pertain to the operation of the SHINE facility. Regulations for generating, managing, handling, storing, treating, protecting, and disposing of wastes during construction, operation, and decommissioning are contained in federal regulations issued and overseen by the NRC and USEPA, and in WDNR. These regulations include comp liance with provisions of the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Atomic Energy Act, and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), among others. Specific ally for Wisconsin, the potentially applic able Environmental Management Regulations are provided in statutes (including Chapters 166, 254, 280, 281, 283, 285, 287, 291, 292 and 299) and the Wisconsin Administrative Code (NR series).Nonradiological hazards are associated with emissions, discharges, and waste from processes within the facility as well as accidental spills/releases. Nonradioactive wastes generated by construction, operation, and decommissioning of the new plant, including solid wastes, liquid wastes, discharges and air emissions, are managed in accordance with applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations, and applicable permit requirements. 19.4.8.1.1Nonradioactive Chemical SourcesDuring construction nonradioactive chemical sources are expected to be on-site in liquid, gaseous and solid forms including fuels, oils, solvents, and other materials necessary for site preparation and construction. During operation, in addition to radioactive chemical sources, production processes include nonradioactive chemical sources in liquid, gaseous and solid forms. For a given industrial facility, pollutants may be present in wastewater and air emissions associated with the production facility. Solid wastes are also generated. The great majority of chemicals in the SHINE facility are either reused or shipped off-site as radioactive waste. Consequently, the focus of the following subsections are impacts of air emissions and solid waste.The bounding inventory of major chemicals (i.e., those in excess of 1000 pounds [454kilograms]) used during operations at the SHINE facility are provided in Table 19.4.8-1. Additionally, Table19.4.8-2 provides information regarding the characteristics of storage of these chemicals by chemical group and maximum inventory.19.4.8.1.2Nonradioactive Liquid, Gaseous, and Solid Waste Management and Control Systems19.4.8.1.2.1Liquid Wastes The great majority of chemical processes at the SHINE facility are conducted inside of the RCA. Any wastes created by these processes are disposed of as radioactive waste and shipped off-site. Some lab-scale chemical use occurs outside the RCA. Liquid wastes produced as a result of these activities are treated to ensure they meet the requirements of the Janesville wastewater treatment facility before being discharged to the municipal sewer. Facility sanitary wastewater is also sent to the Janesville wastewater treatment facility. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-62Rev. 019.4.8.1.2.2Gaseous WastesThe SHINE facility generates gaseous effluents resulting from process operations and the ventilation of operating areas. The non-radiological contaminants associated with this discharge are described and assessed in Subsection 19.4.2. The gaseous effluent from ventilation of operating areas includes the following control systems: *The Zone 1 exhaust airstream passes through two stages of HEPA filtration and a single stage activated carbon bed prior to discharge from the stack*The Zone 2 and Zone 3 exhaust airstreams pass through two stages of HEPA filtration prior to discharge from the stack*Additional controls may be implemented as required by local permit conditions. All the gaseous effluents from the main facility building are vented to the atmosphere through the main stack. 19.4.8.1.2.3Solid WastesThe following is a representative list of nonradioactive solid wastes that are anticipated to be generated by the project during construction, operation, and decommissioning: *Wood from crates*Packaging from receiving activities*Spent personal protective equipment (PPE)*Broken mechanical parts
- Metal shavings*Piping*Wires
- Batteries (alkaline, lithium)*Air filters*Expired lights and fixtures
- Paper*Hoses*Empty plastic containers
- Expired ink cartridgesOther nonradioactive solid wastes are anticipated to be generated in conjunction with routine operations (e.g, office and cleaning supplies, etc.). Solid waste management and control measures for the SHINE facility include waste reduction, recycling and waste minimization practices that are employed during all project phases (construction, operation, decommissioning). Management practices that are used by SHINE include the following:a)Nonradioactive solid wastes (e.g., office waste, recyclables) are collected and stored temporarily on the SHINE site and disposed of or recycled locally.b)Scrap metal, universal wastes (federally designated as universal waste including batteries, pesticides, mercury-containing equipment and bulbs [lamps]), used oil and antifreeze are collected and stored, and recycled or recovered at an off-site permitted recycling or recovery facility, as appropriate.
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-63Rev. 019.4.8.1.3Nonradioactive Effluents ReleasedA list of chemicals released as air emissions during operation to the on-site and off-site environment are provided in Subsection 19.4.2. This subsection provides information regarding the sources, composition and quantity of the air emissions from the SHINE facility.The SHINE facility releases small amounts of maintenance and lab chemicals to the city sewer from outside the RCA. Administrative controls ensure that these effluents meet the requirements of the Janesville wastewater treatment facility before they are released. Additionally, the facility sanitary wastewater is treated by the Janesville wastewater treatment facility.19.4.8.1.4Chemical Exposure to the Public19.4.8.1.4.1Air EmissionsCalculated chemical exposure to the public is described and discussed in Subsection 19.4.2.1 regarding air emissions from the SHINE facility. Potential air emissions effects to the public are limited to indirect impacts as they are off-site. Consequently, there are no direct impacts to the public from air emissions. To estimate the impacts of non-radiological pollutants from the boiler and heaters, the AERMOD Modeling System is used. The AERMOD system is a state-of-the-science dispersion model system that the USEPA promulgated in 2005 to replace the ISC model. Table 19.4.2-10 shows that the total concentration, with background included, is no more than 32percent of the NAAQS for CO, NO 2, PM10, and SO2. The total concentration for PM2.5 is 68percent and 83percent of the NAAQS for the 24-hr. and annual average, respectively. However, most of that is consumed by the background concentration.No impacts exceed the primary ambient air quality standards that have been established to protect public health, including the health of sensitive populations such as children, the elderly, and those with respiratory problems. Therefore, pollutant impacts within a reasonable area that could be impacted and at points of the maximum individual exposure are SMALL.19.4.8.1.4.2Liquid EffluentsAs described in Subsection 19.4.8.1.3 the SHINE facility does not result in point source releases to the environment, as wastewater discharges are sent to the City of Janesville for treatment. The RCA, which contains the majority of SHINE processes, is zero discharge. There are no direct or indirect impacts of liquid effluents from the SHINE facility. Therefore, the impact on human health from liquid discharges is SMALL. 19.4.8.1.5Physical Occupational Hazards The exposure characteristics of the workforce for non-radiological hazards will be defined when the operating strategies are finalized. Because occupational hazards occur on-site and during construction, operation and decommissioning of the SHINE facility they are considered direct impacts. No indirect impacts (off-site) are identified. Table 19.4.8.1-3 lists the general types of occupational physical hazards that may be present at the SHINE facility. Occupational physical hazards are addressed and managed to be reduced or eliminated through implementation of safety practices, training and control measures. In summary, occupational hazards are managed Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-64Rev. 0and minimized by compliance with Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations and therefore impacts from physical occupational hazards are SMALL.19.4.8.1.6Chemical Exposure to the WorkforceAs planned, the SHINE facility will not store or use highly hazardous chemicals in quantities above the Threshold Quantities in Appendix A to 29 CFR 1910.119 during construction. During operation, quantities of nitric acid above the Threshold Quantity will be present on-site and therefore, the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.119 Process Safety Management of Highly Hazardous Chemicals apply to the facility. The majority of process chemicals are used in liquid form and contained in tanks, pipes and hot cells, limiting workforce exposure. Because potential chemical exposure to the workforce during operation of the SHINE facility occurs on-site, they are considered direct impacts. No indirect impacts (off-site) are identified. The facility is designed and practices are applied to keep air contaminants below the limits in 29CFR 1910.1000. In summary, occupational hazards are managed and minimized by compliance with OSHA regulations and therefore impacts from chemical occupational hazards are SMALL.19.4.8.1.7Environmental Monitoring ProgramsApplicable regulations and attending administrative codes that prescribe monitoring requirements may include those associated with emergency management, environmental health, drinking water, water and sewage, pollution discharge, air pollution, hazardous waste management and remedial action. The following statutes are included in Wisconsin's Environmental Management Regulations: *Chapter 166Emergency Management - Emergency planning and Community Right-to-Know Act planning, notification and reporting*Chapter 254Environmental Health - Lead, asbestos, radiation protection, recreational sanitation, animal-borne and vector-borne disease control*Chapter 280Pure Drinking Water - Groundwater and water wells*Chapter 281Water and Sewage - General water resource statute
- Chapter 283Pollution Discharge Elimination - Water pollutant discharge systems *Chapter 285Air Pollution - Air pollution statute*Chapter 291Hazardous Waste Management - Hazardous waste statute
- Chapter 292Remedial Action - Includes hazardous substance releases and reportingSpecifically, regulations cited Chapters 283, 285, and 291 and attending administrative codes will be operative and SHINE is committed to complying with all applicable regulations and monitoring requirements as determined by permitting process. The SHINE facility generates gaseous effluents resulting from process operations, the ventilation of operating areas and boiler emissions from facility buildings. Specific monitoring requirements in support of required air permits will be determined through the permitting process.19.4.8.1.8Mitigation MeasuresMitigative measures are used to ensure protection of human health including workplace and environmental regulations. SHINE is committed to best management practices during construction, operation, and decommissioning to minimize pollutant releases to on-site and Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-65Rev. 0off-site areas, delivery of all facility wastewater to the Janesville wastewater treatment facility, and air emission controls, as appropriate. The facility is designed such that there is no liquid discharge from the RCA. Required permits will be obtained for effluents and emissions. Furthermore, waste reduction practices are employed including recycling and waste minimization.19.4.8.2Radiological Impacts This subsection describes the public and occupational heath impacts from radioactive material due to normal operational activities at the SHINE facility.
19.4.8.2.1Layout and Location of Radioactive MaterialFigure19.2.1-1 depicts the physical layout of the site with labeled buildings, site features, and designated areas. Radioactive material is expected within the following buildings:*Production facility building-Receiving area-Rejected material-Receipt inspection -Target solution preparation-Target solution cleanup area-Noble gas storage -Hot cells-Gloveboxes-Irradiation Unit cells -Health physics (hot)-Hot lab-Radioactive waste packaging*Waste staging and shipping building19.4.8.2.2Characteristics of Radiation Sources and Expected Radioactive EffluentsThe three common sources of radiation for operating nuclear facilities and the expected effluents
released from the SHINE facility are discussed in this subsection.19.4.8.2.2.1Gaseous Sources of RadiationThe radioactive gaseous effluent exhaust from the vent stack is expected to contain measurable quantities of the noble gases krypton and xenon, in addition to iodine. Some particulate activity (other than iodine) and tritium could also be released in airborne effluents; however, most of the off-site exposure due to airborne effluent releases is expected to be associated with noble gas and radioactive iodine releases. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-66Rev. 0Radioactive gaseous effluents produced in the SHINE facility due to normal operations consist of off-gas from the irradiated target solution. In addition, maintenance operations on the accelerator are expected to result in the release of some tritium gas, which is used as the accelerator target. All gaseous effluents rel eased from the SHINE facility are combined and released through a single vent stack. 19.4.8.2.2.2Liquid Sources of Radiation As stated in Subsection 19.2.5.3.4, the radioactive liquid waste produced due to normal operations at the SHINE facility is solidified and shipped off-site. No radioactive liquid waste is discharged from the SHINE facility. Therefore, there are no liquid sources of radiation released to the environment due to normal operations at the SHINE facility. 19.4.8.2.2.3Fixed Sources of RadiationThere are two buildings that contain fixed sources of radiation that contribute to direct dose: the production facility building, which contains sources created during production operations within the RCA (e.g., TSV irradiation, molybdenum-99 [Mo-99] separation), and the waste staging and shipping building, which contains sources associated with staging of solidified radioactive waste prior to shipment off-site.19.4.8.2.3Baseline Radiation LevelsBaseline radiation levels on-site and in the vicinity of the SHINE site are discussed in Subsection 19.3.8. There are no identified abnormal sources of radiation on-site or within the vicinity of the SHINE site that would cause radiation levels to be any higher than the expected natural background radiation level. Therefore, the annual background dose at the site due to terrestrial and cosmic radiation is approximately 279 millirem per year (mrem/yr) (2.79 millisievert per year [mSv/yr]) (Subsection 19.3.8.2).19.4.8.2.4Calculated Annual Total Effective Dose Equivalent, Annual Average Airborne Radioactivity Concentration, and Annual Average Waterborne Radioactivity ConcentrationThis subsection discusses the calculated annual total effective dose equivalent (TEDE), annual average airborne radioactivity concentration, and annual average waterborne radioactivity concentration at the dose receptor corresponding to the maximally exposed individual (MEI). The MEI is located at the site boundary where the doses due to normal operations are expected to be maximized. Additionally, TEDE, annual average airborne radioactivity concentration, and annual average waterborne radioactivity concentration to the nearest full-time resident is discussed. The doses to the public calculated in the following subsections are considered direct effects of operation of the SHINE facility. The radiation dose to the public due to transportation of radioactive waste is discussed in Subsection 19.4.10. The dose to the public due to the transportation of radioactive waste is considered an indirect effect of SHINE facility operation. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-67Rev. 119.4.8.2.4.1Gaseous EffluentsSources of radioactive gaseous effluents are discussed in Subsection 19.4.8.2.2.1. The effluents, which consist of the noble gases krypton and xenon, in addition to iodine and tritium, are released to the environment through the production facility building vent stack. Prior to release to the environment, gaseous effluents are held up to allow for decay.The methodologies used to calculate the annual TEDE to a maximally exposed member of the public and the nearest full-time resident are discussed here.Annual off-site doses due to the normal operation of the SHINE facility have been calculated using the computer code GENII2 (PNNL, 2012). The GENII2 computer code was developed for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), and is distributed by the Radiation Safety Information Computational Center (RSICC). Annual average relative atmospheric concentration (/Q) values were determined using the methodology in Regulatory Guide 1.111 (NRC, 1977) with the meteorological data in Section 2.3. The limit on calculated dose is the annual limit of 0.1 rem in a year to an individual member of the public as specified in 10 CFR 20.1301. Also, a dose constraint of 10 mrem TEDE per year due to air emissions is specified in 10 CFR 20.1101(d). The calculated dose is compared to the acceptance criteria of the 10 CFR 20.1301 dose limit and the 10 CFR 20.1101(d) dose constraint.The dose analysis using the GENII2 code considered the release of airborne radionuclides and exposure to off-site individuals through direct exposure and potential environmental pathways, such as leafy vegetable ingestion, meat ingestion, and milk ingestion. The analysis considered variations in consumption and other parameters by age group, and considered potential doses in each of the 16 meteorological sectors. The doses from each pathway were summed and compared to the acceptance criteria.Dose due to the deposition and ingestion pathways are less than the dose due to airborne sources of radiation. Annual TEDE due to gaseous effluents released from the SHINE facility at the location of the MEI and nearest full-time resident are listed in Table 19.4.8-5.As discussed in the following Subsections 19.4.8.2.4.2 and 19.4.8.2.4.3, the doses due to liquid effluents and direct dose from fixed radiation sources are negligible compared to the airborne sources of radiation. The results contained in Table 19.4.8-5 represent the annual TEDE to the MEI and nearest full-time resident for the sources of radiation due to normal operations at the SHINE facility.Because the results in Table 19.4.8-5 are within the dose constraints explained earlier in this subsection, the radiological impacts to members of the public due to operation of the SHINE facility are SMALL. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-68Rev. 019.4.8.2.4.2Liquid EffluentsAs described in Subsection 19.4.8.2.2.2, the SHINE facility does not generate radioactive liquid waste as candidate material for effluent release. As a result, there are no liquid effluent pathways that contribute to waterborne radioactivity concentrations. Because there are no discharges of radioactive liquid effluent at the SHINE site, the annual averaged waterborne radioactivity concentration is not expected to be greater than the baseline concentration.19.4.8.2.4.3Direct DoseFrom Subsection 19.4.8.2.2.3, fixed sources of radiation inside the production facility building are due to the radioactive materials used for solution preparation, Mo-99 production operations (e.g.,TSV irradiation, holding tanks), and the staging of radioactive waste. The source of radiation inside the waste staging and shipping building is solidified radioactive waste. Both the production facility and the waste staging and shipping building are designed with appropriate shielding to meet the 10 percent of 10 CFR 20.1301 limits on the outer wall of the RCA in the production facility and at the outer wall of the waste staging and shipping building.The direct dose to a member of the public at the boundary of the unrestricted area (the site boundary) is due to gamma radiation penetrating the walls of the production facility and the waste staging and shipping facility. The direct dose is small outside of the buildings, due to site shielding design, and the dose will decrease with increasing distance. Because the nearest site boundary is located at an appreciable distance from both fixed sources, the dose is negligible at the site boundary.19.4.8.2.5Annual Dose to Maximally Exposed Worker Administrative dose limits are occupational radiation exposure limits that radiation workers at SHINE shall not exceed without prior management approval. Table 19.4.8-7 gives SHINE administrative dose limits. 10 CFR Part 20 limits are also provided for reference. 19.4.8.2.6Radiation Exposure Mitigation Measures Occupational and public exposures due to operations at the SHINE site are ALARA. This exposure minimization goal is met through both engineered and administrative controls. The following subsections discuss each individually.19.4.8.2.6.1Engineered ControlsThe SHINE facility utilizes the following engineered controls to minimize radiation exposure to the public and workers:*Radiation source identification*Shielding around radiation sources
- Ventilation control*Access control to radiation areas*Contamination control Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-69Rev. 0*Remote operation*Waste minimization19.4.8.2.6.2Administrative ControlsTo minimize radiation exposure to the public and workers, the SHINE facility utilizes administrative controls, which 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 activities19.4.8.3Radiological MonitoringRadiological monitoring includes effluent monitoring and environmental monitoring.19.4.8.3.1Radiological Effluent MonitoringThe radiological effluent monitoring program is established to identify and quantify principal radionuclides in effluents (Regulatory Position C.1 of Regulatory Guide 1.21). This can be used to verify that the SHINE facility is performing as expected and within its design parameters so that doses to individual members of the public remain within 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. All effluent pathways that could be a significant release pathway for radioactive material from the SHINE facility include radiological effluent monitoring. 19.4.8.3.1.1Gaseous Effluent MonitoringAll gaseous effluents released from the SHINE facility (i.e., TSV off-gas, PVVS exhaust, and ventilation exhaust) are combined and released through a single vent stack. The airborne effluent exhaust from the vent stack is expected to contain measurable quantities of noble gas radioactivity (i.e., xenon and krypton). There could also be radioactive iodine, radioactive particulates, and tritium in the airborne effluent exhaust. Due to the expectation of having measurable quantities of radioactivity in the airborne effluent and since malfunction of the exhaust carbon filtration system could result in a change in iodine radioactivity releases, the combined exhaust in the vent stack is continuously monitored for gross gamma radioactivity using an off-line gas monitor. There are also grab sampling provisions to routinely collect and analyze gas, particulate, iodine, and tritium samples from the combined exhaust in the vent stack in order to identify radionuclides, identify relati ve concentrations of radionuclides in the airborne effluent, and quantify radionuclide releases.
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-70Rev. 019.4.8.3.1.2Liquid Effluent MonitoringThe SHINE facility releases no radioactive liquid effluent due to extensive reuse of process liquids. As such, there are no defined liquid effluent release pathways from the RCA and no requirement for radiation monitoring of liquid effluent release pathways.19.4.8.3.2Radiological Environmental Monitoring The requirement to have a radiological environmental monitoring program is documented in 10CFR 20.1302. The radiological environmental monitoring program 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. Methods for establishing and conducting environmental monitoring are provided in Regulatory Guide 4.1. Regulatory Guide 4.1 refers to NUREG-1301 for detailed guidance for conducting effluent and environmental monitoring. Although Regulatory Guide 4.1 and NUREG-1301 are written for nuclear power plants, due to the similarities between airborne releases of radioactivity from nuclear power plants and those released from the SHINE facility, guidance provided in Regulatory Guide 4.1 and NUREG-1301 was considered when developing radiological environmental monitoring for the SHINE facility. Specifically, guidance provided in Figure 1 of Regulatory Guide 4.1 and Table 3.12-1 of NUREG-1301 was considered when determining which exposure pathways to sample, sample locations, types of samples, and sample frequencies for the SHINE facility. The following radiation exposure pathways are considered for monitoring under the radiological environmental monitoring program: *Waterborne exposure pathway.
- Direct radiation exposure pathway monitored using thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs). *Airborne exposure pathway monitore d using continuous air samples. *Ingestion exposure pathway (monitored only if triggered).19.4.8.3.2.1Waterborne Exposure Pathway (Groundwater Sampling)There is no liquid effluent release pathway from the RCA associated with the SHINE facility and thus surface waters of the rivers in the vicinity of the plant (e.g.,the Rock River and its tributaries) are not expected to accumulate detectable levels of radioactivity. As such, surface water sampling is not included in the radiological environmental monitoring plan. Similarly marine life in the rivers is not expected to accumulate detectable levels of radioactivity and thus sampling of fish or other marine creatures for the ingestion pathway is not included in the radiological environmental monitoring plan. Measured local water table elevations for the site identify the groundwater gradient and indicate that the groundwater flow is to the west and to the south. The nearest drinking water source is a well which is located approximately a third of a mile (0.54 km) to the northwest of the facility. There are four test wells within the property boundary (see Figure 19.3.4-4) for the SHINE facility that were used for monitoring groundwater in support of a hydrological assessment of the site. One test well is located north, one south, one east, and one west of the SHINE facility building.
Although there are no defined liquid effluent release pathways and the groundwater is not Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-71Rev. 0expected to be contaminated due to operation of the SHINE facility, in accordance with NUREG-1301 recommendations, the test wells to the west and the south are sampled for the presence of radionuclide contaminants. Sampling is in accordance with the recommendations in Table 3.12-1 of NUREG-1301, i.e., quarterly with gamma isotopic and tritium analysis. The rationale for sampling the test wells to the west and south of the SHINE facility is provided in Table19.4.8-6. 19.4.8.3.2.2Direct Exposure Pathway (Thermoluminescent Dosimeters)TLDs provide indication of direct radiation from contained radiation sources within the SHINE facility building, from radiation sources contained within the waste storage and shipping facility, from radioactivity in the airborne effluent, and from deposition of airborne radioactivity onto the ground. A description of TLD locations and the rationale for TLD locations are provided in Table19.4.8-6. TLD locations are shown on Figure19.4.8-1. Table 3.12-1 of NUREG-1301 recommends 40 TLD locations, i.e., an inner ring and an outer ring of TLDs with one TLD in each ring at each of the 16 meteorological sectors and the balance of TLDs to be located at special interest areas. At least one TLD is to serve as a control, i.e., located a significant distance from the facility such that it represents a background dose. Considering the size of the SHINE facility and the low power level of the SHINE subcritical irradiation units (IUs), a minimum number of TLD locations (i.e., nine) are specified. These are located in order to provide annual direct dose information at on-site locations which are expected to have significant occupancy and at property line locations in the north, south, east, and west directions (to ensure all directions are monitored). These property line locations include the direction of the theoretical MEI and the direction of the nearest occupied structure. In addition, at least one location includes a paired TLD so that data quality can be determined.19.4.8.3.2.3Airborne Exposure Pathway (Airborne Sampling)Airborne effluent releases from the SHINE facility contribute to off-site doses. Effluent streams from the SHINE facility that have the potential to include radioactive iodine are treated (e.g.,using silver-impregnated zeolite and/or carbon filters) to remove the iodine. Some particulate activity (other than iodine) and tritium could also be released in airborne effluents; however, most of the off-site exposure due to airborne effluent releases is associated with noble gas and radioactive iodine releases. Environmental airborne sampling is performed to identify and quantify particulates and radioiodine in airborne effluents. Regulatory Position C.3.b of Regulatory Guide 4.1 indicates that airborne sampling should always be included in the environmental monitoring programs for nuclear power plants since the airborne effluent pathway exists at all sites. Since the SHINE facility includes airborne effluent releases and radioactivity in the airborne effluent can result in measurable off-site doses and since there is a potential for a portion of the dose to be attributable to radioactive iodine and possibly airborne particulate radioactivity releases, the radiological environmental monitoring program includes airborne sampling. The guidance provided in Table 3.12-1 of NUREG-1301 is used to establish locations for airborne sample acquisition, sampling frequency, and type of sample analysis. Continuous air sample locations are specified in accordance with guidance provided in Table 3.12-1 of NUREG-1301. The continuous air monitors (CAM) that are used to obtain continuous air samples include a radioiodine canister for weekly I-131 analysis and a particulate sampler which is analyzed for gross beta radioactivity and for quarterly isotopic analysis. Four CAM locations Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-72Rev. 1are near the facility property line in the north, south, east, and west direction sectors to ensure all directions are monitored. The north and east direction sectors (from the SHINE facility vent stack) have some of the highest calculated annual ground level deposition factor (D/Q) values. There is also a CAM located a sufficient distance from the SHINE facility to provide background information for airborne activity. Table 3.12-1 of NUREG-1301 suggests an additional CAM location in the vicinity of a community having the highest calculated annual average ground-level D/Q. This CAM requirement is combined with the CAM located at the site boundary in the north direction (refer to Table19.4.8-6). A description of air sample locations and the rationale for air sample locations are provided in Table19.4.8-6. CAM locations are shown on Figure19.4.8-1.19.4.8.3.2.4Ingestion Exposure PathwayNUREG-1301 suggests sampling of various biological media (biota monitoring) as a means to indirectly assess doses due to particulate and iodine ingestion. This type of monitoring may include sampling of soils, broad-leafed plants, fish, meat, or milk. Nuclear power plants have long monitored this pathway and have seen neither appreciable dose nor upward tending. Considering the size of the SHINE facility and the low power level of the SHINE irradiation units, in comparison to nuclear power plants, and that particulate and iodine radionuclides are not normally expected to be present in significant quantities within airborne effluent releases from the SHINE facility, biota monitoring is normally limited to monitoring of the milk pathway, as this pathway is most sensitive for detection of iodine releases. In the event that the results of environmental airborne samples, effluent monitor sample results, or milk sampling results indicate iodine or particulates in quantities large enough to result in a calculated dose greater than that predicted for normal releases (e.g., from GENII models used to show compliance with the 10 CFR 20.1101(d) dose constraint), then a more comprehensive sampling campaign is undertaken.Milk is one of the most important foods contributing to the radiation dose to people if milk animals are pastured in an area near a facility that releases radioactive material. Dairy production takes place approximately one-half mile (0.8 km) to the east of the SHINE facility and goat production takes place at approximately 0.69mi. (1.1km) northeast of the facility. Milk sampling will be performed following guidance (i.e., sampling frequency and type of sample analysis) provided in Table 3.12-1 of NUREG-1301. Cow and goat milk samples would be obtained from the dairy production site and the goat production site, respectively, on a semi-monthly basis (when animals are pastured) and on a monthly basis (at other times). An I-131 analysis and a gamma isotopic analysis would be performed on the samples. Since milk samples are considered a better indicator of radioiodine in the environment than vegetation, as long as milk samples are obtained, it is expected that vegetation sampling (e.g., broad leaf vegetables) would not be included in the exposure pathway sampling (in accordance with guidance provided in Table3.12-1 of NUREG-1301). Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-73Rev. 0[Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]Table 19.4.8-1 Summary of Major (a) Chemical Inventory and Quantitya) In excess of 1000 poundsChemicalApproximate Bounding Inventory, lb.Chemical Grouping[Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information] Nitric Acid 17,600Group 4 - Acids -Organic/Mineral Sulfuric Acid 8100Group 4 - Acids -Organic/Mineral Calcium Hydroxide4800Group 5 - Bases Caustic (NaOH)1500Group 5 - Basesn-dodecane1600Group 2 - Flammable LiquidsNitrogen20,000 - -Ordinary Portland Cement20,000 - - Uranyl Sulfate3100 - - Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-74Rev. 0[Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]Table 19.4.8-2 Chemical Storage Area CharacteristicsChemical GroupChemicalApproximate Bounding Inventory of Chemical Reagents, lbs.Storage AreaGroup 2 Flammable Liquids(Large Quantity)n-dodecane1600Stored in accordance with NFPA 30 Requirements.[Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information] [Proprietary Information]Group 4 Acids - Organic and Mineral (Large Quantity) Nitric Acid Sulfuric Acid Total 11,600370015,300Stored in mini-bulk plastic tanks Group 5 Bases (Large Quantity)Calcium Hydroxide
Caustic (NaOH) Total4800 1500 6300Stored in dedicated corrosive chemicals cabinet that is coated with corrosion resistant material. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-75Rev. 0Table 19.4.8-3 Potential Occupational HazardsElectricalBattery banks (type unknown) Cable runs Diesel generator Electrical equipment (various) Heaters High voltage
Motors Power tools Pumps Service outlets, fittings Switchgear Transformers Distribution lines\wiring underground wiring Hazardous MaterialsAsphyxiants (inert gas) Carcinogens (lead shielding) Decontamination materialsFluoridesHydrides LeadOxidizersPoisons (herbicides, insecticides)Thermal Boilers (modular) Bunsen burner/hot plates Electrical wiring Possible exhaust (forklifts) Welding surfaces Welding torch Internal Flooding Sources Domestic water Fire suppression piping/process waterLight water poolIonizing Radiation SourcesContamination Neutron beams Radioactive materialRadioactive sources Assay equipmentCriticality eventsSpontaneous CombustionCleaning/decontamination solventsDiesel fuel Grease Nitric acid Paint solvents Open FlameBunsen burnersWelding cutting torches Flammables Cleaning decontamination solvents Hydrogen gasesFlammable liquids Natural gas Paint/paint solvent Propane (forklift) PhysicalSharp edges or pointsPinch points Confined spaceTrippingCombustiblesPaper products (filters) Wood products (crate/packaging)Plastics (pallets)Chemical ReactionsConcentrationDisassociation
ExothermicIncompatible chemical mixingUncontrolled chemical reactionsPyrophoric Material UraniumExplosive Materials Dust (without housekeeping)Explosive gas (hydrogen)Hydrogen (batteries)
NitratesPeroxidesPropaneKinetic (Linear and Rotational)Acceleration/deceleration (lifted loads)Bearings (UREX)Belts (fan units) Carts/dolliesCentrifugal (UREX 3-4000 RPM)Drills (trade shops) FansFork liftsGrinders MotorsPower toolsRail cars (depends on movement option)SawsPotential (Pressure)Autoclaves
BoilersCoiled springs (overhead doors)Gas bottles Gas receivers Pressure vessels Pressurized airPotential (Height/Mass)Cranes/hoists Elevated doorsElevated work surfacesElevators LiftLoading dockMezzanines Floor pitsScaffolds and ladders Stacked material
Stairs Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-76Rev. 1Table 19.4.8-4 This table number not used Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-77Rev. 1Table 19.4.8-5 Annual Total Effective Dose Equivalent to the Public at Bounding Dose Receptors (b)Dose ReceptorAnnual TEDE Annual TEDEDose Constraint (a)MEI9.0 mrem(9.0 x 10 -2 mSv)10 mrem(1.0 x 10 -1 mSv)Nearest Full-Time Resident6.3 x 10-1 mrem(6.3 x 10 -3 mSv)a) Dose constraint based on 10 CFR 20.1101(d)b) Values do not include contributions from tritium Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-78Rev. 0Table 19.4.8-6 Environmental Monitoring Locations(Sheet 1 of 2)Monitoring TypeLocationRationaleGroundwater Sampling Locations Test Well SM-GW4A SamplingTest well located directly west of the SHINE facility.The groundwater gradient is to the west and the south and thus any groundwater contamination is likely to flow to the west and to the south. Test Well SM-GW2A SamplingTest well located directly south of the SHINE facility.The groundwater gradient is to the west and the south and thus any groundwater contamination is likely to flow to the west and to the south. TLD Locations(a) TLD #1Control TLD at Off-site Location Distance is sufficiently large such that it represents a background dose, i.e., there is no significant dose rate associated with SHINE facility activities or associated with airborne effluents.TLD #2Southeast Corner of Administration BuildingAdministrative Building is expected to be an on-site area with regular occupancy outside the SHINE facility. The southeast corner of the building is closest to the SHINE facility.TLD #3North Side of the support facility buildingThe support facility building is expected to be an on-site area with regular occupancy outside the SHINE facility. The north side of the support facility building is closest to the SHINE facility.TLD #4Operating Area Boundary Fence Directly East of the Waste Staging and Shipping
BuildingTLD is positioned to detect direct radiation from the Waste Staging and Shipping Building.TLD #5Security StationThe Security Station is expected to be normally occupied.TLD #6Property Line to the East of the SHINE facility Vent StackThis location is in the direction of dairy production and the horse pasture. Also the prevailing wind is from the west as indicated by the annual wind rose so this is the location of the MEI. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-79Rev. 0Table 19.4.8-6 Environmental Monitoring Locations(Sheet 2 of 2)a)At least one TLD location includes a paired TLD for data quality determinationMonitoring TypeLocationRationaleTLD #7Property Line to the West of the SHINE facilityThis location ensures all directions are monitored.TLD #8Property Line to the North of the SHINE facility Vent StackThis location is in the direction of Janesville.TLD #9Property Line to the South of the SHINE facility Vent StackThis location is in the direction of the nearest occupied structure. Air Sampler (CAM) Locations Air Sampler (CAM #1)Off-site LocationControl air sampler located a sufficient distance from the SHINE facility such that airborne samples are unaffected by airborne effluent releases from the facility. Air Sampler (CAM #2)Close to Property Line, Directly North of the SHINE facility Vent StackThis direction has high D/Q and is in the direction of Janesville. Since the community of Janesville is relatively close to the site boundary, this air sampler location is credited with satisfying two of the conditions for air sample location recommendations in Table 3.12-1 of NUREG-1301. Air Sampler (CAM #3)Close to Property Line, East of the SHINE facility Vent
StackThis direction has high D/Q and is in the direction of dairy production and the horse pasture. Air Sampler (CAM #4)Close to Property Line, West of the SHINE facility Vent
StackThis location ensures all directions are monitored. Air Sampler (CAM #5)Close to Property Line, South of the SHINE facility Vent
StackThis location is in the direction of the nearest occupied structure. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewHuman HealthSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-80Rev. 0Table 19.4.8-7 Administrative Dose LimitsType of Dose10 CFR Part 20 Limit (rem/year) SHINE Annual Administrative Limit (rem/year)Adult Radiological WorkerThe more limiting of: Total effective dose equivalent to whole body, or Sum of deep-dose equivalent and committed dose equivalent to any organ or tissue other than lens of eye 5500.55Eye dose equivalent to lens of eye 151.5Shallow-dose equivalent to skin of the whole body or any extremity 505Declared Pregnant WorkerDose to embryo/fetus during the entire pregnancy: taken as the sum of the deep-dose equivalent to the woman and the dose to the embryo/fetus from radionuclides in the embryo/fetus and the woman0.5 rem per gestation period0.5 rem per gestation periodIndividual Members of the PublicTotal effective dose equivalent0.10.1 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewWaste ManagementSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-81Rev. 0[Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]19.4.9WASTE MANAGEMENT19.4.9.1Sources and Types of Waste CreatedThe following subsections discuss hazardous, radioactive and mixed wastes associated with the SHINE facility. Nonradioactive wastes are discussed in Subsection 19.4.8.1. 19.4.9.1.1Sources of Hazardous, Radioactive and Mixed WastesThe sources of radioactive liquid, solid, and gaseous waste generated by the operation of the SHINE facility are found in Subsection 19.2.5.1.The only hazardous (or potentially hazardous) materials are [Proprietary Information] and the zeolite beds. Although small quantities of [Proprietary Information] will be used in the sulfate to nitrate conversion process, the [Proprietary Information] sludge is expected to pass TCLP, and is not considered hazardous waste. Waste streams with a hazardous component are mixed low-level waste such as the zeolite beds and are handled as described in Subsection 19.2.5.3.1.19.4.9.1.2Type and Quantity of Hazardous, Radioactive, and Mixed WastesThe type and quantity of radioactive and mixed wastes are provided in Table19.2.5-1. Discussion of nonradiological waste is provided in Subsection 19.4.8.1.19.4.9.2Description of Waste Management SystemsWaste systems designed to collect, store, and process the waste from the SHINE facility are discussed in Subsection 19.2.5.3.19.4.9.3Waste Disposal PlansWaste streams with a hazardous component are mixed low-level waste and are handled as described in Subsection 19.2.5.3.1.The radiological wastes listed in Table 19.2.5-1 are stored on-site for a period of time before they are shipped off-site. The frequency of shipment of each type of waste is provided in Table19.2.5-1. Enough storage capacity is provided on-site to accommodate the amount of waste between shipments to the off-site repositories. How solid and liquid radwaste is handled is discussed in Subsections 19.2.5.3.1 and 19.2.5.3.2. Radioactive waste gases are discussed in Subsections 19.4.8.2.2.1 and 19.4.8.2.4.1.The radioactive wastes will be transported to the destinations listed on Table 19.2.5-1.19.4.9.4Waste-Minimization PlanThe waste minimization plan to reduce the generation of waste from the SHINE facility is discussed in Subsection 19.2.5.6. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewWaste ManagementSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-82Rev. 019.4.9.5Environmental ImpactsSHINE facility wastes are managed as described in the previous subsections 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. Cumulative impacts are discussed in Subsection 19.4.13.8.2. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-83Rev. 019.4.10TRANSPORTATION19.4.10.1Nuclear Materials TransportedNuclear materials are transported to and from the SHINE facility located in Janesville, Wisconsin. The nuclear material transported to the SHINE facility consists of low enriched uranium (LEU) metal and tritium. The nuclear materials transported from the SHINE facility consist of generated medical isotopes Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133, and the radioactive wastes generated during the production of the medical isotopes. 19.4.10.1.1Transportation Mode and Projected DestinationsThe LEU metal is transported by truck to the SHINE facility from the Y-12 facility located in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. The Y-12 facility is approximately 650 mi. (1046.1 km) by road from Janesville, Wisconsin.The radioactive wastes are transported by truck to various disposal facilities. The highway distances from Janesville, Wisconsin, to the disposal facilities are as follows:*Approximately 1450 mi. (2333.6 km) to the EnergySolutions facility in Clive, Utah.*Approximately 1305 mi. (2100.2 km) to the Waste Control Specialists (WCS) facility in Andrews, Texas.*Approximately 660 mi. (1062.2 km) to the Diversified Scientific Services, Inc. (DSSI) facility in Kingston, Tennessee.The medical isotopes produced at the SHINE facility are transported by air to the various facilities for final processing and distribution to medical facilities. Transportation by truck is used as a back-up in cases where inclement weather does not permit air delivery. The highway distances from Janesville, Wisconsin, to these facilities are as follows:*Approximately 330 mi. (531.1 km) to the Covidien facility in Hazelwood, Missouri.*Approximately 1100 mi. (1770.3 km) to the Lantheus Medical Imaging facility in North Billerica, Massachusetts. *Approximately 975 mi. (1569.1 km) to the Nordion facility in Kanata, Ontario, Canada.19.4.10.1.2Treatment and PackagingThe radioactive wastes generated at the SHINE facility are treated and packaged as discussed in Subsection 19.2.5.3. Solid waste includes used components and equipment. This material is collected, stored in the facility to allow for radioactive decay, and then size-reduced and consolidated for shipment as low specific activity (LSA) material. Higher activity waste is processed and solidified prior to shipment. Liquid waste that cannot be reused is held for radioactive decay and then solidified before shipment.The medical isotopes are extracted from the LEU target solution at the end of each irradiation cycle. The target solution is removed from the TSV and transferred to a hot cell where isotopes are selectively extracted. Purified Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133 are tested by quality control before being packaged for shipment to the various processing facilities. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-84Rev. 0Prior to shipment, all radioactive material is packaged to meet the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) and NRC requirements for the transportation of radioactive materials.19.4.10.1.3Incident-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 medical isotopes and the radioactive wastes (transportation workers and handling workers).The calculation of the incident-free radiological doses is performed using RADCAT/RADTRAN and TRAGIS computer codes. The RADCAT/RADTRAN computer code is used to calculate the doses to the workers and the members of the public using the routes defined by TRAGIS and population data from the USCB. Most of the medical isotopes will be shipped by air, and the doses associated with this transport mode are smaller than the transportation via land routes due to shorter exposure time to the workers and the smaller number of exposed members of the public during air transportation. As described below, transportation scenarios based on land routes are used to conservatively estimate the radiological doses due to medical isotope transport.The TRAGIS computer code is used to determine the highway route distance traveled for a shipment from the SHINE facility to a destination facility. TRAGIS also provides the population density along the route, which is required for calculating the dose to members of the public. However, the version of the TRAGIS computer code used in this analysis (WebTRAGIS 5.0 Beta) did not have the capability to provide population density data. Therefore, the population density data is estimated using the following approach. The state-level mileage distributions for rural, suburban, and urban population density zones are conservatively estimated by superimposing the routes from TRAGIS on the population profile maps (year 2010) from the USCB. The maps that show the routes from TRAGIS and the associated population densities from the USCB are shown in Figures 19.4.10-1 through 19.4.10-4. The summary of the population densities along the transportation routes analyzed are provided in Tables 19.4.10-1 through 19.4.10-4. Using the TRAGIS output, the regions that contain segments of each transportation route are classified as rural, suburban, or urban population zones. In TRAGIS, a population density less than 139 people per square mile is considered a rural population. A population density between 139 and 3326 people per square mile is considered a suburban population. A population density greater than 3326 people per square mile is considered an urban population. The ranges provided on the maps obtained from the USCB do not match these ranges. Therefore, in cases where there are multiple population zones in a region of the transportation route, the population zone with the highest population density is identified and assumed for the region. The TRAGIS Beta release provides a population count of the total exposed population within 800m (243.8ft.) of the route. Adjustment factors are calculated based on the exposed population using the population count from TRAGIS and the exposed population based on the population densities from Figures 19.4.10-1 through 19.4.10-4. Tables 19.4.10-1 through 19.4.10-4 provide the exposed populations along the transportation routes and the associated adjustment factors. The analysis for determining the exposed populations along the transportation routes is performed in a conservative method to ensure the calculated dose values will bound the TRAGIS values once the computer code is updated to internally include the population density data. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-85Rev. 0The doses due to transportation of the radioactive wastes are calculated for shipments to the WCS facility in Andrews, Texas (bounded at 12 shipments/year) and the EnergySolutions facility in Clive, Utah (bounded at 22 shipments/year). The doses due to transportation of radioactive wastes to other disposal facilities, such as the DSSI facility in Kingston, Tennessee, are not calculated because they are bounded by the doses associated with transportation of radioactive wastes to the WCS and EnergySolutions facilities, primarily due to the smaller travel distance which reduces the exposure time to the workers and the members of the public. The doses due to the transportation of the medical isotopes are calculated using scenarios based on truck shipments to the Covidien facility in Hazelwood, Missouri and the Lantheus Medical Imaging facility in North Billerica, Massachusetts. The estimated total number of shipments per year is 468, or nine shipments per week. Most of these shipments will be by air, but to estimate the effect of a combination of shipments by air and ground transportation it is assumed that approximately one quarter of the shipments (two per week) are shipped by truck. This is more truck shipments than is expected, but the use of this larger number of truck shipments conservatively accounts for the dose due to air shipments. Most of the truck shipments would be sent to the closest facility, which is Covidien, because of the short half-life of the medical isotopes. However, shipment by truck of the longer lived isotopes to other facilities may occur. Therefore it is assumed that half of the truck shipments (52 shipments/year) are to Covidien and an equal number of shipments (52 shipments/year) are to the Lantheus Medical Imaging facility. The doses due to the transportation of medical isotopes to other processing facilities, such as the Nordion facility in Kanata, Ontario, Canada, are not calculated because they are bounded by the doses associated with the transportation of medical isotopes to the Lantheus facility, primarily because the transportation route is longer and its path is through areas with a higher population density. The use of these scenarios will bound the shipment by air because the exposed population is smaller and the exposure time for the crew is shorter for each shipment. The dose due to package handling will increase for air shipments, so a conservatively large dose is calculated for the handlers in order to conservatively estimate the dose component for air shipments.The doses associated with the transportation of the LEU metal and tritium gas are much smaller than the doses associated with the transportation of other radioactive materials and are not calculated. The doses associated with the transportation of the LEU metal are much smaller because of the infrequent shipments (less than one per year) and the low activity in each shipment. The doses associated with the transportation of the tritium gas are negligible because, as a beta emitter, the dose rate outside a container of tritium is practically zero, independent of the quantity of tritium.The annual incident-free radiological doses due to transportation of radioactive materials from the SHINE facility are summarized in Table 19.4.10-5. These doses are calculated assuming the dose rates due to the shipping containers are equal to typical dose rates based on reported dose rates from historical shipments of medical isotopes and low-level waste. The dose to the workers due to the transportation of radioactive material from the SHINE facility is 9.63 person-rem/year. The dose to the members of the public due to the transportation of radioactive material from the SHINE facility is 0.350 person-rem/year. As indicated in Subsection 19.4.3.7, the population in the region around the facility is 160,331, and the background dose rate identified in Subsection 19.4.3.8.2 is 620 mrem/yr (6.2 mSv/yr). Therefore, the population dose in the vicinity of the SHINE facility due to background radiation is approximately 1E+05 person-rem/year. Compared to the background dose in the vicinity of the SHINE facility, the effect of incident-free transportation is SMALL. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-86Rev. 019.4.10.2Non-Nuclear Materials TransportedGeneral office supplies and industrial supplies supporting the maintenance and day-to-day operations of the SHINE facility are transported to the site. Office waste is generated at the site and transported from the site by City of Janesville without being treated or packaged. These activities are typical for a general commercial facility within City of Janesville. The associated incident-free transportation activities do not have an adverse impact on the environment, workers, or the members of the public. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-87Rev. 0Table 19.4.10-1 Population Density, Exposed Population, and the Adjustment Factor for Transportation Route to Andrews, Texas StateZoneDistance Traveled (mi.)Distance Traveled (km)PopulationDensity(persons/km 2)Population Along Route SegmentWIRural0.00.06.60E+010.00E+00Suburban3.2 5.11.67E+031.36E+04Urban12.019.33.86E+031.19E+05ILRural94.3151.76.60E+011.60E+04Suburban127.0204.31.67E+035.46E+05Urban86.8139.73.86E+038.63E+05MORural39.263.16.60E+016.66E+03Suburban170.8274.81.67E+037.34E+05Urban80.5129.53.86E+038.00E+05OKRural184.6297.06.60E+013.14E+04Suburban126.8204.01.67E+035.45E+05Urban32.852.83.86E+033.26E+05TXRural238.6383.96.60E+014.05E+04Suburban97.6157.01.67E+034.20E+05Urban10.817.43.86E+031.07E+05Total1305.02099.64.57E+06Population from TRAGIS128,667Adjustment Factor2.82E-02 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-88Rev. 0Table 19.4.10-2 Population Density, Exposed Population, and the Adjustment Factor for Transportation Route to Clive, UtahStateZoneDistance Traveled (mi.)Distance Traveled (km)PopulationDensity(persons/km 2)Population Along Route SegmentWIRural0.00.06.60E+010.00E+00Suburban3.25.11.67E+031.36E+04Urban12.019.33.86E+031.19E+05ILRural36.158.16.60E+016.14E+03Suburban51.783.21.67E+032.22E+05Urban38.361.63.86E+033.80E+05IARural142.8229.86.60E+012.43E+04Suburban44.671.81.67E+031.92E+05Urban117.5189.13.86E+031.17E+06NERural249.6401.66.60E+014.24E+04Suburban165.7266.61.67E+037.12E+05Urban27.844.73.86E+032.76E+05WYRural259.1416.96.60E+014.40E+04Suburban52.183.81.67E+032.24E+05Urban90.4145.53.86E+038.99E+05UTRural59.094.96.60E+011.00E+04Suburban12.119.51.67E+035.21E+04Urban87.9141.43.86E+038.73E+05 Total1449.92332.95.26E+06Population from TRAGIS68,655Adjustment Factor1.31E-02 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-89Rev. 0Table 19.4.10-3 Population Density, Exposed Population, and the Adjustment Factor for Transportation Route to Hazelwood, MissouriStateZoneDistance Traveled (mi.)Distance Traveled (km)Population Density(persons/km 2)Population Along Route SegmentWIRural0.00.06.60E+010.00E+00Suburban3.2 5.11.67E+031.36E+04Urban12.019.33.86E+031.19E+05ILRural94.3151.76.60E+011.60E+04Suburban122.0196.31.67E+035.25E+05Urban85.9138.23.86E+038.54E+05MORural0.00.06.60E+010.00E+00Suburban0.0 0.01.67E+030.00E+00Urban11.518.53.86E+031.14E+05Total328.9529.1 1.64E+06Population from TRAGIS24,272Adjustment Factor 1.48E-02 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-90Rev. 0Table 19.4.10-4 Population Density, Exposed Population, and the Adjustment Factor for Transportation Route to North Billerica, MassachusettsStateZoneDistance Traveled (mi.)Distance Traveled (km)Population Density(persons/km 2)Population Along Route SegmentWIRural0.00.06.60E+010.00E+00Suburban3.25.11.67E+031.36E+04Urban12.019.33.86E+031.19E+05ILRural0.00.06.60E+010.00E+00Suburban30.549.11.67E+031.31E+05Urban87.8141.33.86E+038.73E+05INRural13.321.46.60E+012.26E+03Suburban62.8101.01.67E+032.70E+05Urban70.3113.13.86E+036.99E+05OHRural20.432.86.60E+013.46E+03Suburban139.2224.01.67E+035.99E+05Urban88.3142.13.86E+038.78E+05PARural0.00.06.60E+010.00E+00Suburban13.321.41.67E+035.72E+04Urban33.453.73.86E+033.32E+05NYRural13.321.46.60E+012.26E+03Suburban245.0394.21.67E+031.05E+06Urban119.4192.13.86E+031.19E+06MARural8.914.36.60E+011.51E+03Suburban63.8102.71.67E+032.74E+05Urban76.1122.43.86E+037.56E+05 Total1101.01771.47.25E+06Population from TRAGIS215,374Adjustment Factor2.97E-02 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTransportationSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-91Rev. 0Table 19.4.10-5 Incident-Free Radiological Dose Summary (Person-Rem/Year)Destination FacilityReceptorWCSEnergySolutionsCovidienLantheusTotalWorkers(Transportation)1.44E-012.93E-016.92E-012.31E+003.44E+00Workers(Handling)1.51E-012.77E-012.88E+002.88E+006.19E+00Members of the Public1.48E-021.22E-023.61E-022.87E-013.5E-01 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-92Rev. 019.4.11POSTULATED ACCIDENTSThis subsection identifies the postulated initiating events (IEs) and credible accidents for the SHINE facility that were selected to drive the design of the facility; designated herein as design basis accidents (DBAs). This subsection also describes the maximum hypothetical accident (MHA).The major hazards associated with the SHINE facility are: *Fissile material as either feed or in target solution. *Irradiated fissile solution and corresponding fission products present not only within the TSV but throughout the SHINE facility.*Neutrons produced by the accelerator.
- Radioactive waste.*Production of hydrogen by radiolytic decomposition of irradiated fissile solution.*Failure of tanks and/or vessels with significant quantities of hazardous chemicals.*Exothermic reactions between chemicals leading to damage to tanks or vessels containing significant quantities of hazardous materials.*Mishap during handling of chemicals leads to breach or spill of chemicals from tanks or vessels.*Mishap during handling of chemicals leads to spill of chemicals outside tanks or vessels within the facility.*Mishap during delivery of hazardous chemicals leads to spill of chemicals outside the facility.19.4.11.1Methodology for Identification of Design Basis AccidentsThe methodology for identifying DBAs is described in Chapter 13.The SHINE facility has been divided into two major areas: the Irradiation Facility (IF) and the Radioisotope Production Facility (RPF). The IF consists of the Irradiation Units (IUs) and supporting structures, systems, and components dedicated to the irradiation of target solution.
This includes the primary cooling systems and the tritium purification system. The RPF includes the isotope extraction and purification, target solution preparation and clean-up, radioactive waste handling and chemical storage systems and areas.According to the Final ISG Augmenting NUREG-1537, the following accident categories, as modified for the SHINE facility, are to be addressed for the IF and RPF:*MHA.
- Insertion of excess reactivity.
- Reduction in cooling.*Mishandling or malfunction of target solution (including inadvertent criticality in the RPF).*Loss of normal electrical power.
- External events.*Mishandling or malfunction of equipment.*Large undamped power oscillations (fuel temperature/void-reactivity feedback).
- Detonation and deflagration.*Unintended exothermic chemical reactions other than detonation.*Facility system interaction events.
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-93Rev. 0*Hazardous chemical releases.*Facility fire (RPF).*Unique facility IEs/DBAs.All IEs and scenarios applicable to the IF are evaluated in Section 13a2. Those applicable to the RPF areas are covered in Section 13b.Representative accident scenarios with bounding consequences for each of the above IEs/scenario categories are to be evaluated quantitatively in Sections 13a2.2, 13b.2, and 13b.3, per the guidance in NUREG-1537 and the Final ISG Augmenting NURE G-1537. The most bounding DBAs with respect to consequences for both the IF and the RPF are analytically evaluated in Subsection19.4.11.3 below. 19.4.11.2Identified Initiating Events and Design Basis AccidentsThis subsection gives a quantitative discussion of the consequences of the MHA. This subsection also briefly discusses IEs and DBAs as well as some of the controls that are being designed to prevent or mitigate the potential consequences to levels that are acceptable (i.e.,within regulatory criteria). These IEs and DBAs are designed to bound the potential accident scenarios in each of the accident categories of interest. Potential radiological consequences of DBAs are discussed qualitatively as a function of the source terms released during the postulated scenarios, and controls that mitigate the consequences. The consequences of the DBAs are bounded by the quantitative analysis performed for the MHA.19.4.11.2.1Maximum Hypothetical AccidentThe MHA is defined to be an event that results in radiological consequences that exceed those of any accident considered to be credible. The MHA therefore bounds the radiological consequences of postulated DBA scenarios at the SHINE facility. The MHA need not be a credible scenario but a failure assumed to establish an outer limit consequence.For the SHINE facility, the MHA is based on events unique to the facility that hypothetically could result in a release of radioactive materials. The SHINE facility is subdivided into two major process areas: the IF and the RPF. Processes in both areas of the facility are generally of low energy (i.e., subcritical, low heat generation). In addition, the facility is being designed to withstand credible external events. Therefore, an internal accident releasing the largest possible quantity of radioactive material is considered to be the initiating event that would result in the maximum bounding radiological consequence. The IF and RPF are designed to function as two independent areas within the facility. Though the IF and RPF have processes and systems that interact with each other, they are physically separated by concrete walls. Design features such as irradiation cell shielding, redundant isolation valves, ventilation dampers, and penetration seals in both areas, ensure that an accident in one area is highly unlikely to affect the other area. In addition, both areas are separated to ensure that a radiological release in one area does not have a significant effect on the other area. Because of this physical separation, it is necessary to analyze both the IF and RPF to determine the MHA. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-94Rev. 0The MHA is used to demonstrate that the maximum consequences of an accident at the SHINE facility are within the acceptable regulatory limits of 10 CFR 20.1301. The MHA assumes a failure that results in a radioactive release with radiological consequences that bound all credible DBAs.Because the SHINE facility is being designed to withstand external events such as tornadoes, seismic events, and man-made external events, scenarios that involve multiple irradiation units are not considered to be credible, and are not analyzed further. In addition, several internal events were eliminated as possible MHAs due to the design of facility. For example, a pipe break containing fissile inventory being transferred from a TSV dump tank to a supercell in the RPF was considered. Because all production piping is located in covered, concrete trenches that are designed to contain any rupture of inventory and drain to sumps that are geometrically designed to prevent an inadvertent criticality, this event was eliminated as a possible MHA. There is no credible internal event that will result in releases from multiple TSVs.A potential MHA considered was a rupture or leakage of the TSV or TSV dump tank resulting in a complete release of the target solution and fission product inventory into one IU cell. This potential MHA assumes zero hours of decay time. This event occurs within the confinement of the IU cell and is assumed to release the entire inventory of one TSV into the IU cell. The calculated radionuclide inventory released from the TSV to the IU cell represents the bounding source term for any other postulated accident in the IF. Any potential loss of TSV inventory within the IU is mitigated by several controls, namely: confinement provided by the IU cell and the RCA ventilation system zone (RVZ)1 (including the presence of bubble-tight dampers to isolate the cells upon detection of above-threshold radiation levels), radiation monitoring (to be interlocked with bubble-tight dampers), shielded pipe penetrations, and TSV off-gas system. Another potential MHA considered was a release of the inventory stored in the noble gas removal system (NGRS) storage tanks. This event occurs within the confinement of the noble gas storage tank room, located in the RPF. The calculated radionuclide inventory released from the NGRS storage tanks represents the bounding source term for any other postulated accident in the RPF.Controls to mitigate the consequences of the MHA in the RPF include: the NGRS room, radiation monitors, RCA ventilation system Zone 1 (RVZ1) (including the presence of bubble-tight dampers to isolate the cells upon detection of above-threshold radiation levels), radiation monitoring (to be interlocked with bubble-tight dampers), and RCA ventilation system Zone 2 (RVZ2).The evaluation of the inventory for the considered MHAs is based on a set of limiting initial conditions that were designed to maximize the potential source terms and to bound credible scenarios. This includes assumptions regarding the total time for irradiation, failure to decay target solution prior to processing, process faults that result in additional target solution cycles, and failure of fission product removal. The amount of radioactive material released to the environment (i.e., source term) was calculated for both MHAs based on the five factor formula:ST = MAR x DR x ARF x RF x LPF. (Equation 19.4.11-1) Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-95Rev. 0Where:ST refers to the source termMAR refers to the inventory of material-at-risk from the postulated scenarios. DR represents the fraction of the inventory impacted by the scenario (in the evaluated cases assumed to be 1.0).ARF/RF refer to the airborne release fractions and respirable fractions for the radionuclides assumed to be present in the inventory (based on published ARF/RF in NUREG-6410).LPF refers to the leak-path factor or fraction of the material that is airborne that is assumed to be released to the environment.For the postulated scenarios, the entire inventory of the TSV and the NGRS holding tanks are released to the IU cell and the noble gas storage cell, respectively. ARF x RF for solution spills for particulates from NUREG-6410 were selected. For halogens an ARF x RF of 0.25 was assumed, while an ARF x RF of 1.0 was assumed for noble gases. In-plant transport of the radionuclides was based on the assumptions concerning the functioning of available plant systems. Mitigated consequences are based on the assumption that the radioactive material will be released into the IU cell and that no more than 1 percent of the airborne radioactive material will be released by the IF before the cell is isolated by the RVZ1 isolation bubble-tight dampers. Any radioactive material that is released from the noble gas storage room before it is isolated is assumed to be filtered by the HEPA and charcoal filters. For dose calculations, all releases are assumed to be at ground level. These calculations are based on the 50 th percentile /Q. Doses are calculated using ICRP-30 dose conversion factors, and receptor locations are the closest point on the site boundary and the nearest permanent resident.The total effective dose equivalent (TEDE) and the thyroid doses for the postulated scenarios are:*Rupture or leakage of the TSV or TSV dump tank scenario: TEDE of 1.65E-02 rem at the site boundary and 2.30E-03 rem for the nearest residence.*Release of the inventory stored in the NGRS storage tanks scenario: TEDE of 7.98E-02 rem at the site boundary and 1.12E-02 rem for the nearest residence.Based on the calculated doses, the MHA for the SHINE facility is the release of the inventory stored in the NGRS storage tanks. The dose for the MHA is less than the dose criteria in 10 CFR 20.1301. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-96Rev. 019.4.11.2.2Insertion of Excess ReactivityExcess reactivity insertion in the subcritical assembly system (SCAS) is identified as a potential DBA that needs to be evaluated. This DBA covers events that can lead to an insertion of positive reactivity in the SCAS. Examples include:*Pressurization of target solution fluid.
- Excessive cool down.
- Target solution injection.*Geometry changes.*Reactivity insertion due to moderator lumping effects.
- Inadvertent introduction of other materials into the target solution.*Loss of water from the target solution during irradiation.This event is not applicable to the RPF.The SCAS has a TSV reactivity protection system (TRPS). Anticipated protective signals of the TRPS for TSV shutdown and dump valve actuation include a combination of high neutron flux levels, high flux rate, high TSV fill rate, high TSV level, or indication of a loss of cooling to the TSV. Shutdown of the TSV will limit the amount of power and pressure increase allowed in the TSV preventing PSB breach. Any potential releases from such events are further mitigated by the off-gas system, the facility ventilation system, and the passive nature of the confinement provided by the IU cells and facility itself. As such, release of the entire contents of one TSV bounds any radiological release from such a reactivity insertion event and is therefore bounded
by the MHA.19.4.11.2.3Reduction or Loss of CoolingThe reduction or loss of cooling event is identified as a potential DBA. This scenario, however, is bounded and covered by the MHA event, since there is little or no consequence from loss of cooling in the IF or RPF.The design of the IF, including the intrinsic properties of the irradiated solution, are such that the reduction or loss of cooling (even without engineering features) will lead to a reduction in the neutron multiplication factor (keff), thus leading to a reduction in the amount of energy (or power) generated under this condition. Furthermore, just like for insertion of excess reactivity, the SCAS has a TRPS trip that serves as a defense-in-depth control to mitigate any potential consequences from this postulated scenario. Indication of a loss of cooling to the TSV results in TRPS shutdown of the TSV. This limits the amount of power and pressure increase allowed in the TSV, preventing PSB breach. Any potential re leases from such events are further mitigated by the off-gas system, the facility ventilation system, and the passive nature of the confinement provided by the IU cells and facility itself. Finally, given the low decay heat production, the light water pool serves as a passive heat sink that prevents the temperature of the target solution from rising to any significant degree. As such, release of the entire contents of one TSV bounds any radiological release from a reduction or loss of cooling event and is therefore bounded by the MHA. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-97Rev. 019.4.11.2.4Mishandling or Malfunction of Target SolutionThe following events are identified as potential DBAs representing the mishandling or malfunction of target solution:*Loss of PSB in the IF.-Covers target solution spills and leaks (bounded by release of entire TSV contents).-Vessel/line failures in the RPF (to be covered under mishandling or malfunction of equipment).*Inadvertent criticality in the IF.-Covers IEs associated with failure to control pH in the target solution.-Failure to control target solution temperature and pressure is covered under the reactivity insertion DBA.*Inadvertent criticality in the RPF.-Covers IEs associated with failure to control pH or temperature in the target solution.Loss of PSB and an inadvertent nuclear criticality are prevented and/or mitigated by the design of robust and criticality safe geometry tanks, piping, and valves, along with the design of spill pits or berms around tanks containing significant quantities of fissile material. The TSV where irradiation operations take place is designed with features and safety controls such as dump valves to limit the duration of an inadvertent criticality. Furthermore, administrative controls on the concentration of fissile material in the TSV or tanks are implemented to prevent the occurrence of an inadvertent criticality within the facility. Tanks containing significant quantities of fissile material are seismically qualified to survive site-specific design basis seismic events. Any potential releases of radioac tive material, from either a loss of PSB or an inadvertent criticality, are mitigated by the off-gas system, the facility ventilation system, and the passive nature of the confinement provided by the IU cells and the facility itself. An inadvertent criticality is likely to generate source terms and doses that are equivalent to an insertion of excess reactivity. This is because these events would be limited to a single or small number of pulses. Thus, this event would be bounded by the MHA. 19.4.11.2.5Loss of Normal Electrical Power The loss of normal electrical power affects both the IF and RPF, and has been identified as a potential DBA. A loss of normal electric power causes a shutdown of the TSV and thus reduces significantly the power and heat that could be generated. After shutdown of the TSV, decay heat levels are low enough to allow cooling to ambient, thus a loss of electric power does not cause a breach of the PSB. The loss of power also could lead to an initiating event that could result in various potential accident conditions, including the loss of ventilation and off-gas system, which in turn could lead to a deflagration event from the build-up of hydrogen on the top of the TSV cavity or in the off-gas Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-98Rev. 0system itself. This scenario is covered separately under detonation or deflagration due to the generation of hydrogen. 19.4.11.2.6External Events The following potential external events have been identified as DBAs for the SHINE facility: *Seismic event affecting the IF and RPF.*Tornado or high-winds affecting the IF and RPF.*Small aircraft crash into the IF or RPF.The facility structure, including the SCAS and critical process equipment (including tanks containing potentially significant quantities of fissile material) in the IF and RPF, are designed to survive the above external events. 19.4.11.2.7Mishandling or Malfunction of Equipment The potential DBAs that could be initiated by the mishandling or malfunction of equipment include:*Failure of the off-gas system leading to release of noble gases and halogens.*Loss of pressure boundary in PSB (covered under mishandling target solution).*Vessel/line failures in the RPF (e.g., Mo-99 extraction feed or raffinate tanks).The SHINE facility is designed with multiple engineering features and controls to prevent or mitigate the potential consequences from such mishandling or malfunction of equipment. Critical equipment are designed robustly with significant redundancy or fail safe features to prevent or mitigate the consequences from these events.The consequences from these scenarios are bounded by the release of the entire contents of one TSV and are therefore bounded by the MHA. For this DBA, the worst case condition is the loss of the PSB or a spill of radioactive material from tanks in the RPF.19.4.11.2.8Large Undamped Power OscillationsLarge undamped power oscillations are identified as potential DBAs to be considered. The TSV is designed for subcritical operation, low power density, and large negative temperature and void coefficients, resulting in a stable TSV with only self-limiting power oscillations. The low power density and subcritical operating conditions of the TSV will prevent the occurrence of any large undamped power oscillation. The source term and potential consequences from this type of event would be, however, bounded by the excess reactivity insertion scenario (see Subsection 19.4.11.2.2). 19.4.11.2.9Detonation and Deflagration Events (Due to Hydrogen Generation) The potential for detonation and deflagration due to hydrogen accumulation in the PSB (including in the cavity of the TSV or off-gas system) is identified as a potential DBA. Hydrogen accumulation in the RPF is not expected to exceed the lower explosive limit (LEL) or lower flammability limit (LFL). Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.4-99Rev. 0During operation and post TSV shutdown, the TSV solution generates hydrogen and oxygen. Analysis has shown that buildup of gas to a level that could cause a detonation or deflagration is possible. The off-gas system is engineered to prevent such an event. However, the failure of the off-gas system, combined with a buildup of hydrogen and oxygen in the TSV and an ignition
source, could lead to a breach of the PSB. Many design fe atures and controls are designed to prevent or mitigate such events, including the design of a reliable and robust off-gas system that is interlocked upon failure of the TSV off-gas blower to immediately shutdown the irradiation operations and thus limit the amount of hydrogen being produced. The off-gas system is also designed to structurally survive a wide range of deflagration events (pressure pulses). Upon a deflagration, any releases of radioactive material are confined within the IU cell and are further mitigated by the confinement capability of the IU cell and by the facility ventilation systems. The consequences from this DBA are bounded by the release of the entire contents of one TSV and are therefore bounded by the MHA. 19.4.11.2.10Unintended Exothermic Chemical Reactions Other than DetonationA few potential exothermic chemical reactions were identified that, under very unlikely or incredible conditions, might challenge the PSB integrity. Exothermic reactions are more likely to result in fires. Detonations, deflagrations, or fires due to exothermic reactions other than hydrogen-related in the IF are not considered to be possible given the design of the process. There is the possibility under uncontrolled conditions that during solvent extraction a runaway tributyl phosphate (TBP)/nitric acid reaction could occur due to a number of unexpected events, such as the inadvertent heating of a tank. The design of the solvent extraction process, including the control of the fissile material concentration (protected through administrative controls), the minimization of dissolved solids, and the concentration of nitric acid is such that the maximum temperature achieved during this operation is significantly lower than that of the minimum initiation temperature for a runaway reaction (on the order of 130 oC [266 oF]). The most likely and bounding scenarios resulting from potential exothermic reactions are fires which could impact the RPF. RPF fires, bounding all exothermic chemical reactions that may take place in the area, are covered under facility fire events (see Subsection 19.4.11.2.12). 19.4.11.2.11Facility System Interaction EventsFacility system interaction events have been identified as DBAs that could result in radiological releases from various parts of the facility or multiple areas. The IF and the RPF include the following systems: target solution preparation, TSV, TSV dump tank, TSV off-gas system, molybdenum extraction, and UREX processing systems. System interactions have the potential to cause damage that may lead to the release of these radioactive materials. NUREG/CR-3922 defines a system interaction as "-an event in one system, train, component or structure propagates through unanticipated or inconspicuous dependencies to cause an action or inaction in other systems, trains, components or structures." Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-100Rev. 0There are three categories of system interactions between systems located within the IF and the RPF that are considered in this analysis. The three types of interactions include: 1) functional interactions, 2) spatial interactions, and 3) human-intervention interactions.At the SHINE facility, there are a number of shared system interactions that need to be considered in the context of functional system interactions. The shared systems that are considered:*Electrical power including the uninterruptable power supply system.
- Radioisotope process facility cooling system (RPCS).
- The fire protection system.*RCA ventilation.*NGRS.
- PVVS.Scenarios that are considered for system interactions include:*Loss of off-site power (LOOP) scenarios (see Subsection 19.4.11.2.5).
- Loss of RPCS scenarios (see Subsection 19.4.11.2.3).
- Loss of RVZ1, RVZ2, and RCA ventilation system Zone 3 (RVZ3) ventilation scenarios.*Noble gas release scenarios (see Subsection 19.4.11.2.1).*Fire scenarios (see Subsections 19.4.11.2.9, 19.4.11.2.10, and 19.4.11.2.12).
- External events including seismic events, high wind and tornadoes and aircraft impact events (see Subsection 19.4.11.2.6).*Chemical reaction scenarios (see Subsection 19.4.11.2.10).
- Internal flooding scenarios.
- Pipe break scenarios (see Subsection 19.4.11.2.4).For each of the scenarios listed above, except for loss of ventilation and internal flooding, the consequences are discussed in the referenced subsections. The MHA bounds all of these scenarios as discussed in each subsection. Loss of ventilation does not initiate an accident that could result in a release of radioactive material or hazardous chemicals nor are the ventilation systems used to mitigate the consequences of an accident. Upon release of radioactive materials within the facility, the ventilation system is shut down and bubble-tight dampers are closed to isolate the impacted areas of the facility. Internal flooding as a result of the rupture of water lines in the facility or the inadvertent actuation of a fire suppression system would not result in the release of radioactive material to the environment. All water is collected and sampled for radioactive contamination. If radioactive material contamination is found, the water is treated as radioactive waste.19.4.11.2.12Facility Fire (RPF)
A fire in the RPF is identified as a possible DBA. Events that could lead to a fire in the RPF may be precipitated by failure of electrical or mechanical equipment or human error involving a loss of control of combustible materials or ignition sources or both. Facility fires are not expected to directly release significant amounts of radioactive material; however fires can lead to the release of radioactive material where fire damage to process equipment results in a loss of confinement through damage to system integrity, spurious equipment operation, or loss of equipment control. Fire damage to equipment typically results from direct exposure of equipment to the fire or exposure of equipment to elevated temperatures caused by the fire. Widespread fire damage to Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-101Rev. 1process equipment that could lead to a radiological release is most likely inside a confined enclosure such as a hot cell, glove box, or tank enclosure. Small spaces such as these provide the confinement of the products of combustion, which can lead to development of a damaging fire environment. Development of damaging fire environment in the general area of the RPF is much less likely due to the large volume of the area. Direct fire damage to important equipment which could lead to a significant radiological release is not likely because redundant control or power circuits are separated by distance to prevent such damage from a single fire, accordingly the DBA is considered to be a fire in an enclosure that may lead to the development of a damaging fire environment. The design basis fire accident is postulated to occur in an RPF supercell where it contributes to the release of the contents of the Mo extraction feed tank. Fire damage to the tank, associated valves, or process piping could lead to a release of Mo-99 eluate into the supercell enclosure. Release of this material into the enclosure could lead to an airborne release of radiological material into the cell enclosure and ultimately migration into the RCA ventilation system. The potential release would be mitigated by closure of the bubble-tight dampers in the RCA ventilation system in response to a smoke alarm signal or detection of the radioactive material by the radiation monitoring system. Isolation of the ventilation system would prevent significant release to the environment. Radiological release of this DBA is bounded by the MHA and contained by the facility and RCA ventilation system. Postulated fire strengths are insufficient to breach the credited facility barrier walls or components. The effects of this DBA and any associated radiological release will be contained by the facility construction and RCA ventilation system components.19.4.11.2.13Hazardous Chemical Releases The consequence of chemical releases are evaluated using dispersion models and/or computer codes that conform to NUREG/CR-6410 methodologies.Typical computer codes to model chemical releases and determine the chemical dose (orconcentration) are the ALOHA and EPICode; both computer codes are widely used for supporting accident analysis and emergency response evaluations. Both codes have been used and accepted by government agencies such as DOE. Verification and validation for both codes have been performed for modeling chemical hazards for the SHINE facility. Because ALOHA can readily model only about half of these chemicals, the EPICode was selected to perform chemical dose calculations in this subsection. Both computer codes give comparable results for the hazardous chemicals that they have in common and both codes implement release and dispersion models that are consist ent with the guidance in NUREG/CR-6410.In running EPICode, no credit is taken for depletion or plate out of chemicals within the facility or during transport to the site boundary or nearest population location. All dispersion calculations performed are done assuming neutral meteorological conditions (i.e., Stability Class D) and 4.1m/s wind speed. These represent 50 th percentile meteorological conditions at the site. Ambient temperature was assumed to be 75 oF, no deposition of airborne material was assumed, and a receptor height of 1.5 m was used to simulate the height of an individual. Concentrations are plume centerline values. Releases were conservatively modeled as ground non-buoyant. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-102Rev. 1Chemical dose or concentrations were determined for the 11 chemicals at the site boundary and the nearest residence (249 and 788m, respectively). Table 19.4.11-1 summarizes the results of the source term and concentration calculations for the 11 chemicals. The material-at-risk (MAR) represents the inventory of hazardous material that is at risk from the postulated scenario. The MAR for most of the chemicals represents the amount of material in storage. In some cases, the MAR represents the total facility inventory. For other chemicals, the quantity assumed to be released is reduced to account for separate storage locations, or to account for normal industrial chemicals not interacting with licensed materials or affecting the safety of licensed materials. The 11 chemicals were selected for evaluation based on the combination of anticipated bounding facility inventory amounts and high toxicity characteristics (lowest PAC values). The acceptance limits were those identified in NUREG/CR-6410 and correspond to Protective Action Criteria (PAC) values corresponding to Acute Exposure Guideline Levels (AEGLs), Emergency Response Planning Guideline (ERPG), or Temporary Emergency Exposure Limits (TEEL) values for such chemicals.The results from the analysis indicate that the chemical dose or concentration for the MEI and the nearest residence is below the PAC-1, PAC-2, and PAC-3 levels (equivalent to ERPG-1, ERPG-2, and ERPG-3). These concentrations are conservatively calculated, and are based on the assumption that the entire inventory of liquid hazardous chemicals evaporates from a 100ft 2 pool, over a duration calculated by EPICode. Solid powder material release durations were assumed to be onehour to correspond with ERPG exposure times. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewPostulated AccidentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-103Rev. 1[Proprietary Information - Withhold from public disclosure under 10 CFR 2.390(a)(4)]Table 19.4.11-1 SHINE Hazardous (Toxic) Chemical Source Terms and ConcentrationsHazardous Chemical/Release Mechanism MAR(lb)ARF/RFSource Term*(lb)PAC-1PAC-2PAC-3 SiteBoundaryConcentration(249 m)Nearest Residence Concentration (788 m)Nitric Acid, 12M, associated with licensed materials (Evaporating Liquid)7211.07210.53 ppm24 ppm92 ppm0.090 ppm0.012 ppmSulfuric Acid (Evaporating Liquid)7,7701.07,7700.20 mg/m 38.7mg/m3160 mg/m34.7E-07 mg/m 36.3E-08 mg/m 3Calcium Hydroxide (Dispersed Solid)3,1820.0013.182 15 mg/m3240 mg/m31,500 mg/m 30.16 mg/m 30.020 mg/m 3Caustic Soda (Dispersed Solid)1,4880.0011.4880.5 mg/m35 mg/m350 mg/m30.073 mg/m 30.010 mg/m 3[Proprietary Information] (Dispersed Solid)4,1040.0014.104[ProprietaryInformation][Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information]0.20 mg/m 30.026 mg/m 3Ammonium Hydroxide(Dispersed Solid)590.0010.05961 ppm330 ppm2300 ppm2.0E-03 ppm2.6E-04 ppm[Proprietary Information] (Dispersed Solid)6060.0010.606[ProprietaryInformation][Proprietary Information][Proprietary Information]0.03 mg/m 33.9E-03 mg/m 3Dodecane associated with licensed materials (Evaporating Liquid)3041.03040.0028 ppm0.031 ppm7.9 ppm4.4E-04 ppm5.9E-05 ppmPotassium Permanganate (Dispersed Solid)660.0010.0668.6 mg/m314 mg/m378 mg/m33.3E-03 mg/m 34.2E-04 mg/m 3Tributyl Phosphate (Dispersed Solid)3330.0010.3330.6 mg/m33.5 mg/m3125 mg/m31.5E-03 ppm2.0E-04 ppmUranyl Nitrate (Dispersed Solid) (Likely in solution at SHINE)4800.0010.4800.99 mg/m 35.5 mg/m333 mg/m30.024 mg/m 33.1E-03 mg/m 3 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewEnvironmental JusticeSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-104Rev. 019.4.12ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICEOn February 11, 1994, President Clinton signed Executive Order 12898 Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations. Executive Order 12898 directs federal executive agencies to consider environmental justice under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). This Executive Order ensures that minority and/or low-income populations do not bear a disproportionate share of adverse health or environmental consequences of the building of the SHINE production facility.19.4.12.1Methodology Guidance for addressing environmental justice (EJ) is provided by the Council on Environmental Quality's Environmental Justice Guidance under the National Environmental Policy Act; NRC Policy Statement on the Treatment of Environmental Justice Matters in NRC Licensing Actions; and NRC Office Instruction No. LIC 203, Revision 2, Procedural Guidance for Preparing Environmental Assessments and Considering Environmental Issues. The NRC defines a "minority" by race and ethnicity, as classified by the USCB (NRC, 2009). Specifically, a minority is an individual whose race is: Black or African American; American Indian or Alaska Native; Asian; Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander; Some Other Race (not mentioned above); Two or More Races (i.e., multiracial); or whose ethnicity is Hispanic or Latino of any race. Determination of low-income populations is based on poverty thresholds as defined by the USCB.The geographic area of analysis is the 5-mi. (8-km) area around the SHINE site. The method to identify the locations of minority and low-income populations of the geographic area of analysis is the "block group" method recommended by the NRC. The block group is the smallest geographical unit for which the USCB tabulates data required for EJ analysis (NRC, 2004). The 2010 census data, along with geographic information system (GIS) software, are used to determine the minority characteristics of resident populations by block group. If any part of a block group is located within 5 mi. (8km) of the SHINE site, the entire block group is included in the analysis. A total of 48block groups meet this criteria and are evaluated as part of this analysis (Table 19.4.12-1).The following methodology is used to identify populations that may be the subject of EJ considerations.19.4.12.1.1Minority Populations NRC guidance requires analysis of individual race and ethnicity classifications as well as the aggregate of all minority populations (NRC, 2009). Based on NRC guidance, a minority population exists if either of the following two conditions exist:*The minority population of the block group of the impacted area (block group) exceeds 50percent of the total population of the block group.*The minority population percentage of the block group significantly (20 percentage points) exceeds the geographic area chosen for comparative analysis (NRC, 2004).For the 48 block groups within the geographic area of analysis (5-mi. [8-km] radius), the percentage of each block group's minority population in all of the minority classifications is calculated. If any block group has a minority percentage that exceeds 50 percent, then the block group is identified as containing a minority population. If any block group has a minority Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewEnvironmental JusticeSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-105Rev. 0percentage exceeding the corresponding minority percentage for Rock County and the State of Wisconsin by more than 20 percentage points, then a minority population is determined to exist in that block group.19.4.12.1.2Low-Income Populations NRC guidance defines low-income households as th ose with incomes that are less than the poverty level (NRC, 2004). A block group is considered low-income if either of the following two conditions is met:*The low-income population of the block group of the impacted area (block group) exceeds 50percent of the total number of households in the block group*The low-income population percentage of the block group significantly (20percentage points) exceeds the geographic area chosen for comparative analysisThe number of low-income households in each census block group is divided by the total households for that block group to obtain the percentage of low-income households per block group. If any block group has a low-income percentage exceeding 50 percent, then the block group is identified as containing a low-income population. If any block group has a minority percentage exceeding the corresponding percentage for Rock County and the State of Wisconsin by more than 20 percentage points, then a low-income population is determined to exist.19.4.12.2Assessment of Disproportionate Impacts19.4.12.2.1Minority Populations Table 19.4.12-1 presents the results of the analysis for minority populations. The table displays the percentage of minority populations in each block group and the totals for the complete 5-mi. (8-km) radius. The percentages of each minority category within the county and state are also presented as the basis for determining which block groups meet the criteria. None of the 48 census block groups within the 5-mi. (8-km) radius meet the NRC quantitative method for identifying a minority population. Generally, Hispanic or Latino, Black or African American, and Two or More Races (i.e. multiracial) classifications represent the predominant minority populations in the block groups within 5mi. (8-km) of the SHINE site; however, no block group contains a minority population (individual or aggregate) that either exceeds 50percent or significantly exceeds the comparative geographic areas. Overall, the percentage of minority groups in the 5-mi. (8-km) area of analysis is less than comparative figures for Rock County and Wisconsin. The aggregate minority population in the 5-mi. (8-km) study area is 11.1percent, compared to 15.5 percent in the county and 16.7 in the state. The aggregate minority population includes all minority populations, as defined by NRC (NRC, 2009) (seeSubsection19.4.12.1).Only a small percentage of the study area population is American Indian and Alaska native (0.3percent) in the study area, and there is no American Indian reservation within 5mi. (8km) of the SHINE site (Bureau of Indian Affairs, 2012). Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewEnvironmental JusticeSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-106Rev. 0There is one property in the immediate vicinity of the SHINE site that appears to be a location for regular congregation of minorities. A relatively small Hispanic church congregation uses a building located on US 51 to the south of the SHINE site. The church, called Iglesia Hispania Pentecostale, is not located within a minority block group.Within the 5-mi. (8-km) radius of the SHINE facility, there is an absence of populations indentified as minority that qualify as EJ populations. Therefore, the potential for a disproportionately high impact to these populations is SMALL.19.4.12.2.2Low-Income Populations Table 19.4.12-1 presents the results of the analysis for low-income populations. The table displays the percentage of low-income households in each block group, the total for the 5-mi. (8-km) radius, and the percentage of low-income households within the county and state. The table also highlights the block groups that meet the NRC criteria for low-income populations. Figure19.4.12-1 identifies these populations as occurring in the central area of Janesville.As a whole, the percentage of low-income households in the 5-mi. (8-km) radius (12.7percent) is slightly higher than that for the county (11.4percent) and the state (11.2percent). Eighteen of the 48 block groups in the 5-mi. (8-km) area have low-income populations that exceed county and state rates; however, only three of the 18 meet the NRC criteria for low-income population. The table illustrates that two of the three block groups have a higher percentage of low-income population than comparable percentages for the county and state. The three block groups are contiguous to one another and are located considerably north of the SHINE site in downtown Janesville (see Figure 19.4.12-1).In addition to the identification of EJ populations based on census block analysis, SHINE also considered the potential for isolated low-income/minority groups near the SHINE site. A manufactured housing complex called Janesville Terrace Mobile Home Park is located to the north of the SHINE site on US south of SH11. It is visible from the proposed construction area. There are approximately 25 manufactured housing units in the complex. It is not known whether one or more of the households are classified as low-income, though it is known that Janesville Terrace Mobile Home Park is not located within a low-income Census block group.Potential impacts of plant construction, operations and decommissioning on low-income populations may include small increases in local traffic and associated noise due to construction and operational workforce traffic. Given the distance between low-income population block groups and the SHINE site, and that transportation routes likely to be utilized for construction and operation workforces do not adversely impact these block groups, impacts to low-income population block groups are SMALL and not disproportionate.As is described in Subsection 19.4.7, construction and operation of the SHINE facility may also result in a small demand for housing. The potential that low-income populations may be disadvantaged in their ability to find or keep housing in competition with a non-resident workforce was considered. Factors affecting the degree of disadvantage include the amount of vacant housing available and the size of the work force relocating into the area. A potential impact mechanism to EJ populations may arise from competition from non-resident workers for a limited supply of housing. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewEnvironmental JusticeSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-107Rev. 0Based on the analysis discussed in Subsection 19.4.7.1, a maximum of 420 workers is needed for the facility's construction, and 150 workers are needed permanently for its operation (seeTable 19.3.7-2). As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7.1 it is estimated that approximately 60percent of the required construction and operational workforce is drawn from the labor force that currently resides in the Region of Influence, therefore only a portion of the required construction workers and operations workers will relocate to Rock County. According to 2010 Census, there are 5986 vacant housing units in Rock County (see Table 19.3.7-12). This quantity of vacant housing far exceeds the quantity required to meet estimated non-resident worker demand without creating a competitive shortage of housing. Therefore, with regards to housing the potential impacts to low-income populations are SMALL.19.4.12.2.3Migrant PopulationsThe State of Wisconsin's Bureau of Migrant Labor Services releases an annual Migrant Population Report that documents the number of workers eligible for protection under Wisconsin Statute 103.90-103.97. The state statute provides protections for migrant workers who temporarily leave their principal, out-of-state residence and live in Wisconsin for not more than 10months in a year to work in agriculture, horticulture or food processing. The 2011 Migrant Population Report reflects the number of workers whose presence was verified by Migrant Law Enforcement staff, though it is not intended to provide comprehensive statistics about migrant seasonal farm workers in Wisconsin. The report does not indicate any migrant workers in Rock County (State of Wisconsin Bureau of Migrant Labor Services, 2011); therefore the potential impacts to migrant populations are SMALL.19.4.12.3Assessment of Human Health and Environmental Impacts19.4.12.3.1Minority PopulationsTable 19.4.12-1 shows that there are no block groups that meet the NRC criteria for a minority population. As described in Subsection19.4.12.2, there is a Hispanic church located near to the south of the SHINE site. Plant construction may result in construction related noise; exposure to fugitive dust, exhaust emissions, and vibrations; and generation of construction-related wastes. However, it is not anticipated that construction activity will be heavy on Sundays when the most Hispanic minority persons would be expected to visit the church. Additionally, because dust control measures are used and because noise attenuates to acceptable levels near the site boundary (see Subsection 19.4.2), the potential impacts to minority populations are SMALL.19.4.12.3.2Low-Income Populations As described in Subsection19.4.12.2.2, the Janesville Terrace Mobile Home Park is located to the north of the SHINE site and may include low-income households. Plant construction may result in construction related noise, exposure to fugitive dust, exhaust emissions, vibrations, and generation of construction-related wastes. These are potential impacts that would impact the general population, but have no disproportionate impact on low-income populations. Mitigation measures include implementing best management practices for controlling fugitive dust and proper maintenance of construction equipment for controlling emissions; recycling of construction waste, to the extent possible; and, minimizing land disturbance, removing construction debris in a timely manner, and adding landscape enhancements. Additionally, noise levels attenuate to acceptable levels near the site boundary (see Subsection19.4.2). Therefore, human health and environmental impacts on low-income populations are SMALL. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewEnvironmental JusticeSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-108Rev. 019.4.12.4Mitigation MeasuresMitigation measures to reduce or minimize adverse impacts on EJ populations are not required; any measures as described in Subsections 19.4.12.2 and 19.4.12.3 are used to minimize potentially adverse impacts of construction affecting the general population, which are expected to be SMALL. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewEnvironmental JusticeSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-109Rev. 0Table 19.4.12-1 Minority and Low-Income Population Statistics for Block Groups within a 5-Mi. Radius of the SHINESite(Sheet 1 of 2)Block GroupCensus TractLow-Income Population (%)Minority Population (%) (a)Black or
African American American Indian and Alaska Native Asian Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander Some Other Race Two or More RacesHispanic or LatinoAggregate1129.05.10.10.30.00.02.18.816.5124.80.60.30.50.00.01.52.15.0 223.10.90.61.50.00.00.91.55.5
3235.02.60.41.10.00.12.26.112.5 1356.67.50.31.60.00.02.711.623.8 2348.17.60.65.00.00.23.313.630.43316.14.20.47.20.00.72.05.920.3 1427.85.10.13.30.00.03.69.521.7 2417.82.30.02.00.00.14.37.015.7 3418.20.80.30.30.00.00.72.95.0 4431.01.80.42.90.00.51.914.421.9 154.51.00.41.00.40.00.63.16.4 2510.10.90.70.30.00.03.62.78.1 350.02.30.02.20.20.02.87.014.5 4521.01.30.91.00.10.02.03.89.2 558.01.30.40.70.00.10.910.113.5 167.02.40.20.30.40.22.03.69.2 2619.82.80.30.40.00.03.96.013.4 285.90.20.20.40.00.00.33.64.8 383.71.60.20.50.00.30.95.28.7 483.13.70.50.30.10.02.57.314.4 191.40.80.00.40.00.00.84.36.3 299.01.30.20.50.10.00.52.55.2 1107.42.70.71.00.00.11.76.512.7 21016.91.60.30.60.00.21.111.215.1 1117.01.70.11.10.00.11.23.07.3 2119.91.30.11.50.10.02.23.99.1 31122.66.90.10.80.00.02.79.519.9 4117.30.90.30.60.00.01.82.96.5 51126.32.80.21.20.00.01.111.516.7 112.0110.83.30.20.80.00.02.13.49.9 212.012.71.10.10.30.00.00.72.64.8 312.014.30.40.40.80.00.01.51.84.9 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewEnvironmental JusticeSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-110Rev. 0Table 19.4.12-1 Minority and Low-Income Population Statistics for Block Groups within a 5-Mi. Radius of the SHINESite(Sheet 2 of 2)Block GroupCensus TractLow-Income Population (%)Minority Population (%) (a)Black or African American American Indian and Alaska Native Asian Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander Some Other Race Two or More RacesHispanic or LatinoAggregate113.020.02.30.11.00.10.10.72.16.4213.029.51.50.10.70.00.00.62.85.6 313.026.33.40.00.90.00.00.72.77.7 413.028.60.50.00.00.00.31.01.13.0 513.023.71.20.10.50.00.01.02.04.7 1144.11.00.51.20.00.20.91.04.9 21419.03.80.20.10.00.20.910.615.8 31413.23.10.31.60.20.01.410.917.6 4145.51.50.20.60.00.01.04.17.4 2220.01.10.60.40.00.32.02.06.5 1249.03.70.11.80.00.01.33.210.0 22411.83.30.20.90.00.00.85.110.1 32420.72.60.40.30.10.02.23.39.0 126.0121.814.10.11.20.00.21.911.028.3 126.0214.73.90.11.70.00.10.84.511.2Total, 5-Mi. Radius12.72.70.31.10.00.11.65.411.1Comparative PopulationsRockCountyState ofWisconsin11.44.80.21.00.00.11.77.615.511.26.20.92.30.00.11.45.916.7a) Shaded block groups meet the NRC qualitative method for identifying low-income populations.
References:
USCB, 2010c; USCB, 2006-2010. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-111Rev. 019.4.13CUMULATIVE EFFECTSThis subsection discusses the cumulative impacts to the region's environment that could result from construction and operation of the SHINE facility. A cumulative impac t is defined in Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations (40 CFR 1508.7) as an "impact on the environment which results from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency (federal or non-federal) or person undertakes such other actions." To guide its assessment of the environmental impacts of a proposed action, the NRC has established a standard of significance for impacts based on guidance developed by the CEQ (40CFR1508.27). To address cumulative impacts, the existing environment in the region surrounding the SHINE site was considered in conjunction with the environmental impacts as presented in Section19.4 for constructing and operating a new facility at the SHINE site. These combined impacts are defined by the CEQ as "cumulative" in 40CFR1508.7 and may include individually minor but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time.Cumulative effects analysis encompasses a consideration of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future (Federal, non-Federal, and private) actions that could have meaningful cumulative impacts together with the proposed action. Past construction and operational impacts of existing industrial uses and developments are part of the existing baseline conditions in the region and are therefore, intrinsically integrated as part of the cumulative effects analysis. The cumulative effects analysis therefore, focuses on the additive impacts from the existing baseline conditions, the effects of a new facility, and other identified present and reasonably foreseeable future actions. Table 19.4.13-1 provides a listing of all projects identified as potentially contributing to cumulative impacts. To identify other actions SHINE considered:*Information about current or planned local economic development programs or projects (e.g., commercial, industrial, and/or residential); and *Information about current or planned infrastructure improvements (e.g., transportation, electric and water utility).As described in NRC Memo ML100621017, actions that are not reasonably foreseeable are those that are based on mere speculation or conjecture, or those that have only been discussed on a conceptual basis. These can include projects that have not yet been approved by the proper authorities or have not yet submitted license/permit applications. Present and future projects that were considered for cumulative effects analysis but did not meet the criteria established for reasonable foreseeability were not retained. Projects and other actions retained for the cumulative effects analysis are identified in Table 19.4.13-2 and Figure 19.4.13-1.Cumulative impacts of the new facility and other identified present and reasonably foreseeable future actions are assessed for the following resources: land use and visual resources; air quality and noise; geologic environment; water resources (hydrology, water use, water quality); ecological resources (terrestrial and aquatic communities); historic and cultural resources; the socioeconomic environment; human health; and environmental justice. According to the CEQ's Considering Cumulative Effects Under the National Environmental Policy Act (CEQ, 1997), the Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-112Rev. 0establishment of an appropriate geographic area of analysis is an important step in performing the cumulative effects analysis. The geographic areas for analysis were selected based on the environmental effects that may occur to each of the affected resources under consideration and are the same as those used for each resource category in Section 19.4. The sensitivity of cumulative effects is resource-based, and an appropriate context of analysis was selected for each of the resources described below.19.4.13.1Land Use and Visual ResourcesThe description of the affected environment in Subsection 19.3.1 serves as a baseline for the land use and visual resources cu mulative impact assessment. The geographic area of analysis for evaluation of cumulative effects on land use and visual resources is the same as that used in Subsection 19.4.1 and includes the 91.27 ac. (36.94 ha) within the site boundary and the 5mi. (8km) region surrounding the site. As discussed in Subsection 19.4.1.1, construction and operation impacts from the SHINE facility on la nd use are SMALL. Impacts from construction and operation to visual resources are SMALL, as discussed in Subsection 19.4.1.2.Table 19.4.13-2 identifies recent past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the geographic extent of analysis that can be assessed to determine cumulative effects on land use and visual resources. Relevant "other actions" that are considered in this cumulative effects analysis are limited to the utility line extensions, proposed facility, TIF District No. 35 Project Plan, an agricultural storage facility immediately south of the SHINE site, the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, and an Alliant Energy power generation facility. The storage facility is a recent past disturbance; however it has on-going affects to land use and visual resources. The utility line extensions, proposed facility, and TIF No. 35 Project Plan are all future actions. The airport, Glen Erin Golf Course and power generation facilities are existing facilities ("present actions") and on-going actions.19.4.13.1.1Land Use Resources The City of Janesville plans to install a water main and sanitary sewer main along the northern boundary of the SHINE site as part of the overall TIF District No. 35 development activities. Based on the SHINE facility site layout, the expected route of the water main and sewer main connects directly to the facility (Figure 19.2.1-1). Installation of the City's water and sewer mains disturbs a 50-ft. (15-m) wide corridor (one corridor for both water and sewer) with the pipelines centered in the middle of the co rridor. Similarly, installation of the water and sewer connections from the City's mains to the SHINE facility disturbs a 50-ft. (15-m) wide corridor (one corridor for both water and sewer) with the pipelines centered in the middle of the corridor. The corridors temporarily disturb 0.62ac. (0.25ha) immediately adjacent to the northern boundary of the site. Lands disturbed by this corridor include undeveloped cultivated crop lands and prime farmland, which comprise the majority of the land cover within the site and region. In 2004, the City of Janesville purchased 224 ac. (91ha) of land located south of SH11 and west of County Truck Highway G with the intention of creating a TIF district. The parcel is vacant industrial land in agricultural use in an industrially-zoned area on the City's southeast side. The parcel is unimproved and has been used for agricultural crop production for decades. The land has since been zoned for light industrial use and is "shovel ready" certified. Land cover in this parcel consists entirely of cultivated crops and includes prime farmland. The region surrounding the SHINE site includes over 25,000 ac. (10,000 ha) of cultivated crop land and approximately 42,000 ac. (17,000 ha) of prime farmland or farmland of statewide importance Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-113Rev. 0(seeSubsection19.3.1.1). Consequently, the utilization of the 224 ac. (91ha) included in the TIF District No. 35 Project Plan would have a minimal change in the availability of these resources in the region. Immediately adjacent to the southern border of the SHINE site are two large warehouses that support local agriculture operations and provide storage for large farming equipment. The warehouse facility has resulted in the conversion of prime farmland and the land surrounding the site. This development represents a recent ground disturbance that has impacted the overall land use and potential crop production for the region. As described in Subsection 19.3.1.1.4, the potential relative value of the farmland for the 91.27ac. (36.94 ha) comprising the SHINE site is 13,771 Bu. of grain corn or 3947Bu. of soybeans, while the 10-year production estimate average for Rock County, Wisconsin, is 22,075,540Bu. of grain corn and 3,786,415Bu. of soybeans. The minor loss of on-site agricultural lands, including prime farmland and farmland of state wide importance, and the subsequent loss of potential crop production to industrial facilities is a minor impact when compared to the amount of agricultural land, land designated as prime farmland or farmland of state wide importance, and potential crop production remaining within the region (see Table19.4.1-1 and Subsection 19.3.1.1.4). Therefore, cumulative impacts to land use resources, including agricultural resources, are SMALL.19.4.13.1.2Visual ResourcesThe immediate location of the SHINE site and TIF District No. 35 is composed entirely of land used for agricultural purposes and has no existing architectural features, established structures, or natural-built barriers, screens, or buffers. Consequently, the SHINE facility and any light industrial structure built at the TIF District No. 35 location alters the on-site condition and partially obstructs views of the existing landscape. However, the visual setting of the site is generally flat and uniform in landform with low vegetation diversity and a low visual quality rating (see Subsection19.3.1.3).The viewshed to the west of the site across US51 is a light industrial development landscape that consists of the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport and its associated facilities, which includes the airport control tower and several large warehouses and hangers. The viewshed to the south of the site includes the two large warehouses immediately adjacent to the southern border of the site that support local agricultural operations and provide storage for large farming equipment. Additionally, the viewshed to the south includes several stacks associated with an Alliant Energy coal-fired power generation facility. While a portion of the plant is non-operational, the stacks are still visible as part of the viewshed. Together with the buildings and structures to the south and west, the facilities located at the SHINE and TIF District No. 35 sites do not significantly alter the visual setting. Therefore, cumulative impacts to visual resources are SMALL.19.4.13.2Air Quality and Noise 19.4.13.2.1Air QualityThe description of the affected environment in Subsection 19.3.2 serves as a baseline for the air quality cumulative impact assessment. Table 19.4.13-2 identifies recent past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the geographic extent of analysis that can be Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-114Rev. 0assessed to determine cumulative effects on air quality. Relevant "other actions" that are considered in this cumulative effects analysis include the TIF District No. 35 Project Plan (Rock County), the Alliant Energy - WP&L Turtle Generating Facility, NorthStar Medical Isotopes facility (Rock County), United Ethanol (Rock County), Generac Power Systems (Jefferson County), Kraft Foods Global (Dane County), and University of Wisconsin Madison (Dane County). With the exception of the TIF District No. 35 Project Plan and NorthStar Medical facility, which are future actions, all of the projects are present and on-going actions. The geographic area of analysis for evaluation of cumulative effects on air quality is the same as that used in Subsection 19.4.2 and includes Rock County and the four surrounding counties in Wisconsin: Green, Dane, Jefferson, and Walworth. As described in Subsection19.4.2.1.1, air emission impacts from construction are SMALL as emissions are controlled at the source where practicable; maintained within established regulatory limits designed to minimize impacts; and located a significant distance from the public. Operations of the facility have a SMALL impact on air quality, as discussed in Subsection19.4.2.1.2. Criteria PollutantsAir emission impacts as a result of concurrent construction activities are expected at both the SHINE and NorthStar Medical facilities. In addition, construction at the TIF District No. 35 site could overlap with construction activities at either of these facilities. Construction activity at NorthStar is expected to begin in 2013, with completion slated for mid-2014 (NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, 2012). Depending on the actual completion date for NorthStar, this construction schedule may overlap with the proposed construction schedule for SHINE, which is scheduled to begin in 2015. Implementation of mitigation measures described in Subsection19.4.2.1.1 minimizes impacts to local ambient air quality and the nuisance impacts to the public in proximity to the project. Impacts to air quality from construction activities are expected to be minor, localized, and short-term; therefore, overlapping construction schedules are not expected to contribute significantly to cumulative effects.The proposed NorthStar facility will produce small air emissions from operation of the building's heating system and from the use of chemicals to dissolve Mo-99 targets (DOE, 2012). Gaseous effluents at the SHINE facility are a result of isotope production and fuel combustion, as discussed in Subsection19.4.2.1.2. The SHINE facility does not result in exceedances of federal or state criteria air quality criteria. Operations emissions from both facilities are subject to permitting by the WDNR and controlled at the source using appropriate emissions control systems. In addition, the electricity demand of the SHINE and NorthStar facilities may result in an increase in regional electricity demand. However, this increase is not expected to exceed supply or the ability to deliver it and would not substantially increase air emissions for the region.Existing permitted emissions facilities are considered part of the baseline air quality. Given its proximity to the SHINE site, it is notable that the Alliant Energy - WP&L Turtle Generating Facility recently received an Air Pollution Control Operation Permit (WDNR,2011b). New construction-related emissions permits identified through the WDNR permit application website are all small-scaled and are not expected to have a significant impact on air quality in the region. United Ethanol, an ethanol production facility in Rock County, has one active Construction Permit that was issued in May, 2012 for upgrades to the existing facility. In Jefferson County, Generac Power Systems has an active operating permit renewed to 2015 and is planning modifications to one of their venting stacks, which was issued a Construction Permit exemption in April, 2012. In Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-115Rev. 0Dane County, Kraft Foods Global was issued a Construction Permit in June, 2012 to construct and operate three natural gas or distillate fuel fired boilers. The University of Wisconsin (West Campus) cogeneration facility is planning to add a four-cell cooling tower associated with the chiller plant expansion (exempted from obtaining a Construction Permit in August, 2012). The University of Wisconsin (Charter Street) was issued a Construction Permit in February, 2012 to construct boilers and emergency equipment. The University of Wisconsin is also planning to replace a coal-fired boiler with a natural gas boiler, which will reduce overall emissions (University of Wisconsin, 2009). It is expected that each of these projects will operate in such a manner as to not violate the established permit levels or federal and state criteria. Additionally, permitting reviews performed by the WDNR are conducted to ensure that new permits do not result in regional air quality degradation. Therefore, the cumulative impacts of criteria pollutants to air quality are SMALL.Greenhouse Gas EmissionsThe cumulative impacts of a single or combination of GHG emission sources must be placed in geographic context, considering the following factors:*The environmental impact should be assessed on a global rather than local or regional basis.*The effect is not sensitive to the location of the emission release point.*The magnitudes of individual GHG sources related to human activity, no matter how large compared to other sources, are small when compared to the total mass of GHGs in the
atmosphere.*The total number and variety of GHG sources is extremely large and the sources are ubiquitous.GHG emissions associated with building, operating, and decommissioning the new facility are discussed in Subsection 19.4.2.1.2.3. As noted in Subsection 19.4.3.2.5, SHINE will develop a comprehensive program to avoid and control GHG emissions associated with the facility.Evaluation of cumulative impacts of GHG emissions requires the use of a global climate model. A synthesis of the results of numerous climate modeling studies are presented in the report from Karl, et al. (Karl, et al., 2009). The cumulative impacts of global GHG emissions as presented in the report are the appropriate basis for evaluation of cumulative impacts with regards to the SHINE facility. The report concludes that climate changes are underway in the United States as part of the global climate and that these changes are projected to grow. While noticeable, none of the changes will result in a destabilization of the global climate. In 2010 the EPA issued the CO2 Tailoring Rule (75 Federal Register [FR] 31514), which stated that GHG emissions will be factors in PSD and TitleV permitting and reporting. This revised permitting criterion indicates the need to regulate CO 2 and other GHGs from major emission sources. GHG emissions from individual stationary sources and, cumulatively, from multiple sources can contribute to national and global climate change. Given the relative ly low emissions from the SHINE facility in comparison to total global emissions, cumulative impacts of the proposed facility are SMALL. Furthermore, the cumulative impacts of GHG emissions would still be the same at the national and global scale without the GHG emissions of the proposed SHINE facility. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-116Rev. 019.4.13.2.2NoiseThe description of the affected environment in Subsection 19.3.2 serves as a baseline for the noise cumulative impact assessment. The geographic area of analysis for evaluation of cumulative effects from noise emissions includes the 91.27 ac. (36.94 ha) within the site boundary and the 1 mi. (1.6 km) area surrounding the site. This area was selected as it encompasses the nearest noise receptors to the SHINE site identified in Subsection19.4.3.6.1 and is a distance over which noise generated at the SHINE site would attenuate to negligible levels. Noise impacts resulting from construction and operation of the SHINE facility are discussed in Subsections19.4.2.2.1 and 19.4.2.2.2 and are SMALL.Table 19.4.13-2 identifies recent past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the geographic extent of analysis that can be assessed to determine cumulative effects on noise. Relevant "other actions" that are considered in this cumulative effects analysis are limited to the proposed facility, TIF District No. 35 Project Plan, and the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport. The proposed facility and TIF District No. 35 Project Plan are future actions and the airport is a current and on-going action.During the construction periods for the SHINE (including the off-site utility extension) and TIF District No. 35 facilities, additional impacts to noise are expected in the immediate area around each site. Noise levels from construction equipment are expected to attenuate rapidly with distance, and therefore, do not significantly impact nearby sensitive noise receptors. Noise levels are also impacted by increases in traffic volume during both construction and operation; however they are not expected to be significantly higher than current traffic levels. External noise emission from the SHINE facility during operation is primarily limited by the walls and other physical barriers of the facility itself. Noise generated at the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport contributes to the existing baseline noise levels of the region. The airport currently operates approximately 140 flights per day. Additional flight operations may increase due to the demand to transport materials to and from the SHINE and NorthStar facilities; however these increases are not anticipated to cause an appreciable increase in noise above the current operations. Therefore, cumulative impacts to noise in the region are SMALL.19.4.13.3Geologic Environment The description of the affected environment in Subsection19.3.3 serves as a baseline for the geologic environment cumulative impact assessment. The geographic area of analysis for evaluation of cumulative effects on geologic resources is the same as that used in Subsection19.4.3 and includes the 91.27ac. (36.94ha) within the site boundary and the 5mi. (8km) region surrounding the site. As discussed in Subsection19.4.3, construction and operation impacts from the SHINE site on the geologic environment are SMALL.Table 19.4.13-2 identifies recent past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the geographic extent of analysis that can be assessed to determine cumulative effects on the geologic environment. Relevant "other actions" that are considered in this cumulative effects analysis are limited to the utility line extensions, the proposed facility, and the TIF District No.35 Project Plan, all of which are future actions. No present or on-going actions were identified that are relevant to this analysis. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-117Rev. 0Impacts to the geologic environment from other actions are minor. The proximity of the utility line extensions and TIF District No.35 project to the SHINE site results in impacts to the same geologic resources as those affected by the SHINE facility. However, there are no sensitive geologic resources in the region surrounding the SHINE site. Impacts from these identified projects are expected to be localized and minor. Therefore, cumulative impacts are SMALL.19.4.13.4Water Resources The description of the affected environment in Subsection19.3.4 serves as a baseline for the water resources cumulative impact assessment. The geographic area of analysis for evaluation of cumulative effects on water resources is the same as that used in Subsection19.4.4 and includes the 91.27ac. (36.94ha) within the site boundary and the 5mi. (8km) region surrounding the site. As discussed in Subsection19.4.4.1, construction impacts to water resources are SMALL. Impacts from operation of the facility are discussed in Subsection19.4.4.2 and are SMALL.Table19.4.13-2 identifies recent past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the geographic extent of analysis that can be assessed to determine cumulative effects on water resources. Relevant "other actions" that are considered in this cumulative effects analysis are limited to the utility line extensions planned in support of the SHINE facilit y, proposed facility, TIF District No. 35 Project Plan, Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, and Glen Erin Golf Course. The utility lines, proposed facility, and TIF development are all future actions. Present and on-going actions include the airport and golf course.19.4.13.4.1HydrologyThere are no surface water resources located on either the SHINE or TIF District No. 35 sites; therefore there are no direct impacts as a result of alteration of streams or water bodies. The nearest water bodies are the nearby unnamed tributary to Rock River, located 1.6mi (2.6km) south of the SHINE site, and the Rock River, located 1.9 mi. (3.1 km) southwest of the SHINE site. Construction of the SHINE facility and at the TIF District No. 35 location represents potential sources of pollution associated with runoff from construction sites. It is anticipated that at both sites BMP are used in accordance with the SWPPP, as required by the WDNR, to prevent sediment runoff and subsequent siltation in receiving streams during construction.During operations, potential impacts associated with hydrology are related to stormwater management as agricultural lands at the site are converted to urban development. Currently, sheet flow runoff at the SHINE site location follows natural drainage patterns and discharges to a ditch along US51. The planned SHINE facility collects runoff from the developed parts to be directed through a vegetated on-site detention swale before being discharged through an outfall control structure to the ditch along US51 (Subsection19.4.5). Future facilities at the TIF District No. 35 may include a storm sewer collection system that includes underground piping, surface detention area, and safety fencing (City of Janesville, 2012b). Additionally, when combined with the distance to the nearest off-site water bodies, runoff and siltation to the receiving streams is minimized. Cumulative hydrologic impacts are therefore, SMALL.19.4.13.4.2Water Use All public water supplies in Rock County, including the City of Janesville are derived from groundwater. No public water supplies are provided by surface water within the region. In Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-118Rev. 0addition to the SHINE facility, the only other future demand on the groundwater supply in Janesville is the potential TIF District No. 35 development. Approval of the TIF District No. 35 Project Plan indicates that the City of Janesville has the capacity to serve the future development with both public water supply and wastewater treatment. According to the City of Janesville, the water main and sewer main infrastructure will have more than enough capacity to support the SHINE facility; therefore no upgrades to the City water supply system and sanitary sewer system are anticipated (Subsection 19.4.7). Therefore, cumulative impacts from water use are SMALL.19.4.13.4.3Water QualityExisting stormwater pollutant sources within the region around the SHINE site include urban developments, which are associated with pollutants such as phosphorous and chloride. Phosphorous has been identified as a general pollutant of concern across Wisconsin due to the impacts associated with nutrient build up in lakes. Phosphorous is also a potential pollutant associated with fertilizer application on agricultural lands. Fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides also are generally applied on golf courses. Chloride is another typical pollutant associated with development, particularly resulting from winter applications of salt on roadways and sidewalks for de-icing. Chloride is not readily adsorbed on soil particles or taken up by vegetation.The TIF District No. 35 Project Plan is the only other potential future project within the region of the SHINE site that has the potential to contribute to cumulative impacts on water quality as it is in the same subwatershed as the SHINE site. Other notable developed uses within the same subwatershed that may be the source of pollutant loading include the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport and the Glen Erin Golf Club. However, runoff from the SHINE site is detained in grassed detention areas and because of the high infiltration rates of the soil, is not conveyed to downstream areas within any organized stream channel. Similarly, no organized stream channel is evident near the SHINE site on either the airport or the golf course. Designs for development of the TIF District No. 35 site are expected to incorporate similar detention basins and best management practices as required by Wisconsin DNR and local regulations. Therefore, in consideration of the SHINE site design, future designs for detention associated with the TIF development site, high infiltration rates, and the absence of an organized stream channel near the SHINE site, cumulative impacts on surface water resources are SMALL.The SHINE facility is 91.27ac. (36.94ha) in size, and 53.75ac. (21.75ha) are expected to remain in use for the production of agricultural row crops or be returned to pre-settlement conditions. The removal of 38.52ac. (15.58ha) from row crop production results in a proportional reduction in the amount of agricultural chemicals (fertilizers, etc.) applied on the site, and less potential impact to groundwater quality from pollutant loading. If the remaining 53.75 ac (21.75 ha) were returned to pre-settlement conditions it would result in an even greater reduction in the use of agriculture chemicals. Similarly, the TIF development reduces the area of active agricultural lands and reduces the amount of agricultural chemical application. Consequently, less pollutant loading to groundwater would occur from agricultural practices. No other cumulative impacts to groundwater quality are expected. Therefore, cumulative impacts to groundwater resources are SMALL.19.4.13.5Ecological ResourcesThe description of the affected environment in Subsection19.3.5 serves as a baseline for the ecological resources cumulative impact assessment. The geographic area of analysis for evaluation of cumulative effects on ecological resources is the same as that used in Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-119Rev. 0Subsection19.4.5 and includes the 91.27 ac. (36.94 ha) within the site boundary and the 5mi. (8km) region surrounding the site. As discussed in Subsection19.4.5.1, impacts from construction on terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems, including protected species, are SMALL. Subsection 19.4.5.2 demonstrates that the potential impacts from operation of the SHINE facility on terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems, including protected species, are SMALL.Table19.4.13-2 identifies recent past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the geographic extent of analysis that can be assessed to determine cumulative effects on ecological resources. Relevant "other actions" that are considered in this cumulative effects analysis are limited to the utility line extensions, the proposed facility, and the TIF District No. 35 Project Plan, all of which are future actions. No present or on-going actions were identified that are relevant to this analysis.Terrestrial community resources could be affected by the planned utility line extensions by the City of Janesville and the TIF District No. 35 Project Plan. The proximity of the utility line extensions and TIF District No. 35 project to the SHINE site indicates that the ecological resources at these locations are likely similar. All projects include disturbance of cultivated crop lands and prime farmland. As described in Subsection19.4.5.1.3, plant communities in the region include cultivated crops (corn, soybean, winter wheat) and opportunistic weedy species. There are no federal or state-listed threatened, endangered, or special concern plant species observed or in the proximity of the site. Faunal resources in this area are limited due to the agricultural nature of the land. Field investigations identified bird and mammal species occurring in the region, however there were no state or federally listed species. Therefore, cumulative impacts to terrestrial ecological resources are SMALL.Aquatic community resources that could be affected by the proposed facility and TIF District No.35 Project Plan include the unnamed tributary to Rock River and the Rock River. The unnamed tributary, a small intermittent stream, is 1.6mi. (2.6km) south of the SHINE site and the Rock River is 1.9mi. (3.1km) southwest of the site. There are no wetlands within the SHINE site and dewatering of groundwater in excavations is not anticipated. BMPs will be used in
accordance with the SWPPP, as required by the WDNR, to prevent sediment runoff and subsequent siltation in receiving streams during construction. Because of the distance to the off-site streams and the implementation of BMPs on-site during construction, cumulative impacts to aquatic resources are SMALL.19.4.13.6Historical and Cultural ResourcesThe description of the affected environment in Subsection19.3.6 serves as a baseline for the historical and cultural resources cumulative impact assessment. The geographic area of analysis for evaluation of cumulative effects on historical and cultural resources is the same as that used in Section 19.4.6 and includes the 91.27 ac. (36.94ha) within the site boundary and the 10mi. (16km) region surrounding the site. As discussed in Subsection19.4.6.1, impacts from construction and operation of the SHINE facility are SMALL.Table19.4.13-2 identifies recent past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the geographic extent of analysis that can be assessed to determine cumulative effects on historical and cultural resources. Relevant "other actions" that are considered in this cumulative effects analysis are limited to the utility line extensions, the proposed facility, the TIF District No.35 Project Plan, and NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, all of which are future actions. No present or on-going actions were identified that are relevant to this analysis. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-120Rev. 0The utility line extensions and TIF District No. 35 are in the same cultural context as the SHINE site. Based on the absence of archaeological sites found on the SHINE site and the immediate project area (Subsection19.3.6) it is expected that the potential for undiscovered historic properties (archaeology or historic architecture) occurring on the TIF District No. 35 project area is also low. Furthermore, there have been no Native American traditional properties identified within the region of the SHINE site. It is expected that site development practices at the TIF District No. 35 project include appropriate reviews by the WHS such that potential impacts to historic resources are either avoided or mitigated. Impacts to cultural resources were evaluated in the Environmental Assessment for NorthStar and it was determined that no cultural resources will be impacted by the project (DOE, 2012). Therefore, cumulative impacts to historic and cultural resources are SMALL.19.4.13.7Socioeconomic Environment The description of the affected environment in Subsection19.3.7 serves as a baseline for the socioeconomic cumulative impact assessment. The geographic area of analysis for evaluation of cumulative effects on socioeconomic resources is the same as that used in Subsection19.4.7 and includes the 91.27 ac. (36.94 ha) within the site boundary and the surrounding Rock County. As discussed in Subsection19.4.7.1, impacts from construction and operation of the SHINE facility have a SMALL impact on socioeconomic conditions. Impacts to transportation in Rock County associated with the development of the SHINE site are discussed in Subsection19.4.7.2 and are SMALL.Table 19.4.13-2 identifies recent past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the geographic extent of analysis that can be assessed to determine cumulative effects on the socioeconomic environment. Relevant "other actions" that are considered in this cumulative effects analysis are limited to the associated ut ility line extensions, the proposed SHINE facility, the TIF District No. 35 Project Plan, and NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, all of which are future actions. No present or on-going actions were identified that are relevant to this analysis.The TIF District No. 35 Project Plan approved in August, 2011, established TIF District No. 35 adjacent to the northern boundary of the SHINE site. In February, 2012, the Project Plan was amended to expand the district boundary to include the SHINE site. Prior to the inclusion of the SHINE site, the 226 ac. (91ha) district was created to facilitate development of a new industrial park. The district is zoned for light industrial uses and has the potential to be subdivided into 16parcels ranging from 10.99 to 18.86 ac. (4.45 to 7.6ha) in size. Wisconsin's Tax Increment District Law allows the City of Janesville to retain the property taxes levied against projected improved property value within TIF District No. 35 to pay for improvement costs that are incurred to attract new industrial development. The Project Plan proposes extension of utilities to the district and construction of an extension of Progress Drive from the north. Construction of additional utility and roadway extensions is expected to be phased to meet the needs of specific development projects.19.4.13.7.1Water Supply and Water Treatment As described in Subsection 19.4.13.2, the City of Janesville plans to install a water main and sanitary sewer main along the northern boundary of the SHINE site. The City has indicated that the water main and sewer main have more than enough capacity to support the facility and construction related population increase. Therefore, the City's water supply system and sanitary sewer system are not expected to require any upgrades. Development of the TIF District No.35 Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-121Rev. 0immediately north of the SHINE site will likely place additional demands on the City's water supply and water treatment system. The project plan for the TIF District No. 35 states that improvements to utilities will be made as needed to facilitate development and expansion (City of Janesville, 2012b). As new streets are constructed to provide access to new sites, sewer and water utilities are expected to be installed within the rights-of-way to minimize impacts. Therefore, cumulative effects to water supply and water treatment are SMALL.19.4.13.7.2Tax BaseThe development of TIF District No.35 facilitates industrial expansion, increases property values, and creates new jobs in the City of Janesville. These jobs support the diversification of the local economy and the increased manufacturing and warehousing/distribution payrolls and have a positive multiplier effect in the trade and service sectors. However, as discussed in Subsection19.4.7.1, the overall tax revenues from the SHINE and TIF District No.35 projects are positive, and relatively small in comparison to the established tax bases. Therefore, cumulative effects to the tax bases are SMALL.19.4.13.7.3Labor Force and PopulationThe NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes facility is planned to be constructed in neighboring Beloit in Rock County, WI. NorthStar plans to break ground in 2013, with production beginning in 2016, and is expected to create more than 150 jobs by 2016 (NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, 2012 and Beloit Daily News, 2011). The NorthStar facility is smaller in land area (33ac. [13ha]) and facility footprint (82,000 square ft. [7618square m]) compared to that of the SHINE facility. No workforce breakdown is available for the NorthStar facility. However, it is possible that the demand for workers may overlap between the two facilities for several labor categories. However, given the large workforce availability within the region, no significant labor category shortfalls are expected. The presence of the Blackhawk Technical College and the University of Wisconsin, Madison will help to ensure the availability of a workforce well trained for the required positions. In consideration of the availability and composition of the existing workforce, the cumulative effects on population growth are SMALL.19.4.13.7.4TransportationAs described in Subsection19.4.7.2, no modifications to the local traffic infrastructure are necessary as a result of construction-related traffic at the SHINE site. If construction activities at the TIF District No. 35 site are concurrent with those at SHINE, it is not expected to result in a significant impact on local traffic patterns or infrastructure. The other future development project in the area, NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, is located in the neighboring City of Beloit and therefore does not contribute to cumulative impacts due to the distance between facilities. Mitigation measures described in Subsection19.4.7.2.1 alleviate impacts on traffic patterns due to operation of the SHINE facility. It is anticipated that any impacts from operation of the TIF District No.35 or NorthStar facilities can be mitigated in a similar fashion. Therefore, cumulative effects to transportation infrastructure and traffic patterns are SMALL.19.4.13.7.5Summary of Socioeconomic Cumulative ImpactsIn summary, cumulative impacts from other actions identified in Table19.4.13-1 on aspects of socioeconomics, including water/wastewater systems, population growth, local tax base, the labor force, and transportation are SMALL. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-122Rev. 019.4.13.8Human HealthThe geographic area of analysis for evaluation of cumulative effects on human health is the same as that used in Subsection19.4.8 and includes the 91.27ac. (36.94 ha) within the site boundary and the 5 mi. (8 km) region surrounding the site. As discussed in Subsections19.4.8.1 and 19.4.8.2, impacts from operation of the SHINE facility has a SMALL impact on human health.Table19.4.13-2 identifies recent past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the geographic extent of analysis that can be assessed to determine cumulative effects on human health. Relevant "other actions" that are considered in this cumulative effects analysis are limited to the proposed facility, NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, and the two medical facilities located in Janesville: Mercy Clinic South and Mercy Hospital. The proposed SHINE and NorthStar facilities are future actions, whereas the hospital facilities are present and on-going.19.4.13.8.1Non-Radiological ImpactsConstruction of the SHINE and NorthStar facilities includes potential hazards to workers typical of any construction site. Normal construction safety practices will be employed to promote worker safety and reduce the likelihood of worker injury during construction. Since the Mercy Clinic South and Mercy Hospital are already operating, they have no associated construction
impacts.Potential non-radiological public and occupational hazards pertaining to the operation of the SHINE and NorthStar facilities are associated with emissions, discharges, and waste associated with processes within the facility as well as accidental spills/releases. The great majority of chemical processes at the SHINE facility are conducted inside of the RCA. Any wastes created by these processes are disposed of as radioactive waste and shipped off-site. Some lab-scale chemical use occurs outside the RCA. Liquid wastes produced as a result of these activities are treated to ensure they meet the requirements of the Janesville wastewater treatment facility before being discharged to the municipal sewer. Additionally, the facility sanitary wastewater is treated by the Janesville wastewater treatment facility.Control systems are in place for the SHINE facility and presumably for other permitted projects in accordance with WDNR and local requirements to minimize potential exposure to the public and include conveyance of all wastewater to appropriate approved wastewater treatment facilities, implementation of Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure Plans, and air emission controls, as appropriate. Therefore, cumulative impacts to non-radiological health are SMALL.19.4.13.8.2Radiological ImpactsThe proposed SHINE facility releases small quantities of radionuclides to the environment. Gaseous effluent activity releases and liquid effluent activity releases are discussed in Subsections 19.4.8.2.4.1 and 19.4.8.2.4.2, respectively. Direct dose to a member of the public at the site boundary is due to gamma radiation penetrating the walls of the production facility and the waste staging and shipping facility. As a result of site shielding design, the direct dose outside of the buildings is small and decreases with increasing distance. The nearest site boundary is located at an appreciable distance from the two fixed sources of radiation (production facility building and waste staging and shipping building); therefore the dose is negligible at the site boundary. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-123Rev. 0There are no nuclear fuel cycle facilities located within the 5 mi. (8 km) region around the SHINE site. However, Interstate 39/90 is approximately 2 mi. (3.2 km) from the site boundary, which may result in some radiation exposure from the transportation of radioactive material along the highway. The SHINE site is surrounded by railroads on all sides except for the southeast, so additional doses of radiation may result from transportation of radioactive materials along the
railroads. The NorthStar facility is not projecting to have any radioactive emissions related to the operation of the facility. The facility is designed to control the amount of radioactive material released to a negligible amount. Operations emissions are not expected to violate any federal or state criteria or trigger the need for a PSD or Title V operating permit. Additionally, liquid waste generated during operations will be collected, temporarily stored on-site, and sent off-site for treatment and disposal per WDNR regulations. No public dose from air emissi ons or wastewater from the NorthStar facility is expected. Mercy Clinic South and Mercy Hospital provide imaging services to patients that include radiation oncology and nuclear medicine. Doses of radiological exposure to the public from these facilities are negligible. Therefore, cumulative impacts to radiological health are SMALL.As described in Subsection 19.4.10, the effect of transportation of radioactive material from the SHINE facility on the public is SMALL compared to the background radiological dose in the vicinity of the SHINE facility. Transportation workers will receive a larger dose due to the number of shipments originating at the SHINE facility. The shipment of radioactive material for the SHINE and NorthStar facilities contributes to the cumulative impact of radioactive material production, storage, utilization and disposal for all facilities in the United States that utilize radioactive material. The cumulative impacts of the transportation of radioactive materials for the existing facilities in the region, including the Mercy medical facilities, are SMALL and the impacts from the addition of the SHINE facility do not change that conclusion. Therefore, cumulative effects on transportation of nuclear material from the addition of the SHINE facility are SMALL.19.4.13.9Environmental JusticeThe geographic area of analysis for evaluation of cumulative effects on environmental justice is the same as that used in Subsection19.4.12 and includes the 91.27ac. (36.94ha) within the site boundary and the 5 mi. (8km) region surrounding the site. As discussed in Subsection19.4.12, construction and operation impacts to environmental justice in the region are SMALL.Table 19.4.13-2 identifies recent past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the geographic extent of analysis that can be assessed to determine cumulative effects on environmental justice. Relevant "other actions" that are considered in this cumulative effects analysis are limited to the utility line extensions, the proposed facility, and the TIF District No. 35 Project Plan, all of which are future actions. No present or on-going actions were identified that are relevant to this analysis.Disproportionate impacts on low-income or minority populations from other actions are not expected. The proximity of the utility line extensions and TIF District No. 35 project to the SHINE site indicates that the populations of concern at these locations will be the same and that the cumulative impacts on environmental justice are SMALL. Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-124Rev. 019.4.13.10ConclusionTable19.4.13-3 summarizes the cumulative impacts in all resource areas. In conclusion, there are no significant cumulative adverse environmental impacts from the construction and operation of the SHINE site when considered together with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects in the area. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-125Rev. 0Table 19.4.13-1 Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Projects and Other Actions Considered in the Cumulative Effects Analysis(Sheet 1 of 3) Project Name Summary of ProjectLocationPotentially Affected Resource(s)Retained for Cumulative Effects AnalysisBasisUtility ProjectsUtility line extensionInstallation of water and sewer lines Adjacent to SHINE siteLand Use; Geology; Noise, Water; Ecology; Historical and Cultural; Socioeconomics; Environmental JusticeYPart of overall development of TIF District No. 35; SHINE to tie into line extension.Water and Sewer System ImprovementsImprovements throughout the City of JanesvilleRock County, WILand Use; Water; SocioeconomicsNConstruction activities limited to previously disturbed/ developed landsEnergy ProjectsAlliant Energy Generation FacilityExisting power
generation facilityRock County, WIAir Quality, Visual ResourcesYExisting operating facility. Stacks visible in site
viewshedUniversity of Wisconsin Charter StreetReplacement of coal boilers with natural gas
boilersDane County, WIAir QualityYPlanned rebuild of current facilities with new construction permittedWest Campus CogenerationConstruction of new cooling towers for chiller plant expansionDane County, WIAir Quality YExisting facility with new construction permittedNew ConstructionFuture UrbanizationConstruction of housing, commercial buildings, roads, bridges, rail, and other utility facilities, as described in local land use planning documents.Throughout the regionLand Use; Visual; Geology; Air Quality; Noise; Water; Ecology; Historical and Cultural; Socioeconomics; Environmental JusticeNAll future actions with timeline uncertain. Not in immediate proximity to SHINE site Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-126Rev. 0Table 19.4.13-1 Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Projects and Other Actions Considered in the Cumulative Effects Analysis (Sheet 2 of 3)Project NameSummary of ProjectLocationPotentially Affected Resource(s) Retained for Cumulative Effects AnalysisBasisJanesville Innovation CenterProvides support and assistance for small businesses and start-upsRock County, WISocioeconomicsNConstruction activities limited to previously disturbed/ developed landsNorthStar Medical Radioisotopes Medical radioisotope production facility Rock County, WIAir Quality; Historical and Cultural; Socioeconomics; Human HealthYConstruction planned to start in 2013TIF District No. 35 Project PlanParcel zoned for industrial use as a TIF districtAdjacent to SHINE site, Rock County, WILand Use; Geology; Noise, Ecology; Historical and Cultural; Socioeconomics; Environmental JusticeYApproved by City of JanesvilleManufacturing FacilitiesGenerac Power SystemsModifications to venting stack at generator manufacturing location Jefferson County, WIAir QualityYExisting operation with new construction permittedKraft Foods GlobalNew boiler construction at a processing location for prepared foodsDane County, WIAir QualityYExisting operation with new construction permittedUnited EthanolFacility upgrades at an ethanol production plantRock County, WIAir QualityYExisting operation with new construction permittedTraffic ProjectsInterstate 39/90 CorridorExpansion and improvementsDane and Rock Counties, WILand Use; Water Resources; Air Quality; Noise; SocioeconomicsNTimeframe uncertain Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-127Rev. 0Table 19.4.13-1 Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Projects and Other Actions Considered in the Cumulative Effects Analysis (Sheet 3 of 3)Project NameSummary of ProjectLocationPotentially Affected Resource(s) Retained for Cumulative Effects AnalysisBasisPalmer Drive Bridge Railing replacementRock County, WILand Use; Water Resources; Air Quality; Noise; Socioeconomics NConstruction activities limited to previously disturbed/ developed landsRoad Improvement ProjectsCurb, gutter and sidewalk replacement; manhole rehabilitation and replacement; street resurfacingRock County, WILand Use; Water Resources; Air Quality; Noise; SocioeconomicsNConstruction activities limited to previously disturbed/ developed landsSouthern Wisconsin Regional AirportPublic airport Rock County, WIVisual Resources; Noise; WaterYExisting facility. OperationalWIS 26 CorridorRoad expansionRock County, WILand Use; Water Resources; Air Quality; Noise; SocioeconomicsNTimeframe uncertainUS 14 Corridor StudyRoad expansion studyDane and Rock Counties, WILand Use; Water Resources; Air Quality; Noise; SocioeconomicsNTimeframe uncertainUS 14/WIS 11 Corridor
StudyRoad expansion studyRock and Walworth Counties, WILand Use; Water Resources; Air Quality; Noise; SocioeconomicsNTimeframe uncertainRadiological SourcesMercy Clinic SouthMedical services facilityRock County, WIHuman HealthYOperationalMercy HospitalMedical services facilityRock County, WIHuman HealthYOperationalOther Projects/ ActionsGlen Erin Golf Course7000-yd. public golf courseRock County, WIWater QualityYExisting facility. Operational Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-128Rev. 0Table 19.4.13-2 Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Projects and Other Actions Retained for the Cumulative Effects Analysis(Sheet 1 of 2)Project NameSummary of ProjectLocationStatusUtility ProjectsUtility line extensionInstallation of water and sewer lines0.1 mi. north of siteTimeframe dependent on SHINE facility construction Energy ProjectsAlliant Energy Generation FacilityExisting power generation facility3.2 mi south of siteExisting operating facility, stacks visible in site viewshed(WDNR, 2011b)University of Wisconsin Charter StReplacement of coal boilers with natural gas boilers36.4 mi. northwest of
siteUnder construction (WDNR, 2011c; WDNR, 2012c) West Campus CogenerationConstruction of new cooling towers for chiller plant expansion37.1 mi. northwest of
siteExisting operation with new construction permitted(WDNR, 2010a)New ConstructionTIF District No. 35 Project PlanParcel zoned for industrial use as a TIF district0.9 mi. north of siteApproved by City of Janesville (City of Janesville, 2012b) NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes Medical radioisotope facility 7.7 mi. south of siteConstruction planned to start in 2013 (NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, 2012)Transportation ProjectsSouthern Wisconsin Regional AirportPublic airport 1.0 mi southwest of siteOperational (AirNav, 2013)Manufacturing FacilitiesGenerac Power SystemsModifications to venting stack at generator manufacturing location21.8 mi. northeast of siteExisting operation with new construction permitted(WDNR, 2010b)Kraft Foods GlobalNew boiler construction at a processing location for prepared foods37.5 mi. northwest of siteExisting operation with new construction permitted(WDNR, 2012e)United EthanolFacility upgrades at an ethanol production plant11.2 mi. northeast of siteExisting operation with new construction permitted(WDNR, 2012d) Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-129Rev. 0Table 19.4.13-2 Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Projects and Other Actions Retained for the Cumulative Effects Analysis(Sheet 2 of 2)Project NameSummary of ProjectLocationStatusRadiological SourcesMercy Clinic SouthMedical services facility1.8 mi. north of siteOperational (Mercy Health System, 2012a)Mercy HospitalMedical services facility4.4 mi. north of siteOperational (Mercy Health System, 2012b)Other Projects/ ActionsGlen Erin Golf Course7000-yd. public golf course1.6 mi southwest of siteOperational (Wisconsin Golf Courses, 2013) Chapter 19 - Environmental Review Cumulative EffectsSHINE Medical Technologies19.4-130Rev. 0Table 19.4.13-3 Cumulative Impacts on Environmental Resources, Including the Impacts of the Proposed ProjectResource CategoryCumulative Impact LevelLand Use and Visual Resources Land UseSMALL Visual ResourcesSMALL Air Quality and Noise Air QualitySMALL NoiseSMALL Geologic EnvironmentSMALLWater Resources HydrologySMALL Water UseSMALL Water QualitySMALL Ecological Resources Terrestrial EcosystemsSMALL Aquatic EcosystemsSMALL SocioeconomicsSMALLHistoric and Cultural ResourcesSMALLHuman Health Nonradiological HealthSMALL Radiological HealthSMALL Environmental JusticeSMALLTransportationSMALL Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTable of ContentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-iRev. 0SECTION 19.5ALTERNATIVESTable of Contents SectionTitlePage19.5ALTERNATIVES..........................................................................................19.5-119.5.1NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE.....................................................................19.5-119.5.2REASONABLE ALTERNATIVES..............................................................19.5-219.5.3COST-BENEFIT OF THE ALTERNATIVES..............................................19.5-7219.5.4COMPARISON OF THE POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS......19.5-93 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-iiRev. 0List of Tables NumberTitle19.5.2-1Sensitive Features in the Chippewa Falls Site Area19.5.2-2Potential Land Use and Natural Habitat Impacts at the Chippewa Falls Site (USGS, 2006)19.5.2-3Plant Species Oberved at the Chippewa Falls Site19.5.2-4Endangered Resources Known or Likely to Occur in the Chippewa Falls Site Area19.5.2-5Annual Average Hourly Traffic Counts in the Chippewa Falls Site Area19.5.2-6Minority and Poverty Populations within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Chippewa Falls Site19.5.2-8Sensitive Features in the Stevens Point Site Area 19.5.2-9Potential Land Use and Natural Habitat Impacts at the Stevens Point Site (USGS, 2006)19.5.2-10Plant Species Observed at the Stevens Point Site 19.5.2-11Endangered Resources Known or Likely to Occur in the Stevens Point Site Area19.5.2-12Annual Average Hourly Traffic Counts in the Stevens Point Site Area19.5.2-13Minority and Poverty Populations within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Stevens Point Site19.5.2-14Potentially Significant Projects Identified within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Stevens Point Site Vicinity19.5.4-1Comparison of Construction Impacts for the SHINE Site and Alternative Sites 19.5.4-2Comparison of Operation Impacts for the SHINE Site and Alternative Sites19.5.4-3Comparison of Construction Impacts for the SHINE Technology and Alternative Technologies19.5.4-4Comparison of Operation Impacts for the SHINE Technology and Alternative Technologies Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of FiguresSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-iiiRev. 0List of Figures NumberTitle19.5.2-1Locations of States Considered for Potential Sites (Black Dots) Relative to Potential Customers (Yellow Stars)19.5.2-2Locations of Communities in Wisconsin Considered for Potential Sites (Black Dots) Relative to Potential Future Customers (Yellow Stars)19.5.2-3Locations of Potential Sites19.5.2-4Conceptual Layout of the Chippewa Falls Site19.5.2-5Sensitive Features Near the Chippewa Falls Site19.5.2-6Census Block Groups with Above Average Low Income Population within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Chippewa Falls Site 19.5.2-7Conceptual Layout of the Stevens Point Site19.5.2-8Sensitive Features Near the Stevens Point Site19.5.2-9Census Block Groups with Above Average Low Income Population within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Stevens Point Site Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-ivRev. 0Acronyms and AbbreviationsAcronym/Abbreviation Definition10 CFR 20Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 20oCdegrees Celsius oFdegrees Fahrenheitac.acreADAMSAgencywide Documents Access and Management SystemAHRaqueous homogeneous reactor B&W TSGBabcock & Wilcox Technical Services Group, Inc.CFRCode of Federal Regulations Cicurie CLSCanadian Light Sourcecmcentimetercm/scentimeters per second CPConstruction PermitDOEU.S. Department of EnergyERPEnvironmental Repair Program ft.feetGEHGE Hitachi Nuclear EnergyGISGeographic Information System gpmgallons per minutehahectareHEUhighly enriched uranium HIhealth imaging Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-vRev. 0I-131iodine-131 in.inchISGInterim Staff Guidance kmkilometer kWkilowattLliterL/minliters per minute LEUlow enriched uranium LUSTleaking underground storage tank mmeterMHAMaximum Hypothetical Accident mi.mileMo-98molybdenum-98 Mo-99molybdenum-99 Mo-100molybdenum-100MURRUniversity of Miss ouri Research Reactor MWmegawattNAAQSNational Ambient Air quality Standards NMNuclear MonitorNorthStarNorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, LLC NOxnitrogen oxides NRCU.S. Nuclear Regulator Commission NRCSNatural Resource Conservation Service NRHPNational Register of Historic PlacesAcronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-viRev. 0OLOperating License PMparticulate matter SHINESHINE Medical Technologies SO2sulfur dioxideSPCCSpill Prevention, Control, and CountermeasureSPTStandard Penetration Test sq.squareSWRASouthern Wisconsin Regional AirportTc-99mtechnetium-99m TIFTax Increment Financing UMUniversity of Missouri -ColumbiaUSCBU.S. Census BureauUSEPAU.S. Environmental Protection Agency USFWSU.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceUSGSU.S. Geological Survey UWUniversity of Wisconsin -MadisonWBNWisconsin BrokerNETWDNRWisconsin Department of Natural ResourcesWDORWisconsin Department of Revenue WDOTWisconsin Department of TransportationWDPIWisconsin Department of Public InstructionWGNHSWisconsin Geological and Natural History SurveyWNNWorld Nuclear NewsAcronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-viiRev. 0Xe-133xenon-133Acronyms and Abbreviations (cont'd)Acronym/Abbreviation Definition Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewNo-Action AlternativeSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-1Rev. 0CHAPTER 1919.5ALTERNATIVES19.5.1NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVEThis section defines the No-Action Alternative and describes the consequences of adopting the No-Action Alternative.The proposed federal action is the issuance of a Construction Permit (CP) and Operating License (OL) that would allow SHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. (SHINE) to construct and operate a medical SHINE facility to produce molybdenum -99 (Mo-99), iodine-131 (I-131), and xenon-133 (Xe-133). Under the No-Action Alternative, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) would not issue the CP and OL, and the construction and operation of the SHINE facility would not occur. In accordance with the Final Interim Staff Guidance (ISG) Augmenting NUREG-1537, Chapter 19, the environmental consequences of the No-Action Alternative are assumed to be the status quo. If the SHINE facility were not constructed and operated, the environmental consequences discussed in Section 19.4 would be avoided. The consequences that would be avoided include adverse impacts such as changes in land use; however, as discussed in Section 19.4, the severity of all of the adverse impacts is considered to be SMALL. Because the adverse impacts are not significant, the benefit of avoiding those impacts would also not be significant. In addition, as discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, construction and operation of the SHINE facility produces socioeconomic benefits, such as increases in tax revenues to local jurisdictions. If the SHINE facility were not constructed and operated, these beneficial socioeconomic impacts would not be realized.In addition to the beneficial socioeconomic impacts discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, the SHINE facility benefits the health of people who need diagnostic tests that require technetium-99m (Tc-99m) and other isotopes. The facility is expected to satisfy approximately half of the annual demand for Tc-99m in the United States, and to provide a more reliable supply of this isotope than currently exists. This represents a significant health benefit. The facility will also produce I-131 and Xe-133, which will have additional health benefits. If the SHINE facility were not constructed and operated, these health benefits would not be realized.The SHINE facility also produces significant programmatic benefits that would not be realized under the No-Action Alternative. These programmatic benefits are summarized in the following paragraphs.As discussed in Subsection 19.1.1, there is currently no commercial production of Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133 in the United States. Reactors outside the United States supply these isotopes. Two of these reactors are more than 50 years old (NRCL, 2009), and both have experienced supply disruptions related to maintenance problems. In addition to age-related maintenance problems, the reliability of the medical isotope supply is further jeopardized by increasing demand, both domestically and globally; by the increasing difficulty of transporting medical isotopes across international borders; and by the short half-life of these medical isotopes. Because of these supply reliability concerns, the U.S. government has a policy to encourage the domestic production of medical isotopes. The SHINE facility makes a significant contribution toward advancing this policy. Under the No-Action Alternative, this benefit would not be realized, in direct Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-2Rev. 0contradiction of the stated policy of the U.S. government to encourage the domestic production of medical isotopes.The SHINE facility also helps achieve U.S. government nonproliferation objectives. Currently, most medical isotopes are produced by irradiating highly enriched uranium (HEU) targets in non-power reactors fueled with low enriched uranium (LEU).The United States currently exports HEU for medical SHINE. Congress passed the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (U.S. Government, 1992), which includes a nonproliferation objective to phase out exports of HEU for medical SHINE. Based on this, the U.S. government is encouraging medical SHINE without the use of HEU. The SHINE facility uses LEU to produce medical isotopes, thereby avoiding the use of HEU, reducing the need to ship HEU abroad, and helping to accomplish the nonproliferation objective. Under the No-Action Alternative, this benefit would not be realized.19.5.2REASONABLE ALTERNATIVES This section discusses alternatives to the proposed project as required by the NRC Final ISG Augmenting NUREG-1537. The fo llowing types of alter natives are discussed:*Alternative sites *Alternative technologiesBoth beneficial and adverse impacts are described for the associated environmental resource areas for alternative sites and alternative technologies. The analyses include direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts. Impacts are analyzed in proportion to their significance.It should be noted that alternative siting within each site is not discussed, because the alternative sites are relatively small and no reasonable arrangement of the SHINE facility components within the site boundaries would avoid or significantly reduce the expected environmental impacts. Modification of existing facilities (versus construction of an entirely new facility) is not discussed, because the SHINE facility is intended to be a new stand-alone facility employing a technology that has not previously been used anywhere in the world. Finally, alternative transportation methods are not discussed, because there are no reasonable alternatives considering the nature of the products that need to be transported from the SHINE facility. Due to the short half-life of Mo-99 (2.75 days), this isotope is normally shipped from the facility to the processing facility by air. Among the other possible products, I-131 has a half-life of 8.0 days, and Xe-133 has a half-life of 5.2 days. Due to their longer half-lives, these isotopes could be shipped by either truck or air. However, since the I-131 and Xe-133 would likely be shipped with the Mo-99 shipments, air shipment is the most reasonable method. (Knolls, 2002)19.5.2.1ALTERNATIVE SITES19.5.2.1.1Identification of Reasonable Alternatives This subsection discusses the identification of reasonable siting alternatives for the SHINE facility. The following information is provided:*Process used to determine reasonable alternatives to the proposed site.*All alternative sites considered. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-3Rev. 0*Alternative sites that were eliminated from further study.*Description of reasonable alternative sites.*Discussion of any alternative sites considered that would reduce or avoid adverse effects.The region considered for potential sites was based on SHINE's mission to serve the need for medical isotopes in the United States. In a market where the primary product decays at a rate of 1 percent per hour, being in close proximity to customers is of utmost importance, since minimizing product travel time is key.When determining potential customers, SHINE considered two scenarios: the near-term scenario, in which SHINE sells Mo-99 and other medical isotopes as an active pharmaceutical ingredient to packagers; and a possible long-term scenario, in which SHINE expands to also package and distribute the isotopes itself. The second, long-term scenario is outside the scope of this license application, but was considered in identifying and evaluating potential sites.In the near-term scenario, SHINE identified three likely customers: Nordion (Ottawa, Canada), Covidien (St. Louis, Missouri), and Lantheus Medical Imaging (Billerica, Massachusetts). A production site central to these locations minimizes product losses due to decay during shipment.In addition to these three customers, in the long-term scenario SHINE would be selling directly to consumers. As the hospitals and radiopharmacies that use medical isotopes are located throughout the country, the center of the United States was particularly appealing. Locating on either coast would result in fewer patients being served and therefore reduced social and economic benefits. In general, the Midwest provides a good balance between proximity to currently anticipated customers and customers anticipated in an expansion scenario.Given the Midwest as a starting point, SHINE proceeded to contact state economic development offices. States to be contacted were chosen based on their location and perceived potential ability to provide financial incentives to the project. SHINE contacted economic development offices in Wisconsin, Minnesota, Ohio, Michigan, and Louisiana. Although Louisiana is not considered part of the Midwest, the potential for high financial incentives prompted SHINE to request information.No response was received from Ohio or Michigan; therefore, they were eliminated from consideration. A preliminary check of the seismic conditions in Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Louisiana indicated no major fault lines in any of these states, thereby not eliminating any of them from consideration due to seismic activity. After careful analysis of the proposals from Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Louisiana, Wisconsin was chosen for its superior financial incentive package. Of the three states, Wisconsin also has the benefit of being most centrally located with respect to SHINE's three prospective customers (as seen in Figure 19.5.2-1), and being the home state of several project partners, including the University of Wisconsin-Madison (UW), the Morgridge Institute for Research, and Phoenix Nuclear Labs. Thereby, the states of Minnesota and Louisiana were eliminated from further consideration.After narrowing the search to the state of Wisconsin, SHINE identified four communities that met certain basic requirements for the SHINE plant. In the initial consideration process, the communities were required to have build-to-suit land available for development with good access to an interstate highway, and an airport capable of handling aircraft necessary for isotope Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-4Rev. 0distribution within approximately 10 minutes of the potential site. The four communities identified in Wisconsin that met these requirements were:*Madison*Chippewa Falls *Janesville *Stevens Point Madison was eliminated from consideration early in the study due to lack of community and local government support. The location of the remaining communities is shown in Figure 19.5.2-2. An approximate parcel size appropriate for the facility was determined and the search for parcels within each of the three remaining communities was limited to sites of comparable size. Each of these communities identified a potential site and prepared an incentive proposal detailing the advantages of their site. The location of the potential sites is shown in Figure 19.5.2-3. SHINE then proceeded to compare these sites on the basis of the following criteria:*Local government and community support.
- Financial incentives.
- Size and shape of the proposed parcel.*Access to a skilled workforce.*Proximity to potential future customers.
- Proximity to airport.*Proximity to an interstate highway.*Anticipated depth to groundwater table.
- Seismic characteristics.*Presence of endangered resources and wetlands.*Presence of historic and archaeological resources.The assessments of these criteria with respect to the potential sites are discussed as follows:Local government and community supportLocal government and community support will be essential to SHINE successfully completing its mission and, therefore, were very important factors in the site selection process. All three communities showed very high interest in the project and were extremely cooperative.
Financial incentivesFinancial incentives will also be key to SHINE's success and were thus key to the site selection process. All three communities were competitive with respect to economic incentives, though Janesville and Stevens Point had a slight economic advantage over Chippewa Falls. Size and shape of the proposed parcelA greater distance from the facility to the site boundary was considered beneficial, as a greater distance decreases likelihood of adverse impact to the public. The Janesville site, being 90 acres (ac.) (36.4 hectares [ha]) in size and roughly square, had the largest minimum distance to the site boundary at approximately 1000 feet (ft.) (304.8 meters [m]) in all directions. Stevens Point Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-5Rev. 0proposed an 80 ac. (32.4 ha), square site, roughly on par with the Janesville site minimum distance at just a little under 1000 ft. (304.8 m) in all directions. The Chippewa Falls site, being slightly less than 80 ac. (32.4 ha) and oblong in shape, had a considerably smaller minimum distance to the site boundary in some directions.Access to a skilled workforceTwo factors were considered when determining access to a skilled workforce: proximity to large cities and the potential cooperation with local universities or technical colleges willing to help train the production facility workforce. With respect to larger cities, Janesville has the advantage of being near Madison, Milwaukee, and Chicago. Chippewa Falls is fairly close to Minneapolis/St. Paul, while Stevens Point is a bit more remote. Janesville and Stevens Point both have access to universities or technical colleges willing to help train SHINE's workforce: Blackhawk Technical College and UW-Stevens Point, respectively. Workforce training was not offered by local officials at Chippewa Falls.Proximity to potential customersOf the three potential locations in Wisconsin, medical isotopes shipped from Janesville had the shortest overall distance to travel to each of SHINE's customers by air. Proximity to airportAs discussed earlier, efficient product transportation is extremely important in the medical isotope business. The closer the site was to the local airport, the better from this perspective. The Janesville site is directly across from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (SWAR), requiring SHINE's product to travel less than 0.5 mile (mi.) (0.8 kilometer [km]). The Stevens Point site was approximately 4 mi. (6.4 km) from the Stevens Point Municipal Airport. The Chippewa Falls site was approximately 10 mi. (16.1 km) from the Chippewa Valley Regional Airport. The perceived disadvantage of a higher risk of an airplane crash with increased proximity to the airport (no formal analysis was done on the risk of a crash at the alternative sites) is mitigated through design of the facility.In the case of local airport closure, it is likely that SHINE's product would be transported by truck to the nearest secondary airport. The Janesville site is approximately 1 hour from Dane County Regional Airport in Madison, and within 2 hours of both O'Hare International Airport in Chicago and Mitchell International Airport in Milwaukee. The Chippewa Falls site is within 2hours of Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport. The Stevens Point site is more than 2hours from all of these airports.Proximity to an interstate highwayIn the case of a local airport closure, SHINE would intend to ship its product by truck either to thenext closest airport or, depending on the circumstances, directly to the customer. To facilitate ease of transport by truck, close proximity to an interstate highway is desired.The Janesville site is approximately 3 mi. (4.8 km) by road from I-39/90. The Stevens Point site is less than 2 mi. (3.2 km) by road from I-39, and the Chippewa Falls site is approximately 18 mi. (29.0 km) from I-94. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-6Rev. 0Anticipated depth to groundwaterRough approximations of groundwater depth from U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) historical data were taken into consideration. In general, deeper groundwater was considered to be beneficial as deeper groundwater is less likely to impact the facility and vice versa.The Janesville site is located in Rock County, Wisconsin. Historical wells in counties adjacent to Rock County are between 70 and 100 ft. (21.3 and 30.5 m) deep. Recent measurements down to 30 ft. (9.1 m) found no water and the nearby river elevation is approximately 70 ft. (21.3 m) lower than site elevation. Using this information, groundwater depth at the Janesville site was estimated at greater than 30 ft. (9.1 m). Since then, boreholes and wells drilled on-site have found groundwater at between 55 and 65 ft. (16.8 and 19.8 m) below grade.Using similar estimation methods, groundwater depth at the Chippewa Falls site was estimated to be at 20 to 30 ft. (6.1 to 9.1 m). Records of an on-site borehole subsequently showed groundwater at approximately 50 ft. (15.2 m) below grade. Groundwater depth at the Stevens Point site was estimated to be at 10 ft. (3.0 m) or less. Since then, boreholes and wells drilled on-site at Stevens Point have found groundwater at about 8 to 11 ft. (2.4 to 3.4 m) below grade. Seismic characteristicsA preliminary check of the seismic characteristics of each site was made to determine if there were any major advantages or disadvantages between the three. The Janesville site was deemed slightly more likely to have a very weak shaking event than the other two sites; however, both Chippewa Falls and Stevens Point were predicted to be located on glacial sands that might have higher amplification factors than the ground at Janesville. Overall, Janesville was rated slightly preferable from a seismic perspective. Since that time, a geotechnical investigation of the Janesville site has shown glacial deposits at the Janesville site as well.Presence of endangered resources and wetlandsAn Endangered Resources Review by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) was requested for all three sites. Because of the Janesville site's current condition as an active agricultural field far from any wetlands, water or buffer areas, it was determined to be an unsuitable habitat for endangered resources likely to be in the area. No conservation or compliance actions were recommended for the site.Although the Chippewa Falls site was not found to provide suitable habitat for the four Threatened or Special Concern species identified in its vicinity, strict erosion and siltation controls during the entire construction period were recommended to avoid indirect impact to sensitive aquatic species that could be present in the nearby Lake Wissota or Chippewa River. It was also recommended that the small wetland community on the eastern edge of the project site be protected as much as possible to avoid impacting any rare or declining species it may contain.Like Chippewa Falls, the Stevens Point site was determined to be unlikely to provide suitable habitat for the four Threatened or Special Concern species recorded within the vicinity of the project site. No impacts were expected and no conservation or compliance actions were recommended. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-7Rev. 0Input from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) was also requested for all three sites. No federally-listed, proposed, or candidate species are expected within the project area at either the Janesville or Chippewa Falls sites and neither site contains critical habitat.A portion of the Stevens Point site was found to be within the high potential range of the Karner blue butterfly (Lycaeides melissa samuelis), a federally-listed endangered species in Wisconsin. A survey for wild lupine (Lupinus perennis), the host plant of the Karner blue butterfly, was recommended. It was also recommended that any disturbance of migratory bird nesting places occur before May 1 or after August 30 to minimize impacts to migratory birds. As the Stevens Point site is mostly wooded and the trees would need to be cleared for the SHINE project, it is likely that some migratory bird nesting places would be disturbed. Presence of historic and archaeological resourcesThere was no indication that significant archaeological sites or other cultural resources had been reported on or near any of the sites; however, at the time of the potential site evaluations, none of the sites had been surveyed. Since that time a Phase I archaeaological survey of the Janesville site has been completed. The survey did not identify any pre-contact or historic Euro-American archaeological sites. No additional field work is recommended. No surveys are planned for Stevens Point or Chippewa Falls. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-8Rev. 0SummaryEach potential site was given a score based on the factors discussed above. These scores are summarized below:In consideration of these factors, the Janesville site was selected as the proposed site for the SHINE facility. The Chippewa Falls site and the Stevens Point site were both considered to be viable and were identified as reasonable alternatives. As shown in the summary above, the Janesville site had scores equal to or better than the Chippewa Falls and Stevens Point sites on factors related to environmental impacts. The impact evaluations discussed in Subsection 19.5.2.1.2 subsequently confirmed that neither of the alternative sites would reduce nor avoid adverse effects as compared with the Janesville site.19.5.2.1.2Evaluation of Reasonable AlternativesAs discussed in the previous subsection, the Chippewa Falls site and the Stevens Point site are both considered to be viable sites and reasonable alternatives. This subsection describes the alternative sites in more detail, evaluates the major direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental impacts associated with the sites, and describes potential impact mitigation measures that would reduce or minimize adverse impacts.Information on the Chippewa Falls and Stevens Point sites was obtained through field reconnaissance in the site areas, contacts with appropriate government agencies (federal, state, and local), examination of published maps and aerial photographs, and analysis of digitized Geographic Information System (GIS) mapping data. In order to evaluate the environmental impacts of constructing and operating the SHINE facility, the facility design described in Section19.2 and the construction and operation practices described in Section 19.4 were (Max Score)Janesville StevensPointChippewaFallsLocal government and community support(10)101010Financial Incentives(10)998Minimum distance to site boundary(5)554Access to a skilled workforce(5)433 Proximity to potential future customers(5)543Proximity to airport(5)533Proximity to interstate highway(5)453 Anticipated depth to groundwater table(5)524Seismic characteristics(5) 4(a)33Presence of endangered resources and wetlands(5)522Presence of historic and archaeological resources (5)555Total:65615148a) Based on the geotechnical investigation conducted after site selection was completed, this score would be reduced by one point. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-9Rev. 0applied to each site. This allowed for a comprehensive and qualitatively-consistent assessment of environmental impacts. The potential impact of facility construction and operation on each resource category specified in the Final ISG Augmenting NUREG-1537 was assigned a significance level according to the criteria established in 10 CFR 51, Appendix B, Table B-1, Footnote 3, as follows:SMALL - Environmental effects are not detectable or are so minor that they will neither destabilize nor noticeably alter any important attribute of the resource. MODERATE - Environmental effects are sufficient to alter noticeably, but not to destabilize, any important attribute of the resource.LARGE - Environmental effects are clearly noticeable and are sufficient to destabilize any important attributes of the resource.For some analyses, it was determined that the additional impact criteria established by the NRC in NUREG-1437 were appropriate, and those criteria were used to assign a significance level to certain impacts, as noted in the subsections below.In addition to the direct and indirect impacts of the SHINE facility itself, related cumulative impacts from other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future federal and non-federal projects and activities in the area around each site were considered. The specific environmental resources that could be impacted by the incremental effects of the SHINE facility together with other projects in the vicinity were identified, and the cumulative impacts were assessed.The following subsections summarize the evaluation of each alternative site. 19.5.2.1.2.1Chippewa Falls Site19.5.2.1.2.1.1DescriptionThe Chippewa Falls site is located in the Wissota Lake Business Park, near the northern edge of the corporate boundaries of the City of Chippewa Falls in Chippewa County, Wisconsin. The site is bordered to the west by Commerce Parkway, to the north by County Highway S, and to the east by State Highway 178. The southern boundary of the site is not defined by any observable landmarks; it is located in a fallow agricultural field at the edge of property that has been platted but not yet developed for the Lake Wissota Business Park. The site boundaries were determined by the City of Chippewa Falls when they recommended the site to SHINE.The terrain across the site is flat with little noticeable relief other than a gentle slope to the southwest. No residences or other structures are located within the site boundaries. Most of the site is cultivated cropland used for growing corn and soybeans. An abandoned railroad right of way (with the tracks removed) cuts diagonally through the southern portion of the site. South of this right-of-way is a fallow agricultural field, some of which has been graded for use by the Business Park.Figure 19.5.2-4 shows a conceptual layout of the SHINE facility on the Chippewa Falls site, including the area that would be developed with permanent facility structures, the area that would be temporarily disturbed for construction laydown and parking, and the remaining area within the site boundaries. The area developed with permanent structures occupies part of the abandoned Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-10Rev. 0railroad right-of-way, part of the cropland to the north, and part of the fallow field to the south, while the area temporarily disturbed for construction laydown and parking is located entirely in the cropland. The production facility building, which is the only part of the facility that contains safety-related equipment, is located near the center of the site, positioned so as to maximize the distance to the site boundaries in all directions.The area within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the site is a mixture of agricultural land and suburban-type residential and commercial development. The nearest occupied residence is a house located on County Highway S less than 0.1 mi. (0.16 km) northwest of the northern site boundary. Another house is located on County Highway S slightly more than 0.1 mi. (0.16 km) northeast of the site boundary. Several commercial buildings are located along Commerce Parkway less than 0.1 mi. (0.16 km) west of the western site boundary. The nearest residential concentration is a subdivision located on the north side of County Highway I approximately 0.7 mi. (1.0 km) southwest of the southern site boundary. Other residential concentrations are located within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the site boundaries to the west, north, and east.In addition to residences, several other sensitive features are located within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the site boundaries. These include a hospital, a nursing home, a child day care facility, an adult day care facility, several medical clinics, and two colleges. Table 19.5.2-1 lists the distance to each of these sensitive features from the nearest site boundary and the center point of the safety-related area in the production facility building. Table 19.5.2-1 also lists the distance to the nearest public park, public school, and listed historical property, all of which are more than 1 mi. (1.6 km) from the site boundaries. Figure 19.5.2-5 shows the location of the sensitive features identified within 1 mi. (1.6 km).U.S. Highway 53, which is located about 5 mi. (8.0 km) west of the site at its nearest point, provides long-distance road access to the site area. The exit nearest to the site is Exit 99 (County Highway S), which is approximately 5 mi. (8.0 km) west of the site. State Highway 178, which borders the site to the east, also provides access to the site area. U.S. Highway 53 and State Highway 178 are well-maintained multi-lane divided highways. The other roads in the immediate site area are well-maintained two- or four-lane roads with paved shoulders. Chippewa Valley Regional Airport is located approximately 8 mi. (12.8 km) southwest of the site. Aircraft using this airport would be the primary means of transporting isotopes produced by the SHINE facility.An overhead electrical line and underground natural gas pipeline are located along Commerce Parkway at the western edge of the site. An underground municipal water supply pipeline and sanitary sewer pipeline are located approximately 0.2 mi. (3.2 km) south of the site. It is assumed that if this site were developed, the City of Chippewa Falls would extend the sewer and water utilities to the site boundary.19.5.2.1.2.1.2Land Use and Visual Resources ImpactsExisting land use on the Chippewa Falls site is predominantly agricultural, with approximately the northern two-thirds of the site planted in cultivated crops. The abandoned railroad right of way that cuts through the site and the land south of the right-of-way are primarily fallow. Virtually the Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-11Rev. 0entire site is composed of soils classified as prime farmland. No recreational use of the site or the immediate vicinity was identified.No residences or other structures are located within the site boundaries. The site is zoned for Light Industrial use, as are the adjacent parts of the Wissota Lake Business Park (City of Chippewa Falls, 2011). The City of Chippewa Falls has indicated that a Special Use Permit would probably need to be obtained in order to construct the SHINE facility. A public hearing before the City Council could be required as part of the Special Use Permit application process.The acreage of each major land use category found within the areas affected by the conceptual facility layout was estimated based on USGS land use/land cover GIS mapping data (USGS, 2006). Table 19.5.2-2 summarizes the acreages in the major land use categories and compares those quantities with the total acreages found within a 5 mi. (8.0 km) radius of the site. It can be seen that the acreage of each land use category potentially affected by the facility layout is less than 1 percent of the total acreage of that category found within 5 mi. (8.0 km). There is no reason to believe that construction of the SHINE facility would destabilize any important land use resources. Construction would change much of the site from predominantly agricultural use to industrial use, which would noticeably alter the existing land use resources of the site. However, this alteration is consistent with the existing zoning of the site and the intended land use in the Wissota Lake Business Park. Therefore, the land use impact due to project construction would be SMALL. During operation of the SHINE facility, land use impacts would be reduced. No new land use impacts would occur beyond those described above for project construction, and some areas that were temporarily disturbed for construction laydown and parking might be returned to agricultural use. Therefore, the land use impact due to operation of the SHINE facility would be SMALL.Visual resources in the vicinity of the site could be affected by the visual intrusion of industrial structures and equipment. During project construction, dust could create additional visual intrusions. Given that the site area currently includes some rural and residential scenery, in addition to institutional, commercial, and industrial scenery, project construction and operation would alter the existing visual conditions somewhat. However, the severity of visual impacts on the human population would depend primarily on the visibility of the proj ect facilities from sensitive viewing areas.Field reconnaissance and examination of aerial photographs indicate that more than 100 residences are located within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the site boundaries. As discussed in Subsection 19.5.2.1.2.1.1, the area within 1 mi. (1.6 km) also includes several other sensitive viewing areas, including a hospital, a nursing home, a child day care facility, an adult day care facility, several medical clinics, and two colleges. Although trees and existing buildings would block the view from some of these locations, many would be expected to have at least a partial view of the SHINE facility during construction and operation. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-12Rev. 0NUREG-1437 establishes the following criteria for judging the severity of aesthetic impacts:SMALL - No complaints from affected public about a changed sense of place or a diminution in enjoyment of the physical environment, and no measurable impact on socioeconomic institutions and processes.MODERATE - Some complaints from affected public about a changed sense of place or a diminution in enjoyment of the physical environment, and measurable impacts that do not alter the continued functioning of socioeconomic institutions and processes.LARGE - Continuing and widely shared opposition to the project based on a perceived degradation of the area's sense of place or diminution in enjoyment of the physical environment, and measurable social impacts that perturb the continued functioning of community institutions and processes.Considering that the SHINE facility would noticeably alter the appearance of the project site and be at least partially visible from numerous sensitive viewing areas, it is possible that project construction would generate some public complaints related to a changed sense of place and diminished enjoyment of the physical environment. However, it is not likely that there would be "continuing and widely shared opposition" to the project or that there would be "measurable social impacts that perturb the continued functioning of community institutions and processes." Therefore, the visual resources impact associated with project construction would be MODERATE.Project operation would not result in significant further alteration of aesthetic conditions, and it does not seem likely that there would be continued public complaints related to diminished enjoyment of the physical environment. Therefore, the visual resources impact associated with project operation would be SMALL.As shown in Figure 19.5.2-4, the conceptual layout of the Chippewa Falls si te includes provisions to plant trees along the boundaries of the site that border public roads. These provisions would partially mitigate the visual impact of the project, especially during project operation, and this mitigation is considered in the impact assessment discussed above. No other feasible mitigation measures for land use or visual impacts have been identified.19.5.2.1.2.1.3Air Quality and Noise ImpactsThe Chippewa Falls site is located in Chippewa County, Wisconsin, which is part of the Southeast Wisconsin - La Crosse (West Central Wisconsin) Interstate Air Quality Control Region (WDNR, 2012a). The ambient air quality in Chippewa County currently is in attainment with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for all criteria pollutants (ozone, particulate matter, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, and lead) (USEPA, 2012a). The nearest county out of attainment with the NAAQS is Dakota County, Minnesota, which is non-attainment for lead (USEPA, 2012b). Dakota County is located in the Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan area, approximately 75 mi. (120 km) west of the Chippewa Falls site. The nearest Wisconsin county out of attainment is Sheboygan County, Wisconsin, which is non-attainment for ozone (USEPA, 2012a). Sheboygan County is located along the western shore of Lake Michigan, approximately 190 mi. (306 km) southeast of the Chippewa Falls site. At these distances and beyond, air pollution emissions from the Chippewa Falls site would not be expected to have any noticeable effect on non-attainment areas. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-13Rev. 0The air quality impacts of constructing and operating the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be very similar to the impacts discussed for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.2. Potential air pollution emissions during construction would include dust from earthmoving and material handling activities, and exhaust emissions from construction equipment and vehicles. In general, these emissions would be the same as the emissions associated with any large construction project. Emission-specific control measures, such as watering areas of disturbed soil, would be implemented to limit air quality impacts and ensure compliance with applicable federal and state regulations. Therefore, air quality impacts associated with facility construction would be SMALL.During facility operation, the SHINE process would emit small quantities of nitrogen oxides. Natural gas firing to heat buildings and occasional testing of the standby diesel generator would emit nitrogen oxides and very small quantities of particulate matter and sulfur dioxide. Standard emission control measures, such as proper mixing of fuels and combustion air, would be implemented to limit air quality impacts. Emissions during facility operation would be governed by applicable air permits, which would ensure compliance with the NAAQS and other applicable regulatory requirements. Therefore, air quality impacts associated with facility operation would be SMALL.As discussed above, standard emission control measures would be implemented to limit air quality impacts during construction and operation. These measures would ensure that impacts on air quality would be SMALL, and there would be no need for any other air quality impact mitigation measures.Noise emissions during construction at the Chippewa Falls site would be very similar to the emissions discussed for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.2. Based on the depth to bedrock at the Chippewa Falls site (see Subsection 19.5.2.1.2.1.4), blasting and pile driving would not be required for excavation or installation of foundations. The primary source of noise during construction would be the operation of heavy equipment. This noise would be noticeable in the immediate construction area, but it generally would be expected to attenuate to acceptable levels before reaching sensitive receptors. However, vehicular traffic due to construction workers commuting to and from the site and deliveries of equipment and supplies to the site would increase noise levels in the immediate vicinity of several sensitive receptors. It is expected that most project-related traffic would move on Commerce Parkway, County Highway S, and/or County Highway I, and all of these roads have sensitive receptors (residences, medical clinics, day care facilities, a hospital, etc. ) in close proximity. It is likely that increased traffic noise would be noticeable at some of these receptors; therefore, noise impacts associated with project construction would be MODERATE.During operation, project-related traffic would be greatly reduced, and there would be no use of heavy construction equipment on the site. As discussed in Subsection 19.4.2, no significant sources of noise have been identified for project operation. Therefore, noise impacts associated with operation would be SMALL.As shown in Figure 19.5.2-4, the conceptual layout of the Chippewa Falls si te includes provisions to plant trees along the facility access road and the boundaries of the site that border public roads. The layout also would accommodate a low earthen berm around the permanent project facilities. These provisions would be expected to achieve some attenuation of operational noise, and this mitigation is considered in the impact assessment discussed above. No other feasible mitigation measures for noise impacts have been identified. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-14Rev. 019.5.2.1.2.1.4Geology, Soils, and Seismology ImpactsThe majority of the surface soils at the Chippewa Falls site consist of Sattre loam derived from glacial outwash materials. The upper 30 inches (in.) (76.2 centimeters [cm]) of the soil horizon is a mixture of sand, silt, and clay with roughly equal proportions of each. Below 30 in. (76.2 cm), sand becomes the predominant constituent (approximately 90 percent) with a substantial increase in the hydraulic conductivity (approximately 0.015 centimeters per second [cm/s]). Soils at the site are generally well-drained and not susceptible to ponding or flooding. Erosion potential of the surficial soils is expected to be slight to moderate. (UW, 1964; NRCS, 2012)Subsoil information obtained from one boring drilled at the site (American Engineering Testing, 2011) and records of two water wells drilled within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the site (WGNHS, 2004) corroborate the soils information provided above. The on-site boring log (American Engineering Testing, 2011) also shows an apparently man-made layer of fill material, approximately 3 ft. (0.9m) thick, at the surface. The fill material was identified as a mixture of sand, gravel, and clay. It is not known how much of the site is covered by this fill material. Bedrock lies directly beneath the glacial outwash materials and primarily consists of granite (Mudrey, et al., 1982). Karst conditions are not expected in the bedrock (WGNHS, 2012). The single soil boring drilled at the site (American Engineering Testing, 2011) did not encounter bedrock at 82 ft. (25.0 m) below grade, the maximum depth of the boring. Driller's records (WGNHS, 2004) for the two water wells within 1 mi. (1.6 km) show sand and gravel to depths of 50 ft. and 61 ft (15.2 and 18.6 m). The wells were completed within the sand and gravel aquifer, and therefore do not indicate the depth of bedrock. However, a report by the UW (1983) indicates the thickness of unconsolidated materials (soils) as between 100 ft. and 200 ft. (30.5 and 61.0m), which indicates that the depth to bedrock is 100 ft. to 200 ft. (30.5 and 61.0 m) below grade elevation. As described in Subsection 19.4.3, the maximum depth of excavation required for the SHINE facility is 39 ft. (11.9 m) below grade. Therefore, blasting would not be required for installation of foundations or other construction activities.The USGS National Seismic Hazard Maps database (USGS, 2012a) indicates the following peak ground accelerations for the Chippewa Falls site area:*10-percent probability of exceedance in a 50-year period:0.78 percent of gravity.*2-percent probability of exceedance in a 50-year period:2.13 percent of gravity.Based on these values, seismicity in the site area is considered to be minimal. In addition, no significant historical earthquakes have been recorded in the site area or anywhere in Wisconsin (USGS, 2012b), and no Quaternary faults (age less than 1.6 x 106 years) are known to be present in the site area or anywhere in Wisconsin (USGS, 2012c).The Chippewa Falls site is flat and does not contain landslide hazards. Because the site soils are primarily granular (sand with very little silt and clay) below the upper 30 in. (76.2 cm) of the soil profile, and no underground mining activity has been identified in the site area, land subsidence is not anticipated due to either consolidation of the site soils or local loss of support resulting from underground mining. In addition, no potential for shrink/swell action in response to changes in the moisture content of the soil as related to the stability of shallow foundations is anticipated. Potential for frost heave beneath shallow foundations should also be minimal. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-15Rev. 0Standard Penetration Test (SPT) blow counts obtained during drilling of the one soil boring on the site indicate that the sand deposits are generally medium dense and not subject to substantial settlement under typical loads applied by shallow foundations. As described in Subsection 19.4.3, the main building for the SHINE facility has a concrete foundation at 39 ft. (11.9 m) below grade, and it should be possible to design this foundation without the need for piles or drilled piers. Due to the low seismicity of the site area and relatively high SPT blow counts, the potential for earthquake induced liquefaction of subsoil below the groundwater table does not need to be considered. Based on the information summarized above, the geology, soils, and seismology of the Chippewa Falls site would not be expected to have any significant impacts on the SHINE facility. Similarly, construction and operation of the SHINE facility would not be expected to have any significant impacts on the geology, soils, and seismology of the Chippewa Falls site. There is no indication that any rare or unique rock, mineral, or energy assets are present that could be impacted by development at the site. Mining of sand is being conducted in several locations around Chippewa County (where the Chippewa Falls site is located) for use in hydraulic fracturing associated with natural gas production (USGS, 2012c). It is not known whether the type and gradation of the sand at the site is suitable for use in hydraulic fracturing. However, suitable sand deposits appear to be common in Chippewa County and therefore cannot be considered rare or unique. There is no indication that any contaminated soils are present that could be exposed by development at the site. A USGS map of contaminated sites in Chippewa County shows a few closed leaking underground storage tank (LUST) and Environmental Repair Program (ERP) locations in the site area, but investigation and cleanup activities at these locations have been completed and approved by the state (USGS, 2012d). There is no reason to believe that any LUST or ERP concerns extend to the site.Considering the information presented above, geology, soils, and seismology impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL. There would be no need for impact mitigation measures.19.5.2.1.2.1.5Water Resources ImpactsNo streams or other surface water bodies have been identified within the boundaries of the Chippewa Falls site. Therefore, construction of the SHINE facility would have no direct impacts on surface water. The only surface water features identified in close proximity to the site are drainage ditches along the roads that border the site. These drainage ditches would receive rainfall runoff from the construction site, and they potentially could experience indirect impacts, such as increased runoff volumes or degradation of water quality due to sedimentation. However, potential impacts would be minimized by implementing best management practices, such as soil erosion and sediment control measures; runoff detention ponds; provisions to allow infiltration of rainfall; stormwater pollution prevention plans; and Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) plans. Therefore, surface water impacts associated with facility construction would be SMALL.The City of Chippewa Falls municipal water supply system would provide all water required for operation of the SHINE facility. A 16-inch water main currently serves the Wissota Lake Business Park, and this main would be expected to have more than enough capacity to satisfy the needs Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-16Rev. 0of the SHINE facility. The facility would have no need to withdraw surface water or ground water. Best management practices would continue to be used during facility operation to minimize potential impacts on the drainage ditches that receive rainfall runoff from the site. Wastewater other than uncontaminated runoff would be discharged to the City of Chippewa Falls sanitary sewer system after being treated as described in Subsection 19.4.4. Wastewater discharges would comply with state and local pretreatment requirements. Therefore, surface water impacts associated with facility operation would be SMALL.A soil boring drilled at the Chippewa Falls site in 2011 found ground water at a depth of 50 ft. (15.2 m) below the grade elevation (American Engineering Testing, 2011). As described in Subsection 19.4.3, the maximum depth of excavation required for the SHINE facility is 39 ft. (11.9 m) below grade. Although there could be some seasonal variation in the depth to ground water, it is not likely that significant dewatering of excavations would be required. Because the SHINE facility would not withdraw ground water during construction or operation, the only potential impact on ground water would be possible contamination due to a leak or spill of oil or chemicals. The soils found at the Chippewa Falls site have relatively high hydraulic conductivity, which increases the potential for ground water contamination (UW, 1989). However, oil and chemical storage and handling during both construction and operation would be governed by SPCC plans and standard best practices to prevent and contain leaks and spills. Therefore, ground water impacts associated with facility construction and operation would be SMALL.As described above, best management practices and other standard provisions would be used during construction and operation to avoid and minimize impacts on surface water and ground water. These measures would ensure that impacts on water resources would be SMALL, and there would be no need for any other water resources impact mitigation measures.19.5.2.1.2.1.6Ecological Resources ImpactsNo significant ecological resources were identified on or in the immediate vicinity of the Chippewa Falls site. The majority of land on the site is cultivated cropland used for growing corn and soybeans. An abandoned railroad right-of-way (with the tracks removed) cuts diagonally through the southern portion of the site. South of this right-of-way is a fallow agricultural field, some of which has been graded for use by the Wissota Lake Business Park. Observations during a field reconnaissance visit to the site indicate that the edges of the agricultural fields support weedy herbaceous plant species typical of early successional stages. The plant community associated with the abandoned railroad right-of way is a mid-successional disturbance community with a few deciduous tree species and few prairie remnant species observed during field reconnaissance. The fallow agricultural field south of the right-of-way appears to support a typical old field plant community. Representative plant species observed within these areas are listed in Table 19.5.2-3.An apparent wetland community was observed in a narrow drainage way along the eastern edge of the site, immediately west of State Highway 178. Representative plant species observed within this area are listed in Table 19.5.2-3.Wildlife observed at the site included red-tailed hawk, common crow, black-capped chickadee, and various sparrows. None of the plant or animal species observed during field reconnaissance are listed by the USFWS or the WDNR as Endangered, Threatened, or of Special Concern. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-17Rev. 0Figure 19.5.2-4 shows a conceptual facility layout, including the area that would be developed with permanent facility structures and the area that would be temporarily disturbed for construction laydown and parking. It can be seen that the permanently developed area occupies part of the abandoned railroad right-of-way, part of the cropland to the north, and part of the fallow field to the south, while the temporarily disturbed area is located entirely in the cropland.The acreage of natural habitats found within the areas affected by the conceptual facility layout was estimated based on USGS land use/land cover GIS mapping data. Table 19.5.2-2 summarizes the acreages in the natural habitat categories and compares those quantities with the total acreages found within a 5 mi. (8.0 km) radius of the site. It can be seen that the permanently developed area would occupy approximately 0.5 ac. (0.2 ha) of deciduous forest, which represents the trees scattered along the abandoned railroad right-of-way. This is a tiny percentage of the deciduous forest found within 5 mi. (8.0 km) of the site, and the loss of this habitat would not be expected to have any noticeable ecological impact. Table 19.5.2-2 does not show any other natural habitats within the site boundaries.The apparent wetland community observed along the eastern edge of the site is not identified as wetland habitat in the GIS data used to compile Table 19.5.2-2, probably because the community developed somewhat recently as a result of drainage alterations caused by State Highway 178. This wetland community may have some ecological value, but it would not be disturbed during construction or operation of the SHINE facility. The drainage ditch that supports the wetland community would receive rainfall runoff from the site and could potentially experience indirect impacts such as increased runoff volumes or degradation of water quality. However, as discussed in Subsection 19.5.2.1.2.1.5, potential impacts would be minimized by implementing best management practices and pollution prevention plans during construction and operation. Therefore, the wetland community would not be significantly affected.The nearest wetland habitat represented in GIS mapping data is a small area located along a railroad line west of the Chippewa Falls site. This wetland area is approximately 0.25 mi. (0.4km) from the site boundary at its nearest point, and it is separated from the site by two roads and a row of commercial buildings. It would not be directly or indirectly affected by construction or operation of the SHINE facility.As discussed in Subsection 19.5.2.1.2.1.5, no streams or other surface water bodies have been identified within the boundaries of the Chippewa Falls site, and the only surface water features identified in close proximity to the site are drainage ditches along the roads that border the site. These drainage ditches do not represent significant aquatic ecological habitats. The nearest significant surface water bodies are Lake Wissota, which at its nearest point is approximately 0.75 mi. (1.2 km) north-northwest of the site, and the Chippewa River, which at its nearest point is approximately 0.9 mi. (1.4 km) south of the site. Both of these are significant ecological habitats, but neither would be directly or indirectly affected by construction or operation of the SHINE facility.A consultation letter received from the USFWS (2012a) states that "no federally-listed, proposed, or candidate species, or designated critical habitat occurs within the project area." This letter does not express any concerns about or recommendations applicable to the development of the Chippewa Falls site. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-18Rev. 0A letter documenting an Endangered Resources Re view conducted by t he WDNR (2011a) lists four Endangered, Threatened, or Special Concern species known or likely to occur in the project area. These species and their regulatory status are shown in Table 19.5.2-4. The letter indicates that none of these species are likely to occur on the project site, because they all are associated with aquatic habitats, primarily Lake Wissota and the Chippewa River. The letter does not list any actions that need to be taken to comply with state or federal endangered species laws. It recommends avoiding impacts on the wetland community observed along the eastern edge of the site and implementing strict erosion and siltation controls during the entire construction period.Considering the information presented above, aquatic and terrestrial ecology impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL. The methods used to clear vegetation, control erosion and siltation, and restore temporarily disturbed areas would be selected so as to minimize impacts as described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.5. No other impact mitigation measures would be required.19.5.2.1.2.1.7Historic and Cultural Resources ImpactsNo properties listed on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) are located on or in the immediate vicinity of the Chippewa Falls site. The nearest listed property is the Notre Dame Church and Goldsmith Memorial Chapel, which is approximately 2 mi. (3.2 km) southwest of the southwestern corner of the site. This property is located in a densely populated part of the City of Chippewa Falls, and it is separated from the site by numerous buildings, roads, trees, and other obstructions. Therefore, this property would not be directly or indirectly affected by construction or operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site.The Wisconsin State Archeologist conducted a search of the Wisconsin Historic Preservation Database in order to identify any historic and archeological resources that have been reported in the site vicinity, regardless of whether those resources are listed on the NRHP or not. The database search did not identify any historic or archeological resources that have been reported on the site or within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the site boundaries. The Wisconsin State Archeologist did not express any concerns about potential construction at the site except that Wisconsin law must be followed if human remains are unearthed or if Native American burial mounds or any marked or unmarked burial is suspected to be present. (Broihahn, 2011)Field reconnaissance in the site vicinity did not identify any buildings or other features that appeared likely to have historic or cultural significance. Based on the information presented above, construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would not be expected to directly or indirectly affect historic or cultural resources. If human remains or archeological artifacts were discovered during construction or operation, the procedures outlined for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.6 would be followed. Therefore, cultural resources impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL. There would be no need for impact mitigation measures. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-19Rev. 019.5.2.1.2.1.8Socioeconomic ImpactsThis subsection evaluates the social and economic impacts that could result from constructing and operating the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site. The evaluation includes the impacts of construction and operation activities themselves and the demands placed by the construction and operation workforces on the site and the surrounding region. As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, the socioeconomic impacts of constructing and operating the SHINE facility at the Janesville site are expected to be largely restricted to Rock County, the county in which the site is located. Socioeconomic impacts in other counties are expected to be minimal and do not require evaluation. It is expected that the socioeconomic impacts of construction and operation at the Chippewa Falls site would similarly occur primarily in Chippewa County, the county in which the site is located. Therefore, the following impact evaluation focuses on Chippewa County. In accordance with the Revised ISG Augmenting NUREG-1537, the ev aluation considers potential impacts on housing, public services, public education, tax revenues, and transportation. HousingImpacts on housing could be caused by construction and operation workers moving, either permanently or temporarily, into the region surrounding the project site (Chippewa County). This influx of workers could decrease the availability of unoccupied housing units and increase the cost to buy or rent housing. The severity of such impacts would depend primarily on the existing availability of unoccupied housing units compared with the number of workers who would move into the area.NUREG-1437 establishes the following criteria for judging the severity of impacts on housing:SMALL - Small and not easily discernible change in housing availability. Increases in rental rates or housing values equal or slightly exceed the statewide inflation rate.MODERATE - Discernible but short-lived reduction in available housing units. Rental rates and housing values rise slightly faster than the inflation rate, but prices realign quickly once new housing units became available or project-related demand diminishes.LARGE - Project-related demand for housing units results in very limited housing availability and increases in rental rates and housing values well above normal inflationary increases in the state.Based on U.S. Census Bureau (USCB) data for 2010, the total number of housing units in Chippewa County was 27,185, and the number of vacant units was 2,775 (USCB, 2012a). As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for construction of the SHINE facility is 420. It is expected that many of these workers would be current residents of Chippewa County or the nearby region, but even if all of the workers moved into the county and required housing, the resulting demand for 420 housing units would represent only about 15 percent of the vacant housing units in the county. It is unlikely that this would result in any discernible change in ho using availability or increase in housing costs. Therefore, the housing impact associated with construction of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-20Rev. 0As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for operation of the SHINE facility is 150. This number is significantly smaller than the estimated number of construction workers. Therefore, the housing impact associated with operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL. Public ServicesPublic services include water supply and waste water treatment facilities; police, fire, and medical services; and social services. Impacts on public services could be caused by construction and operation workers moving into the region surrounding the project site (Chippewa County). This influx of workers and their families could increase the demand for public services, potentially requiring local governments to add facilities, programs, and/or staff.Per NUREG-1437, impacts on public services generally are considered to be SMALL if there is little or no need to add facilities, programs, and/or staff because of the influx of workers, and MODERATE or LARGE if additional facilities, programs, and/or staff are required. USCB estimates that the population of Chippewa County in 2011 was 62,778, and the average number of people per household was 2.5 (USCB, 2012b). As discussed above, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for construction of the SHINE facility is 420. It is expected that many of these workers would be current residents of Chippewa County or the nearby region, but even if all of the workers moved into the county with the average household size of 2.5 people, the resulting influx of 1,150 people would increase the population of the county by less than 2 percent. It is unlikely that this small population increase would result in a noticeable increase in the demand for public services or a need to add facilities, programs, and/or staff. Therefore, the public services impact associated with construction of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL.As discussed above, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for operation of the SHINE facility is 150. This number is significantly smaller than the estimated number of construction workers. Therefore, the public services impact associated with operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL.Public EducationImpacts on public education could be caused by construction and operation workers moving into and bringing school-aged children into the region surrounding the project site (Chippewa County). This increase in the number of school-aged children could cause crowding of local schools and potentially require school systems to add facilities and/or staff. Per NUREG-1437, impacts on education are considered to be SMALL if the project-related increase in school enrollment represents less than 3 percent of the total school enrollment in affected school systems, MODERATE if 4 to 8 percent, and LARGE if more than 8 percent.Based on Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (WDPI) data for 2010, the total public school enrollment in Chippewa County was 9,218 students (WDPI 2012). As discussed above, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for construction of the SHINE facility is 420. It is expected that many of these workers would be current residents of Chippewa County, but if all of the workers moved into the county and brought a school-aged child who attended a public school, the resulting influx of 420 students would increase school Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-21Rev. 0enrollment by approximately 4.6 percent. Using the NUREG-1437 guideline, this would indicate a MODERATE impact on education. However, given the conservativeness of the assumption that all construction workers would move into the county and the fact that the peak construction employment period would last less than 1 year, it is unlikely that the increase in school-aged children would result in noticeable crowding or a need to add facilities or staff. Therefore, the public education impact associated with construction of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALLAs discussed above, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for operation of the SHINE facility is 150. This number is significantly smaller than the estimated number of construction workers. Therefore, the public education impact associated with operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL.TaxesProperty taxes and other taxes paid during construction and operation of the SHINE facility would benefit the state and local jurisdictions that co llect the taxes. Per NUREG-1437, tax impacts are considered SMALL if project-related tax revenues represent less than 10 percent of the total tax revenues of the local taxing jurisdictions, MODERATE if 10 to 20 percent, and LARGE if more than 20 percent.As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, SHINE intends to enter into a Tax Increment Financing (TIF) agreement with the City of Janesville. This agreement is expected to cover the first 10 years of the NRC license period, which includes the construction period for the SHINE facility. Under this agreement, SHINE expects to pay a total of $635,000 per year in property taxes and payments in lieu of taxes. If the SHINE facility were constructed at the Chippewa Falls site, it is expected that SHINE would enter into a similar TIF agreement and make similar payments during the construction period. Based on Wisconsin Department of Revenue (WDOR) data for Chippewa County, the property taxes collected in 2011 were $14,887,300 (WDOR, 2012a). Therefore, even if the entire payments of $635,000 per year were counted toward property taxes, the payments would represent approximately 4.3 percent of the annual property tax revenues of Chippewa County, and the tax impact associated with construction of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL.After expiration of the 10-year TIF agreement with the City of Janesville, SHINE expects to pay property taxes of approximately $660,000 per year during the remaining period of operation for the SHINE facility. It is expected that tax payments at the Chippewa Falls site would be approximately the same, and such payments would represent approximately 4.4 percent of the annual property tax revenues of Chippewa County. Therefore, the tax impact associated with operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL.TransportationTransportation in the vicinity of the SHINE facility could be affected by the increase in vehicle traffic associated with construction and operation workers commuting to and from the site and the delivery of materials and equipment to the site. The increase in vehicle traffic could cause congestion and delays on local roads. The severity of such impacts would depend primarily on the existing road conditions and traffic volumes on the local roads compared with the expected volume of project-related traffic. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-22Rev. 0As shown in Figure 19.5.2-4, the entrance road for the SHINE facility would connect with Commerce Parkway, a City of Chippewa Falls street that forms the western boundary of the site. No other construction, modification of roads, or other transportation infrastructure would be required for construction, operation, or decommissioning of the SHINE facility. However, Commerce Parkway is a two-lane road that probably would experience a significant increase in traffic volume due to project-related traffic. Therefore, construction of turning lanes or other improvements might be necessary to avoid traffic delays on Commerce Parkway, as discussed below.U.S. Highway 53 provides long-distance road access to the site area. The exit nearest to the site is Exit 99, which is approximately 5 mi. (8.0 km) west of the site and connects with County Highway S. Thus, it is expected that most vehicles traveling to the site from outside of the Chippewa Falls metropolitan area would travel on County Highway S and then turn onto Commerce Parkway. Many vehicles traveling to the site from inside of the metropolitan area probably also would travel on County Highway S, although some might travel on County Highway I. Commerce Parkway and County Highway S are two-lane roads with paved shoulders, while County Highway I is a four-lane road with curbed shoulders and a two-way turning lane as the median. Table 19.5.2-5 provides Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WDOT) peak hourly traffic data for Commerce Parkway, County Highway S, County Highway I, and other roads in the site area (WDOT, 2011). It can be seen that the traffic volume on most of these roads is around 400 vehicles per hour during both the morning and evening peak periods. As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, the maximum number of vehicles expected to travel to and from the site during construction of the SHINE facility is 465 per day. The great majority of these vehicles (approximately 420) would represent commuting construction workers. These vehicles generally would arrive at the site on Commerce Parkway at about the same time each morning and leave on Commerce Parkway at about the same time each evening. Thus, commuting construction workers could roughly double the volume of traffic on Commerce Parkway during the peak morning and evening periods. The increase in traffic volumes on other roads in the site vicinity probably would not be as great but could be significant.Considering the nature of the roads in the site vicinity and the increase in traffic volume these roads would experience, it is likely that the peak construction-related traffic would noticeably alter existing transportation conditions (cause noticeable traffic delays) but not be sufficient to destabilize transportation resources. Therefore, the transportation impact associated with project construction would be MODERATE.As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, the maximum number of vehicles expected to travel to and from the site during operation of the SHINE facility is 118 per day. The great majority of these vehicles would represent commuting operation workers, but it is expected that these workers would be divided into three shifts. Thus, the maximum number of vehicles arriving at or departing from the site at any one time would be much less than during the construction period. Therefore, the transportation impact associated with facility operation would be SMALL.In order to alleviate traffic congestion during project construction, mitiga tion measures, such as adding turning lanes might be necessary, especially on Commerce Parkway. Specific mitigation measures would be selected after a detailed evaluation of traffic patterns and potential problem areas. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-23Rev. 019.5.2.1.2.1.9Human Health Impacts19.5.2.1.2.1.9.1Nonradiological ImpactsNo unusual existing sources of nonradioactive chemical exposure or effluents have been identified in the vicinity of the Chippewa Falls site. No operating industrial facilities with environmental monitoring programs have been identified in the site vicinity. A SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be essentially the same as the SHINE facility described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.8.1 with regard to the following factors:*Nonradioactive chemical sources (location, type, strength).*Nonradioactive liquid, gaseous, and solid waste management and effluent control systems.*Nonradioactive effluents released into the on-site and off-site environment.
- Chemical exposure to the public and on-site workforce.
- Physical occupational hazards.*Mitigation measures for nonradiological human health impacts.Nonradiological chemical sources, wastes, effluents, and occupational hazards associated with the SHINE facility would be strictly controlled to ensure compliance with applicable environmental and occupational regulations and standards as discussed in Subsection 19.4.8.1. Therefore, the nonradiological human health impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL.19.5.2.1.2.1.9.2Radiological Impacts No unusual existing sources of radiation have been identified in the vicinity of the Chippewa Falls site. The major sources and levels of background radiation exposure at the Chippewa Falls site are very similar to the sources and levels described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.3.8.2. The physical layout of the Chippewa Falls site is shown in Figure 19.5.2-4. Radioactive materials would be located in the central part of the production facility building. A SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be essentially the same as the SHINE facility described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.8.2 with regard to the following factors:*Characteristics of radiation sources and expected radioactive effluents.*Compliance with 10 CFR 20.1301, including calculated radiation dose rates at the site boundary.*Annual radiation dose to the maximally exposed worker.
- Mitigation measures to minimize public and occupational exposures to radioactive material.Radiation sources and radioactive effluents would be strictly controlled to ensure compliance with applicable regulations and standards as discussed in Subsection 19.4.8.2. Therefore, the radiological human health impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL.
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-24Rev. 019.5.2.1.2.1.10Waste Management ImpactsNo conditions have been identified for the Chippewa Falls site that would significantly affect waste management impacts. A SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be essentially the same as the SHINE facility described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.9 with regard to the following factors:*Sources, types, and approximate quantities of solid, hazardous, radioactive, and mixed wastes.*Proposed waste management systems designed to collect, store, and process the waste.
- Anticipated waste disposal or waste management plans.*Anticipated waste-minimization plans to minimize the generation of waste.Wastes would be handled, processed, stored, and disposed as discussed in Subsection 19.4.9. Therefore, the waste management impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL.19.5.2.1.2.1.11Transportation ImpactsPer the Final ISG Augmenting NUREG-1537, the traffic impacts of vehicles associated with the SHINE facility are discussed in Subsection 19.5.2.1.2.1.8. This subsection discusses the radiological and other human health impacts of transporting nuclear and non-nuclear materials associated with the project. No conditions have been identified fo r the Chippewa Falls site that would significantly affect the impacts of transporting nuclear and non-nuclear materials, including radioactive waste, nonradioactive waste, and medical isotopes. Because the Chippewa Falls site and the Janesville site are relatively close to each other in comparison with the projected origins and destinations of nuclear and non-nuclear materials, distance-related impacts of transportation would be essentially the same. A SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be essentially the same as the SHINE facility described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.10 with regard to the
following factors:*Transportation modes.
- Approximate transportation distances.
- Treatment and packaging for radioactive and nonradioactive wastes.*Calculated radiological dose to members of the public and workers from incident-free transportation scenarios.The impact of the transportation of nuclear and non-nuclear materials is discussed in Subsections 19.4.10.1.3 and 19.4.10.2. The transportation impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls si te would be SMALL.
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-25Rev. 019.5.2.1.2.1.12Postulated Accident ImpactsNo conditions have been identified fo r the Chippewa Falls site that would significantly affect the radiological and nonradiological impacts from postulated accidents. A SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be essentially the same as the SHINE facility described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.11 with regard to the following factors:*Credible accidents having a potential for releases into the environment. *Radiological and nonradiological consequences from the postulated accidents.The SHINE facility would be designed, constructed, and operated to ensure that the consequences of postulated accidents would comply with applicable regulations and standards as discussed in Subsection 19.4.11. Therefore, the postulated accident impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL.19.5.2.1.2.1.13Environmental Justice ImpactsEnvironmental justice issues involve aspects of the project that could disproportionately impact minority or low-income populations. The potential for disproportionate impacts depends primarily on the location of the project facilities in relation to existing minority and low-income populations.Minority and low-income populations within 5 mi. (8 km) of the Chippewa Falls site were identified based on USCB Census block group data (USCB, 2012c and 2012d). Census block groups with above-average minority and low-income populations were determined by comparing the minority and poverty populations in each block group to the total population in that block group and to the average minority and poverty populations in the county and state. Where the minority or poverty population in a block group exceeded 50 percent of the total population in that block group, or where the minority or poverty population was found to be at least 20 percentage points greater than the comparable county and/or state averages, the minority or poverty population was defined as "above average." This methodology is consistent with NRC guidance for identification of Environmental Justic e populations (NRC, 2004).Table 19.5.2-6 shows the block groups and census tracts within 5 mi. (8 km) of the Chippewa Falls site, the percentage of households below the poverty level in each, and the percentage of each minority group, including American Indian and Hispanic populations, in each. The percentage of households below the poverty level, the percentage of each minority group, and aggregate percentage of all minority groups are compared with the average percentage in Chippewa County and the state of Wisconsin.As shown in Table 19.5.2-6, none of the block groups/census tracts within 5 mi. (8 km) of the Chippewa Falls site has an above average percentage of any minority groups individually or in the aggregate, and only one block group/census tract has an above average percentage of households below the poverty level. This block group/census tract has 36.5 percent of households below the poverty level, compared with 10.9 percent in Chippewa County and 11.2percent in the state of Wisconsin. The location of this block group/census tract is shown in Figure 19.5.2-6. It is approximately 2 mi. (3.2 km) southwest of the Chippewa Falls site. It is located in a densely populated part of the City of Chippewa Falls, and it is separated from the site by numerous buildings, roads, trees, and other obstructions. None of the primary transportation routes that would be used to transport workers, materials, or equipment to the Chippewa Falls Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-26Rev. 0site pass through this block group/census tract. Therefore, this population would not be directly or indirectly affected by construction or operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site.No American Indian reservations or other special communities have been identified within 5 mi. (8 km) of the Chippewa Falls site. The nearest American Indian reservation is the Winnebago Reservation, which belongs to the Ho-Chunk Nation and is located approximately 35 mi. (56 km) southeast of the site (National Atlas of the United States, 2012; WDNR, 2012b).Based on the information presented above, there is no indication that any minority or low-income population would be disproportionately affected during project construction or operation as compared to the effect on the general population. Based on the potential for disproportionate exposure to environmental hazards from the SHINE facility as well as multiple-hazard and cumulative hazard conditions, the human health and environmental effects on minority and low-income populations would not be significantly high or adverse. Therefore, the environmental justice impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site would be SMALL.19.5.2.1.2.1.14Cumulative ImpactsPast, present, and reasonably foreseeable future development projects and other actions that could result in cumulative impacts at the Chippewa Falls site were identified by searching for economic development plans, permit lists, news releases, and similar sources of information. An effort was made to identify all relevant activities conducted, regulated, or approved by a federal agency or non-federal entity within 5 mi. (8 km) of the site. Available information about the projects and other activities identified is provided in Table 19.5.2-7.As shown in Table 19.5.2-7, the projects and other activities located within 5 mi. (8 km) of the Chippewa Falls site generally are of a relatively small scale and would not be expected to have significant impacts in the same areas affected by the SHINE facility. The Wissota Green Housing Development, a planned neighborhood that was to be developed approximately 1 mi. (1.6 km) from the Chippewa Falls site might have contributed significantly to the land use impacts of the SHINE facility; however, current information indicates that this project is not likely to proceed in the form originally proposed. It is possible that the individual lots may be developed by private owners, but this type of development would likely occur gradually over a number of years, which would mitigate the cumulative impacts somewhat. The projects in Table 19.5.2-7 that are procedeeding or appear likely to proceed would not be expected to have significant land use impacts. However, some of these projects could produce increases in vehicle traffic and ambient noise that might affect some of the same areas as the SHINE facility. Therefore, the cumulative effects of these projects might contribute to the traffic and noise impacts of the SHINE facility, which are expected to be MODERATE as discussed above.19.5.2.1.2.2Stevens Point Site 19.5.2.1.2.2.1DescriptionThe Stevens Point Site is located adjacent to the eastern edge of the corporate boundaries of the City of Stevens Point, in Portage County, Wisconsin. No public roads currently border the site. The site boundaries were determined by the City of Stevens Point when they recommended the Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-27Rev. 0site to SHINE. The city has indicated that if the SHINE project proceeded at this site they would annex the site property and install public streets along the northern and western site boundaries. The SHINE project would be dependent on the installation of these public streets, and the street impacts are considered part of the direct project impacts discussed below.The terrain across the site is flat, with little noticeable relief other than a gentle slope to the south. No residences or other structures are located within the site boundaries. Most of the site is occupied by a woodlot, but there are areas of cultivated cropland along the western and southern sides of the site.Figure 19.5.2-7 shows a conceptual layout of the SHINE facility on the Stevens Point site, including the area that would be developed with permanent facility structures, the area that would be temporarily disturbed for construction laydown and parking, and the remaining area within the site boundaries. The area developed with permanent structures occupies most of the woodlot, while the area temporarily disturbed for construction laydown and parking is located in the cropland along the western edge of the site. The production facility building, which is the only part of the facility that contains safety-related equipment, is located near the center of the site, positioned so as to maximize the distance to the site boundaries in all directions.The area within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the site is a mixture of agricultural land and suburban-type residential and commercial development. The nearest occupied residences are two houses located along Old Highway 18 approximately 0.2 mi. (0.32 km) north of the northern site boundary. The nearest residential concentration is a subdivision located along Old Highway 18 approximately 0.6 mi. (0.96 km) northwest of the site boundary. A Lands' End outlet facility is located immediately west of the site, and the grounds of this facility include an exercise track that passes less than 0.1 mi. (0.16 km) from the site boundary.In addition to residences, several other sensitive features are located within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the site boundaries. These include a preschool, two child day care facilities, a medical clinic, and a city park. Table 19.5.2-8 lists the distance to each of these sensitive features from the nearest site boundary and the center point of the safety-related area in the production facility building. Table 19.5.2-8 also lists the distance to the nearest hospital, public sc hool, and listed historical property, all of which are more than 1 mi. (1.6 km) from the site boundaries. Figure 19.5.2-8 shows the location of the sensitive features identified within 1 mi. (1.6 km). It should be noted that GIS data identifies a public school known as Stockton School located along Old Highway within 1mi. (1.6 km) of the site boundaries, but during field reconnaissance in November 2011, it appeared that this school was no longer in use. Therefore, Stockton School is not listed as a public school but is listed as a potential historical property in Table 19.5.2-8. Interstate 39, which is located about 1 mi. (1.6 km) west of the site at its nearest point, provides long-distance access to the site area. The exit nearest to the site is Exit 156 (County Highway HH), which is approximately 1.5 mi. (2.4 km) southwest of the site. Exit 158 (U.S. Highway 10) is approximately 2 mi. (3.2 km) northwest of the site. U.S. Highway 10 is a well-maintained multi-lane divided highway. The other roads in the immediate vicinity of the site (County Highway HH, Old Highway 18, County Highway R, and Burbank Road) are two- or four-lane roads of variable width and condition. Stevens Point Municipal Airport is located approximately 2.8 mi. (4.5 km) northwest of the site. Aircraft using this airport would be the primary means of transporting isotopes produced by the SHINE facility. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-28Rev. 0An overhead electrical line, municipal water supply pipeline, sanitary sewer pipeline, and natural gas pipeline are located north of the Lands' End facility along County Highway R, approximately 0.3 mi. (0.48 km) from the site. It is assumed these utilities would be extended to the site when the city constructed the public streets that would border the site.19.5.2.1.2.2.2Land Use and Visual Resources ImpactsExisting land use on the Stevens Point site is predominantly forestry and agriculture. Most of the site is occupied by a second-growth woodlot, and some evidence of logging was observed during field reconnaissance in November 2011. There are areas of cultivated cropland along the western and southern sides of the site, and these areas appeared to have been planted in corn. The field at the southern side of the site was pivot-irrigated. Virtually, the entire site is composed of soils classified as Prime Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance. No recreational use of the site or the immediate vicinity was identified except for the exercise track on the grounds of the Lands' End outlet facility, which is immediately west of the site.No residences or other structures are located within the site boundaries. The site currently is zoned by Portage County partly for Agricultural use and partly for Industrial use (Portage County, 2012a), but the City of Stevens Point has indicated that if the SHINE project proceeded they would annex the site property and zone it for Industrial use. The City's Comprehensive Plan (Cityof Stevens Point, 2011a) shows the site property as part of a planned business park. However, Portage County's Comprehensive Plan (Portage County, 2012b) indicates that the area is planned partly for Rural Residential use (2 ac. or more per residence) and partly for Limited Agriculture/Mixed use (low intensity agricultural uses that maintain the rural characteristics of the area).The acreage of each major land use category currently found within the areas affected by the conceptual facility layout was estimated based on USGS land use/land cover GIS mapping data (USGS, 2006). Table 19.5.2-9 summarizes the acreages in the major land use categories and compares those quantities with the total acreages found within a 5 mi. (8.0 km) radius of the site. It can be seen that the acreage of each land use category potentially affected by the facility layout is less than 1 percent of the total acreage of that category found within 5 mi. (8.0 km).There is no reason to believe that construction of the SHINE facility would destabilize any important land use resources. However, construction would change much of the site from predominantly forestry and agricultural use to industrial use, which would noticeably alter the existing land use resources of the site. This alteration may be consistent with the City of Stevens Point's plan to develop the area as a business park, but it is not consistent with the existing zoning on parts of the site or with Portage County's planning of the area for rural residential and low intensity agricultural use. In addition, the project would depend on the City constructing a public street along at least one of the site boundaries, and this would have further land use impacts, converting a somewhat isolated rural area into a more urbanized area. Therefore, the land use impact associated with project construction would be MODERATE.During operation of the SHINE facility, land use impacts would be reduced. No new land use impacts would occur beyond those described above for project construction, and some areas that were temporarily disturbed for construction laydown and parking might be returned to agricultural use. Therefore, the land use impact associated with facility operation would be SMALL. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-29Rev. 0Visual resources in the vicinity of the site could be affected by the visual intrusion of industrial structures and equipment. During project construction, dust could create additional visual intrusions. Given that the site area currently includes some rural and residential scenery, in addition to institutional and commercial scenery, project construction and operation would alter the existing visual conditions somewhat. However, the severity of visual impacts on the human population would depend primarily on the visibility of the project facilities from sensitive viewing areas.Field reconnaissance and examination of aerial photographs indicate that more than 100 residences are located within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the site boundaries. As discussed in Subsection 19.5.2.1.2.2.1, the area within 1 mi. (1.6 km) also includes several other sensitive viewing areas, including a preschool, two child day care facili ties, a medical clinic, and a city park. Although trees and existing buildings would block the view from some of these locations, some would be expected to have at least a partial view of the SHINE facility during construction and operation. In addition, the exercise track on the grounds of the Lands' End outlet facility would have at least a partial view of the SHINE facility during construction and operation.NUREG-1437 establishes the following criteria for judging the severity of aesthetic impacts:SMALL - No complaints from affected public about a changed sense of place or a diminution in enjoyment of the physical environment, and no measurable impact on socioeconomic institutions and processes.MODERATE - Some complaints from affected public about a changed sense of place or a diminution in enjoyment of the physical environment, and measurable impacts that do not alter the continued functioning of socioeconomic institutions and processes.LARGE - Continuing and widely shared opposition to the project based on a perceived degradation of the area's sense of place or diminution in enjoyment of the physical environment, and measurable social impacts that perturb the continued functioning of community institutions and processes.Considering that the construction of the SHINE facility would noticeably alter the appearance of the project site and be at least partially visible from numerous sensitive viewing areas, it is possible that project construction would generate some public complaints related to a changed sense of place and diminished enjoyment of the physical environment. However, it is not likely that there would be "continuing and widely shared opposition" to the project or that there would be "measurable social impacts that perturb the continued functioning of community institutions and processes." Therefore, the visual resources impact associated with project construction would be MODERATE.Operation of the SHINE facility would not result in significant further alteration of aesthetic conditions, and it does not seem likely that there would be continued public complaints related to diminished enjoyment of the physical environment. Therefore, the visual resources impact associated with project operation would be SMALL.As shown in Figure 19.5.2-7, the conceptual layout of the Stevens Point site includes provisions to plant trees along the facility access road and the boundaries of the site that border public roads. These provisions would partially mitigate the visual impact of the project, especially during Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-30Rev. 0project operation, and this mitigation is considered in the impact assessment discussed above. No other feasible mitigation measures for land use or visual impacts have been identified.19.5.2.1.2.2.3Air Quality and Noise ImpactsThe Stevens Point site is located in Portage County, Wisconsin, which is part of the North Central Wisconsin Intra-State Air Quality Control Region (WDNR, 2012a). The ambient air quality in Portage County currently is in attainment with the NAAQS for all criteria pollutants (ozone, particulate matter, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide and lead) (USEPA, 2012a). The nearest county out of attainment with the NAAQS is Sheboygan County, Wisconsin, which is
non-attainment for ozone (USEPA, 2012a). Sheboygan County is located along the western shore of Lake Michigan, approximately 100 mi. (161 km) east-southeast of the Stevens Point site. At this distance and beyond, air pollution emissions from the Stevens Point site would not be expected to have any noticeable effect on non-attainment areas.The air quality impacts of constructing and operating the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be very similar to the impacts discussed for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.2. Potential air pollution emissions during construction would include dust from earthmoving and material handling activities, and exhaust emissions from construction equipment and vehicles. In general, these emissions would be the same as the emissions associated with any large construction project. Emission-specific control measures, such as watering areas of disturbed soil, would be implemented to limit air quality impacts and ensure compliance with applicable federal and state regulations. Therefore, air quality impacts associated with facility construction
would be SMALL.During facility operation, the isotope production process would emit very small quantities of nitrogen oxides. Natural gas firing to heat buildings and occasional testing of the emergency diesel generator would emit nitrogen oxides and very small quantities of particulate matter and sulfur dioxide. Standard emission control measures, such as proper mixing of fuels and combustion air, would be implemented to limit air quality impacts. Emissions during facility operation would be governed by applicable state permits, which would ensure compliance with the NAAQS and other applicable regulatory requirements. Therefore, air quality impacts associated with facility operation would be SMALL.As discussed above, standard emission control measures would be implemented to limit air quality impacts during construction and operation. These measures would ensure that impacts on air quality would be SMALL, and there would be no need for any other air quality impact mitigation measures.Noise emissions during construction at the Stevens Point site would be very similar to the impacts discussed for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.2. Based on the depth to bedrock at the Stevens Point site (see Subsection 19.5.2.1.2.2.4), blasting and pile driving would not be required for excavation or installation of foundations. The primary source of noise during construction would be the operation of heavy equipment. This noise would be noticeable in the immediate construction area, but it generally would be expected to attenuate to acceptable levels before reaching sensitive receptors. However, vehicular traffic due to construction workers commuting to and from the site and deliveries of equipment and supplies to the site would increase noise levels in the immediate vicinity of several sensitive receptors. It is expected that much of the project-related traffic would move on County Highway R (Eisenhower Road) and/or County Highway HH (McDill Avenue), and these roads have numerous residences, a medical Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-31Rev. 0clinic, two day care facilities, and a preschool in close proximity. It is likely that increased traffic noise would be noticeable at some of these receptors. In addition, construction noise would be noticeable at the exercise track on the grounds of the Lands' End outlet facility. Therefore, noise impacts associated with project construction would be MODERATE.During operation, project-related traffic would be greatly reduced, and there would be no use of heavy construction equipment on the site. As discussed in Subsection 19.4.2, no significant sources of noise have been identified for project operation. Therefore, noise impacts associated with operation would be SMALL.As shown in Figure 19.5.2-7, the conceptual layout of the Stevens Point site includes provisions to plant trees along the facility access road and the boundaries of the site that border public roads. The layout also would accommodate a low earthen berm around the permanent project facilities. These provisions would be expected to achieve some attenuation of operational noise, and this mitigation is considered in the impact assessment discussed above. No other feasible mitigation measures for noise impacts have been identified.19.5.2.1.2.2.4Geology, Soils, and Seismology ImpactsThe majority of the surface soils at the Stevens Point site consist of Richford loamy sand derived from glacial outwash materials. The Richford loamy sand consists of about 65 to 95 percent sand, generally less than 10 percent silt, and 1 to 10 percent clay. The hydraulic conductivity of the loamy sand is high (approximately 0.015 cm/s), and therefore it is well-drained and not susceptible to ponding or flooding. Erosion potential of the surficial soils is expected to be slight. (UW, 1964; NRCS, 2012) Subsoil information obtained from a set of borings drilled at the site and records of four water wells and one test hole drilled within 1 to 2 mi. (1.6 to 3.2 km) of the site (WGNHS, 2005) corroborate the soils information provided above.Bedrock directly lies beneath the glacial outwash materials and primarily consists of granite (Greenberg and Brown, 1986). Karst conditions are not anticipated in the bedrock (Mudrey, et al., 1982; WGNHS, 2012). The drilling log of one water well in the site vicinity indicates granite bedrock at a depth of 77 ft. (23.5 m), while the other wells in the vicinity were drilled to depths of 54 ft. to 72 ft. (16.5 to 21.9 m) and did not encounter bedrock. A borehole at the site was advanced to a depth of 140 ft. (42.7 m) and did not encounter bedrock. Based on this information, bedrock at the site is expected to be more than 50 ft. (15.2 m) below the grade elevation. As described in Subsection 19.4.3, the maximum depth of excavation required for the SHINE facility is 39 ft. (11.9 m) below grade. Therefore, blasting would not be required for installation of foundations or other construction activities.The USGS National Seismic Hazard Maps database (USGS, 2012a) indicates the following peak ground accelerations for the Stevens Point site area:*10-percent probability of exceedance in a 50-year period:0.90 percent of gravity.*2-percent probability of exceedance in a 50-year period:2.46 percent of gravity.Based on these values, seismicity in the site area is considered to be minimal. In addition, no significant historical earthquakes have been recorded in the site area or anywhere in Wisconsin Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-32Rev. 0(USGS, 2012b), and no Quaternary faults (age less than 1.6 x 106 years) are known to be present in the site area or anywhere in Wisconsin (USGS, 2012c).The Stevens Point site is flat and does not contain landslide hazards. Because the site soils are primarily granular (sand with small percentages of silt and clay), and no underground mining activity has been identified in the site area, land subsidence is not anticipated due to either consolidation of the site soils or local loss of support resulting from underground mining. In addition, no potential for shrink/swell action in response to changes in the moisture content of the soil as related to the stability of shallow foundations is anticipated. Potential for frost heave beneath shallow foundations should also be minimal.Available on-site boring logs indicate a generally loose condition in the site soils. Therefore, it is expected that the load bearing capacity of the site soils is rather low and the soils would be susceptible to settlement under heavy loads. For the SHINE facility main building and any other structures that generate large foundation loads, the site soils would likely need to be improved with dynamic compaction, vibro-compaction, cement mixing, and/or grouting. However, it should be possible to design the foundations without the need for piles or drilled piers. Due to the low seismicity of the site area, the potential for earthquake induced liquefaction of subsoil below the groundwater table does not need to be considered. Based on the information summarized above, the geology, soils, and seismology of the Stevens Point site would not be expected to have any significant impacts on the SHINE facility. Similarly, construction and operation of the SHINE facility would not be expected to have any significant impacts on the geology, soils, and seismology of the site. There is no indication that any rare or unique rock, mineral, or energy assets are present that could be impacted by development at the site. Mining of sand is conducted in certain parts of Wisconsin for use in hydraulic fracturing associated with natural gas production. It is not known whether the type and gradation of the sand at the Stevens Point site is suitable for use in hydraulic fracturing. However, suitable sand deposits appear to be common in some parts of Wisconsin and therefore cannot be considered rare or unique. There is no indication that any contaminated soils are present that could be exposed by development at the site. A USGS map of contaminated sites in Portage County (where the Stevens Point site is located) shows a few closed LUST and ERP locations in the site area, but investigation and cleanup activities at these locations have been completed and approved by the state (USGS, 2012e). There is no reason to believe that any LUST or ERP concerns extend to the site.Considering the information presented above, geology, soils, and seismology impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL. There would be no need for impact mitigation measures. 19.5.2.1.2.2.5Water Resources Impacts No streams or other surface water bodies have been identified within the boundaries of the Stevens Point site. Therefore, construction of the SHINE facility would have no direct impacts on surface water. The only surface water features identified in close proximity to the site are local drainage ditches. These drainage ditches would receive rainfall runoff from the construction site, and they potentially could experience indirect impacts such as increased runoff volumes or Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-33Rev. 0degradation of water quality due to sedimentation. However, potential impacts would be minimized by implementing best management practices such as soil erosion and sediment control measures; runoff detention ponds; provisions to allow infiltration of rainfall; stormwater pollution prevention plans; and SPCC plans. Therefore, surface water impacts associated with facility construction would be SMALL.The City of Stevens Point municipal water supply system would provide all water required for operation of the SHINE facility. A 12 inch water main currently is located along County Highway R, to the northwest of the site, and it is assumed that the city would extend this main to the site when they constructed the public streets that would border the site. This main would be expected to have more than enough capacity to satisfy the needs of the SHINE facility. The facility would have no need to withdraw surface water. Best management practices would continue to be used during facility operation to minimize potential impacts on the drainage ditches that receive rainfall runoff from the site. Wastewater other than uncontaminated runoff would be discharged to the City of Stevens Point sanitary sewer system after being treated as described in Subsection 19.4.4. Wastewater discharges would comply with state and local pretreatment requirements. Therefore, surface water impacts associated with facility operation would be SMALL.Several soil borings drilled at the Stevens Point site in 2011 encountered ground water at a depth of 8 ft. to 11 ft. (2.4 to 3.4 m) below the grade elevation. The depth to ground water observed inside of water wells recorded in the site vicinity varied between 7 ft. and 20 ft. (2.1 and 6.1m) below the grade elevation (WGNHS, 2005). As described in Subsection 19.4.3, the maximum depth of excavation required for the SHINE facility is 39 ft. (11.9m) below grade. Therefore, it is likely that extensive dewatering of excavations would be required during construction. This dewatering probably would be required for a period of several months and could have a noticeable impact on ground water levels in the immediate site vicinity. Therefore, ground water impacts associated with facility construction would be MODERATE.High ground water levels could continue to be a concern after the completion of construction, but it is anticipated that the facility foundations could be designed so as to avoid the need for continued dewatering. Because the facility would not need to withdraw ground water during operation, the only potential impact on ground water would be possible contamination due to a leak or spill of oil or chemicals. The soils found at the Stevens Point site have relatively high hydraulic conductivity, which increases the potential for ground water contamination (UW, 1989). However, oil and chemical storage and handling would be governed by SPCC plans and standard good practices to prevent and contain leaks and spills. Therefore, ground water impacts associated with facility operation would be SMALL.As described above, best management practices and other standard provisions would be used during construction and operation to avoid and minimize impacts on surface water and ground water. The need for continued dewatering during facility operation would be avoided by proper design of foundations. There would be no need for any other water resources impact mitigation measures.19.5.2.1.2.2.6Ecological Resources ImpactsNo significant ecological resources were identified on or in the immediate vicinity of the Stevens Point site. Approximately two-thirds of the site is occupied by a second-growth woodlot dominated by oak and maple species with a few pines and other evergreens. Some evidence of logging was observed along the southern edge of the woodlot during a field reconnaissance visit Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-34Rev. 0to the site. Representative plant species observed within the woodlot are listed in Table 19.5.2-10. The western and southern portions of the site are cultivated cropland, primarily used for growing corn. The edges of these agricultural fields support weedy herbaceous plant species typical of early successional stages. Representative plant species observed within the fields and field edges are listed in Table 19.5.2-10.Wildlife observed at the site included red-tailed hawk, blue jay, common crow, red-bellied woodpecker, white-breasted nuthatch, black-capped chickadee, and various sparrows. None of the plant or animal species observed during field reconnaissance are listed by the USFWS or WDNR as Endangered, Threatened, or of Special Concern.Figure 19.5.2-7 shows a conceptual facility layout, including the area that would be developed with permanent facility structures and the area that would be temporarily disturbed for construction laydown and parking. It can be seen that the permanently developed area occupies less than half of the woodlot, while the temporarily disturbed area is located entirely in the western cropland area.The acreage of natural habitats found within the areas affected by the conceptual facility layout was estimated based on USGS land use/land cover GIS mapping data. Table 19.5.2-9 summarizes the acreages in the natural habitat categories and compares those quantities with the total acreages found within a 5 mi. (8.0 km) radius of the site. It can be seen that the entire site comprises approximately 48.2 ac. (19.5 ha) of deciduous forest, which is less than 1 percent of the deciduous forest found within 5 mi. (8.0 km) of the site. Even if all of the forest on the site was cleared (which could be required for site security purposes), the loss of this habitat would not be expected to have any noticeable ecological impact. The only other natural habitat shown in Table 19.5.2-9 is 1.6 ac. (0.6 ha) of mixed forest.No wetland habitat was observed on or near the site during field reconnaissance, and none is represented in GIS mapping data within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the site boundaries. The nearest wetland habitat in GIS mapping data is a small area located approximately 1.2 mi. (1.9 km) north of the site boundary at its nearest point. This area is separated from the site by U.S. Highway 10, Old Highway 18, a railroad line, and several buildings. It would not be directly or indirectly affected by construction or operation of the SHINE facility.As discussed in Subsection 19.5.2.1.2.2.5, no streams or other surface water bodies have been identified within the boundaries of the Stevens Point site, and the only surface water features identified in close proximity to the site are local drainage ditches. These drainage ditches do not represent significant aquatic ecological habitats. The nearest significant surface water bodies are the Plover River, which at its nearest point is approximately 2.0 mi. (3.2 km) northwest of the site, and the Wisconsin River, which at its nearest point is approximately 3.5 mi. (5.6 km) southwest of the site. Both of these are significant ecological habitats, but neither would be directly or indirectly affected by construction or operation of the SHINE facility.A consultation letter received from the USFWS (2012b) states that the Stevens Point site is within the high potential range of the Karner blue butterfly, a federal Endangered species. The letter recommends conducting a survey for wild lupine, the host plant for the Karner blue butterfly, before proceeding with a project at the site. A survey would be conducted if the Stevens Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-35Rev. 0Point site were to be developed, but at this time there is no indication that either wild lupine or the Karner blue butterfly occurs on the site. A letter documenting an Endangered Resources Re view conducted by t he WDNR (2011b) lists four Endangered, Threatened, or Special Concern species known or likely to occur in the project area. These species and their regulatory status are shown in Table 19.5.2-11. The letter indicates that none of these species are likely to occur on the project site, due to lack of suitable habitat. The letter does not list any actions that need to be taken to comply with state or federal endangered species laws, and it does not list any recommendations.Considering the information presented above, aquatic and terrestrial ecology impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL. The methods used to clear vegetation, control erosion and siltation, and restore temporarily disturbed areas would be selected so as to minimize impacts, as described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.5. No other impact mitigation measures would be required.19.5.2.1.2.2.7Historic and Cultural Resources ImpactsNo properties listed on the NRHP are located on or in the immediate vicinity of the Stevens Point site. The nearest listed property is Nelson Hall, which is approximately 3.8 mi. (6.1 km) northwest of the northwestern corner of the site. This property is located in a densely populated part of the City of Stevens Point, and it is separated from the site by numerous buildings, roads, trees, and other obstructions. Therefore, this property would not be directly or indirectly affected by construction or operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site.The Wisconsin State Archeologist conducted a search of the Wisconsin Historic Preservation Database in order to identify any historic and archeological resources that have been reported in the site vicinity, regardless of whether those resources are listed on the NRHP or not. The database search did not identify any historic or archeological resources that have been reported on the site or within 1 mi. (1.6 km) of the site boundaries. The Wisconsin State Archeologist did not express any concerns about potential construction at the site except that Wisconsin law must be followed if human remains are unearthed or if Native American burial mounds or any marked or unmarked burial is suspected to be present. (Broihahn, 2011)Field reconnaissance in the site vicinity identified two features that were not identified in the NRHP or the Wisconsin Historic Preservation Database search, but appeared to possibly have historic significance. These features are described below.A small, unnamed cemetery was observed at the intersection of Count y Highway HH (McDill Avenue) and Burbank Road southeast of the Stevens Point site. The cemetery was enclosed by a fence and locked gated, but several of the headstones appeared to be quite old. The cemetery is approximately 0.9 mi. (1.4 km) from the nearest part of the site boundary, and it is separated from the site by several existing buildings and scattered trees. It would not be directly affected by construction or operation of the SHINE facility, but it might be indirectly affected by the visual impacts of the facility and/or by increased traffic on County Highway HH and Burbank Road (see Subsection 19.5.2.1.2.2.8). If the Stevens Point site were selected for development, the historical significance of the cemetery and potential impacts on it would have to be evaluated in more detail. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-36Rev. 0An old school building was observed on Old Highway 18 northeast of the Stevens Point site. A sign on the building read "Stockton School Dist. No. 1 Est. 1857." The building appeared to be a one-room school that is no longer in use. The building is approximately 0.7 mi. (1.1 km) from the nearest part of the site boundary and is separated from the site by a railroad line and scattered trees. It would not be directly affected by construction or operation of the SHINE facility, but it might be indirectly affected by the visual impacts of the facility and/or by increased traffic on Old Highway 18 (see Subsection 19.5.2.1.2.2.8). If the Stevens Point site were selected for development, the historical significance of the school building and potential impacts on it would have to be evaluated in more detail.Based on the information presented above, it is possible that construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site could indirectly disturb historic resources, but such impacts cannot be positively determined at this time. On the basis of known historic and cultural resources, there would not be significant impacts. If human remains or archeological artifacts were discovered during construction or operation, the procedures outlined for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.6 would be followed. Therefore, cultural resources impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL. There would be no need for impact mitigation measures.19.5.2.1.2.2.8Socioeconomic ImpactsThis subsection evaluates the social and economic impacts that could result from constructing and operating the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site. The evaluation includes the impacts of construction and operation activities and the demands placed by the construction and operation workforces on the site and the surrounding region. As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, the socioeconomic impacts of constructing and operating the SHINE facility at the Janesville site are expected to be largely restricted to Rock County, the county in which the site is located. Socioeconomic impacts in other counties are expected to be minimal and do not require evaluation. It is expected that the socioeconomic impacts of construction and operation at the Stevens Point site would similarly occur primarily in Portage County, the county in which the site is located. Therefore, the following impact evaluation focuses on Portage County. In accordance with the Final ISG Augmenting NUREG-1537, t he evaluation considers potential impacts on housing, public services, public education, tax revenues, and transportation. HousingImpacts on housing could be caused by construction and operation workers moving, either permanently or temporarily, into the region surrounding the project site (Portage County). This influx of workers could decrease the availability of unoccupied housing units and increase the cost to buy or rent housing. The severity of such impacts would depend primarily on the existing availability of unoccupied housing units compared with the number of workers who would move into the area.NUREG-1437 establishes the following criteria for judging the severity of impacts on housing: SMALL - Small and not easily discernible change in housing availability. Increases in rental rates or housing values equal or slightly exceed the statewide inflation rate. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-37Rev. 0MODERATE - Discernible but short-lived reduction in available housing units. Rental rates and housing values rise slightly faster than the inflation rate, but prices realign quickly once new housing units became available or project-related demand diminishes.LARGE - Project-related demand for housing units results in very limited housing availability and increases in rental rates and housing values well above normal inflationary increases in the state.Based on USCB data for 2010, the total number of housing units in Portage County was 30,054, and the number of vacant units was 2240 (USCB, 2012a). As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for construction of the SHINE facility is 420. It is expected that many of these workers would be current residents of Portage Countyand the nearby region, but even if all of the workers moved into the county and required housing, the resulting demand for 420 housing units would represent less than 19 percent of the vacant housing units in the county. It is unlikely that this would result in any discernible change in housing availability or an increase in housing costs. Therefore, the housing impact associated with construction of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL.As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for operation of the SHINE facility is 150. This number is significantly smaller than the estimated number of construction workers. Therefore, the housing impact associated with operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL. Public ServicesPublic services include water supply and waste water treatment facilities; police, fire, and medical services; and social services. Impacts on public services could be caused by construction and operation workers moving into the region surrounding the project site (PortageCounty). This influx of workers and their families could increase the demand for public services, potentially requiring local governments to add facilities, programs, and/or staff.Per NUREG-1437, impacts on public services generally are considered to be SMALL if there is little or no need to add facilities, programs, and/or staff because of the influx of workers, and MODERATE or LARGE if additional facilities, programs, and/or staff are required. USCB estimates that the population of Portage County in 2011 was 70,084, and the average number of people per household was 2.4 (USCB, 2012e). As discussed above, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for construction of the SHINE facility is 420. It is expected that many of these workers would be current residents of Portage County and the nearby region, but even if all of the workers moved into the county with the average household size of 2.4 people, the resulting influx of 1,008 people would increase the population of the county by less than 2 percent. It is unlikely that this small population increase would result in a noticeable increase in the demand for public services or a need to add facilities, programs, and/or staff. Therefore, the public services impact associated with construction of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALLAs discussed above, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for operation of the SHINE facility is 150. This number is significantly smaller than the estimated number of construction workers. Therefore, the public services impact associated with operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-38Rev. 0Public EducationImpacts on public education could be caused by construction and operation workers moving into and bringing school-aged children into the region surrounding the project site (Portage County). This increase in the number of school-aged children could cause crowding of local schools and potentially require school systems to add facilities and/or staff. Per NUREG-1437, impacts on education are considered to be SMALL if the project-related increase in school enrollment represents less than 3 percent of the total school enrollment in affected school systems, MODERATE if 4 to 8 percent, and LARGE if more than 8 percent.Based on WDPI data for 2010, the total public school enrollment in Portage County was 9,528 students (WDPI, 2012). As discussed above, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for construction of the SHINE facility is 420. It is expected that many of these workers would be current residents of Portage County and the nearby region, but if all of the workers moved into the county and brought a school-aged child who attended a public school, the resulting influx of 420 students would increase school enrollment by approximately 4.4 percent. Using the NUREG-1437 guideline, this would indicate a MODERATE impact on education. However, given the conservativeness of the assumption that all construction workers would move into the county, and the fact that the peak construction employment period would last less than 1 year, it is unlikely that the increase in school-aged children would result in noticeable crowding or a need to add facilities or staff. Therefore, the public education impact associated with construction of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALLAs discussed above, the maximum number of workers expected to be employed at any time for operation of the SHINE facility is 150. This number is significantly smaller than the estimated number of construction workers. Therefore, the public education impact associated with operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL.TaxesProperty taxes and other taxes paid during construction and operation of the SHINE facility would benefit the state and local jurisdictions that co llect the taxes. Per NUREG-1437, tax impacts are considered SMALL if project-related tax revenues represent less than 10 percent of the total tax revenues of the local taxing jurisdictions, MODERATE if 10 to 20 percent, and LARGE if more than 20 percent.As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, SHINE intends to enter into a TIF agreement with the City of Janesville. This agreement is expected to cover the first 10 years of the NRC license period, which includes the construction period for the SHINE facility. Under this agreement, SHINE expects to pay a total of $635,000 per year in property taxes and payments in lieu of taxes. If the SHINE facility were constructed at the Stevens Point site, it is expected that SHINE would enter into a similar TIF agreement and make similar payments during the construction period. Based on WDOR data for Portage County, the property taxes collected in 2011 were $24,819,000 (WDOR, 2012a). Therefore, even if the entire payment of $635,000 per year were counted toward property taxes, the payments would represent approximately 2.6percent of the annual property tax revenues of Portage County, and the tax impact associated with construction of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would beSMALL. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-39Rev. 0After expiration of the 10-year TIF agreement with the City of Janesville, SHINE expects to pay property taxes of approximately $660,000 per year during the remaining period of operation for the SHINE facility. It is expected that tax payments at the Stevens Point site would be approximately the same, and such payments would represent approximately 2.7 percent of the annual property tax revenues of Portage County. Therefore, the tax impact associated with operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL.TransportationTransportation in the vicinity of the SHINE facility could be affected by the increase in vehicle traffic associated with construction and operation workers commuting to and from the site and the delivery of materials and equipment to the site. The increase in vehicle traffic could cause congestion and delays on local roads. The severity of such impacts would depend primarily on the existing road conditions and traffic volumes on the local roads compared with the expected volume of project-related traffic.As shown in Figure 19.5.2-7, the entrance road for the SHINE facility would connect with a new street that the City of Stevens Point has indicated they would construct along the northern boundary of the site. It is expected that this new street would connect with County Highway R (Eisenhower Road), an existing public road located approximately 1.0 mi. (1.6 km) west of the site, and Burbank Road, an existing public road located approximately 1.5 mi. (2.4 km) east of the site. The City also has indicated that they would construct a new street along the western boundary of the site, between the new street to the north and County Highway HH (McDill Avenue), an existing public road to the south. No other construction or modification of roads or other transportation infrastructure would be required for construction, operation, or decommissioning of the SHINE facility. Interstate-39 provides long-distance access to the site area. The exit nearest to the site is Exit156, which is approximately 1.5 mi. (2.4 km) southwest of the site and connects with County Highway HH. Exit 158, which is approximately 2 mi. (3.2 km) northwest of the site, connects with U.S. Highway 10. Thus, it is expected that most vehicles traveling to the site from outside of the Stevens Point metropolitan area would travel on County Highway HH or U.S. Highway 10, then turn onto County Highway R, and then turn onto the new street to be constructed along the northern boundary of the site. Many vehicles traveling to the site from inside of the metropolitan area probably also would travel on County Highways R and HH, although some might travel on Old Highway 18 or Burbank Road, which are the nearest existing public roads to the north and east of the site, respectively.U.S. Highway 10 is a multi-lane divided highway. County Highway R is an undivided four-lane road with a curbed shoulder. County Highway HH, Old Highway 18, and Burbank Road are two lane roads with minimal paved shoulders. Old Highway 18 and Burbank Road are narrow and do not have painted center stripes.Table 19.5.2-12 provides peak hourly traffic data for the roads in the site area (WDOT, 2011). It can be seen that the traffic volume on these roads varies greatly. Most relevantly, however, the traffic volume on County Highway R in the site area (south of U.S. Highway 10) is around 400 vehicles per hour during the morning peak period and around 700 vehicles per hour during the evening peak period. The traffic volume on County Highway HH is around 350 vehicles per hour during the morning peak period and around 500 vehicles per hour during the evening peak Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-40Rev. 0period. The traffic volume on both Old Highway 18 and Burbank Road is less than 50 vehicles per hour during both the morning and evening peak periods.As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, the maximum number of vehicles expected to travel to and from the site during construction of the SHINE facility is 465 per day. The great majority of these vehicles (approximately 420) would represent commuting construction workers. These vehicles generally would arrive at the site on County Highway R at about the same time each morning and leave on County Highway R at about the same time each evening. Thus, commuting construction workers could roughly double the volume of traffic on County Highway R during the peak morning period. The increase in traffic volumes on other roads in the site vicinity would not be as great but could be significant. Given the low existing traffic volumes and relatively poor road conditions on Old Highway 18 and Burbank Road, any appreciable increase in traffic could be significant for these roads.Considering the nature of the roads in the site vicinity and the increase in traffic volume these roads would experience, it is likely that the peak construction-related traffic would noticeably alter existing transportation conditions (cause noticeable traffic delays) but not be sufficient to destabilize transportation resources. Therefore, the transportation impact associated with project construction would be MODERATE.As discussed in Subsection 19.4.7, the maximum number of vehicles expected to travel to and from the site during operation of the SHINE facility is 118 per day. The great majority of these vehicles would represent commuting operation workers, but it is expected that these workers would be divided into three shifts. Thus, the maximum number of vehicles arriving at or departing from the site at any one time would be much less than during the construction period. Therefore, the transportation impact associated with facility operation would be SMALL.In order to alleviate traffic congestion during project construction, mitiga tion measures such as widening or adding turning lanes might be necessary, especially on Old Highway 18 and Burbank Road. Specific mitigation measures would be selected after a detailed evaluation of traffic patterns and potential problem areas.19.5.2.1.2.2.9Human Health Impacts19.5.2.1.2.2.9.1Nonradiological Impacts No unusual existing sources of nonradioactive chemical exposure or effluents have been identified in the vicinity of the Stevens Point site. No operating industrial facilities with environmental monitoring programs have been identified in the site vicinity. A SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be essentially the same as the SHINE facility described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.8.1 with regard to the following factors:*Nonradioactive chemical sources (location, type, strength).
- Nonradioactive liquid, gaseous, and solid waste management and effluent control systems.*Nonradioactive effluents released into the on-site and off-site environment.
- Chemical exposure to the public and on-site workforce.*Physical occupational hazards.*Mitigation measures for nonradiological human health impacts.
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-41Rev. 0Nonradiological chemical sources, wastes, effluents, and occupational hazards associated with the SHINE facility would be strictly controlled to ensure compliance with applicable environmental and occupational regulations and standards as discussed in Subsection 19.4.8.1. Therefore, the nonradiological human health impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL.19.5.2.1.2.2.9.2Radiological Impacts No unusual existing sources of radiation have been identified in the vicinity of the Stevens Point site. The major sources and levels of background radiation exposure at the Stevens Point site are very similar to the sources and levels described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.3.8.2. The physical layout of the Stevens Point site is shown in Figure 19.5.2-7. Radioactive materials would be located in the central part of the production facility building. A SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be essentially the same as the SHINE facility described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.8.2 with regard to the following factors:*Characteristics of radiation sources and expected radioactive effluents.
- Compliance with 10 CFR 20.1301, including calculated radiation dose rates at the site boundary.*Annual radiation dose to the maximally exposed worker.*Mitigation measures to minimize public and occupational exposures to radioactive material.Radiation sources and radioactive effluents would be strictly controlled to ensure compliance with applicable regulations and standards as discussed in Subsection 19.4.8.2. Therefore, the radiological human health impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL.19.5.2.1.2.2.10Waste Management ImpactsNo conditions have been identified for the Stevens Point site that would significantly affect waste management impacts. A SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be essentially the same as the SHINE facility described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.9 with regard to the following factors:*Sources, types, and approximate quantities of solid, hazardous, radioactive, and mixed wastes.*Proposed waste management systems designed to collect, store, and process the waste.*Anticipated waste disposal or waste management plans.*Anticipated waste-minimization plans to minimize the generation of waste.Wastes would be handled, processed, stored, and disposed as discussed in Subsection 19.4.9. Therefore, the waste management impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL.
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-42Rev. 019.5.2.1.2.2.11Waste Management ImpactsPer the Final ISG Augmenting NUREG-1537, the traffic impacts of vehicles associated with the SHINE project are discussed in Subsection 19.5.2.1.2.2.8. This subsection discusses the radiological and other human health impacts of transporting nuclear and non-nuclear materials associated with the project.No conditions have been identified for the Stevens Point site that would significantly affect the impacts of transporting nuclear and non-nuclear materials, including radioactive waste, nonradioactive waste, and medical isotopes. Because the Stevens Point site and the Janesville site are relatively close to each other in comparison with the projected origins and destinations of nuclear and non-nuclear materials, distance-related impacts of transportation would be essentially the same. A SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be essentially the same as the SHINE facility described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.10 with regard to the following factors:*Transportation modes.*Approximate transportation distances.*Treatment and packaging for radioactive and nonradioactive wastes.
- Calculated radiological dose to members of the public and workers from incident-free transportation scenarios.The impact of the transportation of nuclear and non-nuclear materials is discussed in Subsections 19.4.10.1.3 and 19.4.10.2 . Therefore, the transportation impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL.19.5.2.1.2.2.12Postulated Accident ImpactsNo conditions have been identified for the Stevens Point site that would significantly affect the radiological and nonradiological impacts from postulated accidents. A SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be essentially the same as the SHINE facility described for the Janesville site in Subsection 19.4.11 with regard to the following factors:*Credible accidents having a potential for releases into the environment.*Radiological and nonradiological consequences from the postulated accidents.The SHINE facility would be designed, constructed, and operated to ensure that the consequences of postulated accidents would comply with applicable regulations and standards, as discussed in Subsection 19.4.11. Therefore, the postulated accident impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL.19.5.2.1.2.2.13Environmental Justice ImpactsEnvironmental justice issues involve aspects of the project that could disproportionately impact minority or low-income populations. The potential for disproportionate impacts depends primarily on the location of the project facilities in relation to existing minority and low-income populations.Minority and low-income populations within 5 mi. (8 km) of the Stevens Point site were identified based on USCB Census block group data (USCB, 2012c and 2012d). Census block groups with above-average minority and low-income populations were determined by comparing the minority Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-43Rev. 0and poverty populations in each block group to the total population in that block group and to the average minority and poverty populations in the county and state. Where the minority or poverty population in a block group exceeded 50 percent of the total population in that block group, or where the minority or poverty population was found to be at least 20 percentage points greater than the comparable county and/or state averages, the minority or poverty population was defined as "above average." This methodology is consistent with NRC guidance for identification of Environmental Justic e populations (NRC, 2004).Table 19.5.2-13 shows the block groups and census tracts within 5 mi. (8 km) of the Stevens Point site, the percentage of households below the poverty level in each, and the percentage of each minority group, including American Indian and Hispanic populations, in each. The percentage of households below the poverty level, the percentage of each minority group, and aggregate percentage of all minority groups are compared with the average percentage in Portage County and the state of Wisconsin.As shown in Table 19.5.2-13, none of the block groups/census tracts within 5 mi. (8 km) of the Stevens Point site has an above average percentage of any minority groups individually or in the aggregate, but four block groups/census tracts have an above average percentage of households below the poverty level. These block groups/census tracts have 36.4 to 59.5 percent of households below the poverty level, compared with 12.4 percent in Portage County and 11.2percent in the state of Wisconsin. The location of these block groups/census tracts is shown in Figure 19.5.2-9. It can be seen that all of the block groups/census tracts are located west-northwest of the Stevens Point site, with the nearest one being approximately 3.5 mi. (5.6km) from the site. All of the block groups/census tracts are located on the far side of the City of Stevens Point, and all are separated from the site by numerous buildings, roads, trees, and other obstructions. None of the primary transportation routes that would be used to transport workers, materials, or equipment to the Stevens Point site pass through these block groups/
census tracks. Therefore, these populations would not be directly or indirectly affected by construction or operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site.No American Indian reservations or other special communities have been identified within 5 mi. (8 km) of the Stevens Point site. The nearest American Indian reservation is the Winnebago Reservation, which belongs to the Ho-Chunk Nation and is located approximately 20 mi. (32 km) southwest of the site (National Atlas of the United States, 2012; WDNR, 2012b).Based on the information presented above, there is no indication that any minority or low income population would be disproportionately affected during project construction or operation as compared to the effect on the general population. Based on the potential for disproportionate exposure to environmental hazards from the SHINE facility as well as multiple-hazard and cumulative hazard conditions, the human health and environmental effects on minority and low-income populations would not be significantly high or adverse. Therefore, the environmental justice impacts associated with construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site would be SMALL Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-44Rev. 019.5.2.1.2.2.14Cumulative ImpactsPast, present, and reasonably foreseeable future development projects and other actions that could result in cumulative impacts at the Stevens Point site were identified by searching for economic development plans, permit lists, news releases, and similar sources of information. An effort was made to identify all relevant activities conducted, regulated, or approved by a federal agency or non-federal entity within 5 mi. (8 km) of the site. Available information about the projects and other activities identified is provided in Table 19.5.2-14.As shown in Table 19.5.2-14, the projects and other activities located within 5 mi. (8 km) of the Stevens Point site generally are of a relatively small scale and would not be expected to have significant impacts in the same areas affected by the SHINE facility. Construction of a new ethanol plant, as planned by Central Wisconsin Alcohol, Inc. approximately 1 mi. (1.6 km) from the Stevens Point site might have contributed to the land use impacts of the SHINE facility; however, the air construction permit application for this project recently was rejected and it is not clear that the project will proceed. The projects that are proceeding or appear likely to proceed would not be expected to have significant land use impacts. However, some of these projects could produce increases in vehicle traffic and ambient noise that might affect some of the same areas as the SHINE facility. Therefore, the cumulative effects of these pr ojects might contribute to the traffic and noise impacts of the SHINE facility, which are expected to be MODERATE as discussed above.19.5.2.2ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGIES 19.5.2.2.1Identification of Reasonable AlternativesThe SHINE facility uses a new, proprietary technology developed by SHINE in order to domestically produce medical isotopes such as Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has provided support to SHINE and three additional technologies for the domestic production of medical isotopes (NRC, 2011). The DOE conducted a rigorous technical review of proposed technologies for producing Mo-99 domestically before selecting its four cooperative agreement partners. The DOE intentionally chose four distinct technologies to support. Rather than repeat this selection process for the purpose of this section, the three other DOE cooperative agreement partner technologies were selected as the alternative technologies to be considered in this section.The three technologies considered were:*Linear accelerator-based technology (for production of Mo-99 only).*Neutron capture using existing power reactors (for production of Mo-99 only).*Low enriched uranium (LEU) aqueous homogenous reactors.Each of these technologies were evaluated to determine if they could reasonably be implemented at the Janesville site. While both an aqueous homogeneous reactor and linear accelerator facility could concievably be built at the SHINE site, there is no power reactor at the site. As a result, neutron capture in an existing power reactor was considered unreasonable for the purpose of this section and eliminated from the list.The two remaining technologies are considered reasonable alternatives to the SHINE technology for the Janesville site and are evaluated in the following subsections. However, as noted below, Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-45Rev. 0the linear accelerator-based approach is not able to produce medical isotopes other than Mo-99, and therefore, does not address the need for domestic SHINE as effectively as the SHINE technology.19.5.2.2.2Evaluation of Reasonable AlternativesThe two alternative technologies evaluated are as follows:*Linear accelerator-based approach (for production of Mo-99 only).*Low enriched uranium (LEU) aqueous homogeneous reactor approach.The following subsections describe these alternative technologies in more detail and evaluate the major environmental impacts associated with construction and operation of the technologies at the SHINE site. Cumulative impacts and potential impact mitigation measures would be largely determined by the project site conditions, and therefore, would be the same as described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.13.19.5.2.2.2.1Linear Accelerator Approach (Production of Mo-99 Only)19.5.2.2.2.1.1DescriptionThis technology uses multiple linear accelerators to produce Mo-99. The linear accelerator accelerates electrons that collide with a metal target, producing extremely intense high-energy photons. The high energy photons irradiate a target made of molybdenum-100 (Mo-100), producing Mo-99 (CLS, 2012). The Mo-99 is shipped to pharmacies for TechneGenŽ processing and Tc-99m generation. The design allows for increasing production when required by demand.19.5.2.2.2.1.2Land Use and Visual Resources ImpactsThe linear accelerator SHINE facility for this technology is 77,000 square (sq.) ft. (7200 sq. m) in size and requires an approximately 33 ac. site (13.4 ha) (DOE, 2012). The size of the facility is similar to the size of the SHINE facility, and it would be expected to have similar impacts on land use and visual resources (see Subsection 19.4.1). Therefore, the land use and visual impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.1.3Air Quality and Noise ImpactsConstruction activities associated with the proposed facility would generate air pollutant emissions from site-disturbing activities, such as grading, filling, compacting, trenching, and operation of construction equipment. The maximum annual greenhouse gas emissions would be about 0.037 percent of Wisconsin's 2009 carbon dioxide emissions (DOE, 2012). The proposed facility would produce air emissions from operation of the building's heating system. Process emissions would not be expected, but the use of chemicals used to dissolve Mo-99 targets and the resulting evaporation could result in small emissions. Operations emissions under the proposed project would not be expected to (1) cause or contribute to a violation of any Federal or State ambient air quality standard; (2) expose sensitive receptors to substantially increased pollutant concentrations; or (3) exceed any evaluation criteria established by a State implementation plan. Operation of the facility would also result in an increase in vehicular emissions and noise due to shipping radioisotopes and operating and maintaining the Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-46Rev. 0facility. Noise would stem from the operation of linear accelerator and chemical processing equipment. While operations are likely to produce considerable noise, the noise would be contained within the production facility and would have no impact on the surrounding ambient noise levels. Employees working in this environment would follow best management practices, such as the use of hearing protection equipment, as necessary to limit exposure above the permissible levels defined by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (DOE, 2012). Therefore, the air quality and noise impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.1.4Geology, Soils, and Seismology ImpactsThe linear accelerator SHINE facility would be designed to withstand the same seismic and geologic hazards as the SHINE facility. Construction of the linear accelerator SHINE facility would require some excavation and the use of some geologic resources for fill material. No information on the design of the linear accelerator SHINE facility is available except the size, but the need for excavation and geologic resources should be similar to those described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.3. Therefore, the geology, soils, and seismology impacts during construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.1.5Water Resources ImpactsConstruction of the proposed facility and associated parking areas and roadways would likely involve conversion of less than 2 hectares (5 acres) of the property to impervious surface. This would result in a slight increase in potential runoff from the project site compared with the site's undeveloped state. Facility operations would not be expected to require di rect withdrawals of groundwater, as all required water would be obtained from municipal supplies (DOE, 2012). The water resource impacts would be similar to those described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.4. Therefore, the water resource impacts during construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.1.6Ecological Resources ImpactSince the linear accelerator SHINE facility is similar in size to the SHINE facility, the ecological resource impacts would be similar to those described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.5. Therefore, the ecological impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.1.7Historic and Cultural Resources Impacts Since the linear accelerator SHINE facility is similar in size to the SHINE facility, the historical and cultural resource impacts would be similar to those described for the SHINE facility discussed in Subsection 19.4.6. Therefore, the historical and cultural resource impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.1.8Socioeconomic ImpactsConstruction of the linear accelerator SHINE facility would have a positive socioeconomic impact related to employment and tax revenues. Operation of the facility would create 150 jobs (HI, 2011) as well as provide additional tax revenues and alleviate shortages of medical isotopes. These beneficial impacts, as well as potential adverse impacts on public services and transportation, would be similar to those described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.7. Therefore, the socioeconomic impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-47Rev. 019.5.2.2.2.1.9Human Health ImpactsConstruction would entail potential hazards to workers typical of any construction site. Normal construction safety practices would be employed to promote worker safety and reduce the likelihood of worker injury during construction. Nonetheless, construction accidents could occur. Air emissions from the facility have the potential to contain radioactive material as a result of the accelerator operations and the dissolution and packaging of radioactive materials in the hot cells. However, the facility design and operation would be intended to control the amount of radioactive material released to a negligible amount. Liquid waste generated during operations would be collected, temporarily stored on-site, and sent off-site for treatment and disposal. The proposed facility would not release any radioactive material through wastewater. No public dose from air emissions or wastewater is expected. Although radiological emissions would not be expected, if any emissions were to occur, impacts on the public would be negligible (DOE, 2012).The potential sources of exposure for the workers include the activities associated with the linear accelerator irradiation of the Mo-100 targets, transfer of irradiated material into the hot cells, packaging and shipment of the Mo-99 product, and preparation of any radioactive waste for disposal. The Mo-99 production facility design and operation would include several features to limit worker dose. Only a fraction of the workers at the Mo-99 production facility would be expected to receive any radiation dose; individual worker doses would not exceed the 5-rem-per-year regulatory limit (DOE, 2012). The human health impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.1.10Waste Management ImpactsExcavation of the subgrade portion of the facility would generate up to 23,000 cubic meters (30,000 cubic yards) of soil/rock that would be disposed of off-site if not used for on-site grading. The soil/rock material would be recycled/reused as construction fill for other construction or grading purposes, if the material properties are acceptable. Construction activities would generate about 160 metric tons (175 tons) of solid waste in the form of wood, metal, concrete, or other miscellaneous construction debris. Construction waste would be recycled to the extent practicable or disposed of at an appropriate licensed landfill or waste management facility (DOE,2012). Operation of this type of facility would be expected to result in waste generation during the process of bombarding targets and preparing the Mo-99 product for shipment. About 10.4 cubic meters (14cubic yards) of low-level radioactive waste, 2.4 cubic meters (3.1 cubic yards) of hazardous waste, and 45 cubic meters (59 cubic yards) of solid waste would be generated annually. No mixed low-level radioactive waste generation would be expected. Existing commercial or municipal treatment and disposal facilities would be able to accommodate all projected quantities of waste generated by the proposed facility (DOE, 2012).No process-water discharges would be expected. Sanitary waste from the facility would be discharged to the sanitary sewer system; the quantity of waste, primarily from personnel water use, would be a small addition to the load on the local sewer system (DOE, 2012). The waste management impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-48Rev. 019.5.2.2.2.1.11Transportation ImpactsLow-level radioactive waste would be shipped by truck and/or rail to waste disposal facilities, and Mo-99 would be shipped by air for processing. The transportation impacts would be similar or less (since there would be no fission product wastes) than those for the SHINE facility discussed in Subsection 19.4.10. Therefore, the transportation impacts would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.1.12Postulated Accidents ImpactsA range of accidents involving radioactive Mo-99 or chemicals to be used in the process was postulated. Risks to the public from most postulated accidents would be small. Impacts of extremely unlikely severe accidents, such as building collapse from an earthquake or explosion, could extend to members of the public. A severe accident causing release of the entire helium inventory (from the linear accelerator target-cooling system) could result in dispersion of hazardous concentrations to a distance of about 85 meters (280 feet) from the building; the distance from the building to the site boundary is about 20 meters (66 feet). A severe accident involving direct exposure to a freshly irradiated molybdenum target would result in a risk of a latent cancer fatality of 7 x 10 -4 (1 chance in 1,400) to someone exposed at the site boundary for an hour. Although considered extremely unlikely, an intentional destructive act involving release of a significant portion of a freshly-irradiated target would result in a risk of a latent cancer fatality of 8 x 10 -5 to 3x 10-4 (1 chance in 3,000 to 13,000) to a person at the site boundary (DOE, 2012). The environmental impact of postulated accidents would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.1.13Environmental Justice ImpactsEnvironmental justice impacts are largely dependent on the site location, and since the alternative technologies are assumed to be constructed at the SHINE site, the impacts would be similar to those described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.12. Given that the impacts in all environmental resource areas discussed above would be SMALL, the environmental justice impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.2Low Enriched Uranium Aqueous Homogeneous Reactor Approach (Production of Mo-99, I-131 and Xe-133)19.5.2.2.2.2.1DescriptionThis process consists of an array of aqueous homogeneous reactors (AHR) to produce Mo-99, I-131 and Xe-133. The AHR uses an LEU uranyl nitrate solution for fuel and target material. Once produced, these isotopes are extracted and sent for processing, distribution to pharmacies, and Tc-99m generation. This technology has the potential to supply more than 50 percent of the US demand for Mo-99 (B&W TSG, 2009a).The facility consists of a small number of AHR modules, each with a generating capacity of 200 to 240 kilowatt (kW), less than 1 MW total (B&W TSG, 2009b). The use of LEU uranyl nitrate solution for both reactor fuel and target material allows Mo-99 to be produced in the entire reactor solution. The design reduces waste production and proliferation issues, and allows for a large negative coefficient of reactivity, passive safety factor, operating temperature of 80 degrees Celsius (°C) (176°F [degrees Fahrenheit]), and atmospheric operating pressure (B&W TSG, 2009c). The low power and small footprint of the AHR modules allows for additional facilities Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-49Rev. 0and/or increased production at the first facility. To produce Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133, LEU is dissolved in nitric acid and brought to criticality. To extract these isotopes, the solution is transferred from the reactor to a vent tank. After degassing, the solution is transferred to an extraction column where it undergoes nitric acid wash, water wash, and sodium hydroxide elution processes. The processed solution is cleaned up and returned to the reactor (B&W TSG, 2009b; B&W TSG, 2009c). 19.5.2.2.2.2.2Land Use and Visual Resources ImpactsThere is no information on the size of this type of facility. It is anticipated the size would be similar to the SHINE facility (see Subsection 19.4.1) (B&W TSG, 2009c). Therefore, the land use and visual resource impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.2.3Air Quality and Noise Impacts Construction of the facility results in an increase in dust and vehicular emissions and noise. Operation of the facility results in an increase in vehicular emissions and noise due to shipping radioisotopes and operating and maintaining the facility. The air quality and noise impacts would be similar to those described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.2. Therefore, the air quality and noise impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.2.4Geology, Soils, and Seismology ImpactsThe facility would be designed to withstand the same seismic and geologic hazards as the SHINE facility. Construction of the facility would require some excavation and the use of some geologic resources for fill material. No information on the design of the facility is available, but the need for excavation and geologic resources should be similar to those described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.3. Therefore, the geology, soils, and seismology impacts during construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.2.5Water Resources ImpactsThere is no information on the water requirements for this type of facility. However, the water requirements are anticipated to be greater than that of the SHINE facility (see Subsection 19.4.4) (B&W TSG, 2009c). However, the water resource impacts of construction and operation would likely be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.2.6Ecological Resources Impact There is no information on the size of this type of facility. However, the size is likely to be similar to the SHINE facility (B&W TSG, 2009c). Therefore, the ecological resource impacts of construction and operation would be similar to those described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.5 and the impacts would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.2.7Historic and Cultural Resources ImpactsThere is no information on the size of this type of facility. However, the size is likely to be similar to the SHINE facility (B&W TSG, 2009c). Therefore, the historic and cultural resource impacts of construction and operation would be similar to those described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.6 and the impacts would be SMALL. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-50Rev. 019.5.2.2.2.2.8Socioeconomic ImpactsConstruction of the facility would have a positive socioeconomic impact related to employment and tax revenues. While there is no information on the number of jobs that would be created by operating this type of facility, it is likely to be similar to the operation of the SHINE facility. Operation also would provide additional tax revenues and alleviate shortages of medical isotopes. These beneficial impacts, as well as potential adverse impacts on public services and transportation, would be similar to those described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.7. Therefore, the socioeconomic impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.2.9Human Health ImpactsThere is no information available on this type of facility to directly assess the human health impacts of its construction and operation. However, the radiological and nonradiological human health impacts of this type of facility (B&W TSG, 2009b) is likely to be greater than those of the SHINE facility (see Subsection 19.4.8). However, the human health impacts of construction and operation are likely to be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.2.10Waste Management ImpactsThere is no information available on this type of facility to directly assess the radiological and nonradiological waste management impacts of its construction and operation. However, given the similar Mo-99 production levels, the waste production is anticipated to be similar to the SHINE facility (see Subsection 19.4.9). Therefore, the waste management impacts of construction and operation are likely to be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.2.11Transportation ImpactsThere is no information available on this type of facility to directly assess transportation impacts. However, given the similar Mo-99 production levels, the impacts of transporting spent fuel and radioactive waste from this type of facility is anticipated to be similar to those of the SHINE facility (see Subsection 19.4.10). Transportation impacts due to the shipment of Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133 to processing facilities would be similar to the impact of shipping isotopes from the SHINE facility as described in Subsection 19.4.10. Therefore, environmental impacts due to transportation would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.2.12Postulated Accidents ImpactsThere is no information available on this type of facility to directly assess the impacts of postulated accidents. However, the postulated accident impacts of this type of facility are anticipated to be greater than those of the SHINE facility (see Subsection 19.4.11). Regardless, the environmental impact of postulated accidents would be SMALL.19.5.2.2.2.2.13Environmental Justice Impacts Environmental justice impacts are largely dependent on the site location, and since the alternative technologies are assumed to be constructed at the SHINE site, the impacts would be similar to those described for the SHINE facility in Subsection 19.4.12. Given that the impacts in all environmental resource areas discussed above would be SMALL, the environmental justice impacts of construction and operation would be SMALL. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-51Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-1 Sensitive Features in the Chippewa Falls Site Area Measured fromSite NearestBoundaryMeasured fromCenter PointNearest Residence 10.07 mi. (0.12 km)0.40 mi.(0.65 km)Nearest Residence 20.12 mi. (0.19 km)0.39 mi.(0.63 km)Monkey Business Child Care Center0.21 mi. (0.34 km)0.40 mi.(0.65 km)Grace Adult Day Services0.49 mi. (0.79 km)0.64 mi.(1.04 km)Oral & Maxillofacial Associates0.58 mi. (0.93 km)0.74 mi.(1.19 km)Lakeland College and Chippewa Valley Technical College 0.56 mi.(0.90 km)0.70 mi.(1.13 km)Family Health Associates0.55 mi. (0.89 km)0.70 mi.(1.13 km)Chippewa Valley Eye Clinic0.54 mi (0.86 km)0.69 mi.(1.12 km)Wissota Health and Regional Vent Center0.69 (1.12 km)0.88 mi.(1.41 km)Marshfield Clinic Chippewa Falls Center0.64 mi. (1.03 km)0.84 mi.(1.35 km)St. Joseph's Hospital0.65 mi. (1.05 km)0.82 mi.(1.32 km)Wissota Sprints Assisted Living Center0.63 mi. (1.01 km)0.81 mi.(1.31 km)Marshfield Clinic Chippewa Falls Dental
Center0.69 mi.(1.11 km)0.93 mi.(1.50 km)Kids USA Learning Center0.81 mi. (1.30 km)1.00 mi.(1.60 km)Sunrise Family Care Clinic0.77 mi. (1.24 km)0.95 mi.(1.53 km)Irvine Park (nearest public park)1.45 mi. (2.34 km)1.79 mi.(2.89 km)Notre Dame Church and Goldsmith Chapel (nearest listed historical site) 1.85 mi.(2.98 km)2.11 mi.(3.40 km)Parkview Elementary School (nearest public school) 1.50 mi.(2.41 km)1.79 mi.(2.88 km) Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-52Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-2 Potential Land Use and Natural Habitat Impacts at the Chippewa Falls Site (USGS, 2006) Land Use CategoryPermanently Developed AreaTemporarilyDisturbed AreaRemaining Area within Site BoundariesTotal Within Site BoundariesTotal Witin 5-Mile RadiusPercentage of 5-MileRadius within Site BoundariesDeveloped land2.6 ac.(1.0 ha)0.01 ac.(0.004 ha)6.5 ac.(2.6 ha)9.1 ac.(3.7 ha)8,966.4 ac.(3,628.6 ha)0.10%Cultivated Crops14.9 ac.(6.0 ha)13.7 ac.(5.5 ha)37.9 ac.(15.4 ha)66.5 ac.(26.9 ha)19,133.0 ac.(7,742.9 ha)0.35%Pasture/Hay0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)3,237.0 ac.(1,310.0 ha)0.0%Grassland/Herbaceous0 ac. (0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)895.6 ac.(362.4 ha)0.0%Shrub/Scrub0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)568.9 ac.(230.2 ha)0.0%Deciduous Forest0.5 ac.(0.2 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0.3 ac.(0.1 ha)0.8 ac.(0.3 ha)7,301.3 ac.(2,954.7 ha)0.01%Evergreen Forest0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)1,116.1 ac.(451.7 ha)0.0%Mixed Forest0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)495.9 ac.(200.7 ha)0.0%Woody Wetlands0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)1,268.9 ac.(513.5 ha)0.0%Emergent, HerbaceousWetlands0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)732.8 ac.(296.5 ha)0.0%Open Water0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)6,549.0 ac.(2,650.3 ha)0.0%Barren Land (Rock/Sand/Clay)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0 ac.(0 ha)0.0%Totals17.9 ac.(7.3 ha)13.7 ac.(5.5 ha)44.8 ac.(18.1 ha)76.4 ac.(30.9 ha)50,264.9 ac.(20,341.5 ha)0.15% Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-53Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-3 Plant Species Oberved at the Chippewa Falls Site(Sheet 1 of 2)Site LocaleScientific Name Common NameCultivated FieldEdgesBromus inermissmooth brome Cirsium vulgare thistleFestuca elatior fescuePicea sp. (treeline to north)sprucePinus resinosa (treeline to north)red pinePoa pratensisKentucky bluegrassPopulus deltoides (treeline to north)cottonwoodRubus sp. (treeline to north) blackberrySetaria glaucafoxtail grassSolidago sp. (treeline to north)goldenrod Symphyotrichum sp. asterTaraxicum officinalecommon dandelionTrifolium repenswhite cloverWetland Community Eleocharis sp.spikerushPhalaris arundinaceareed canary grass Rumex sp. dockScirpus cyperinus woolgrassTypha latifoliacommon cattail Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-54Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-3 Plant Species Oberved at the Chippewa Falls Site(Sheet 2 of 2)Site LocaleScientific Name Common NameOldfield/Railroad ROWAmbrosia artemisiifoliacommon ragweedAmorpha canescensleadplantAndropogon gerardiibig bluestemAristida sp.three-awned grassAsclepias syriacacommon milkweedAster nove-angliaeNew England aster Bromus inermissmooth bromeCornus speciesdogwood speciesFestuca elatior fescueLespedeza captitataprairie bush cloverMonarda fistulosawild bergamotPoa pratensisKentucky bluegrassPopulus deltoidescottonwoodPopulus tremuloides trembling aspenRubus flagellarusdewberryRubus sp. blackberryRudbeckia hirtablack-eyed susanSchizachyrium scoparium little bluestemSetaria glaucafoxtail grassSolidago sp. goldenrod Symphyotrichum sp. aster Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-55Rev. 0a)Species designated by the WDNR in Endangered Resources Review (WDNR, 2011a). b)Global ranking system ranging from G1: critically imperiled globally to G5: common, widespread, and abundant as described in the Wisconsin Natural Heritage Working List. c)State ranking system ranging from S1: critically imperiled in Wisconsin to S5: demonstrably secure in Wisconsin as described in the Wisconsin Natural Heritage Working List. d)Bald eagles are not expected to be present on project site due to lack of suitable habitat; however, as a result of Federal protection under the Bald & Golden Eagle Protection Act and Migratory Bird Act, Wisconsin DNR must be contacted if individuals begin to nest in or near sit e.e)Classification signifying an issue with abundance or distribution to increase awareness before species becomes threatened or endangered. Species not legally protected by state or federal endangered species laws, but may be protected by other laws, policies, or permitting processes requiring or strongly encouraging protection of these resources. f)The term "threatened" is defined in the Endangered Species Act as "any species which is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range". Table 19.5.2-4 Endangered Resources Known or Likely to Occur in the Chippewa Falls Site Area (a)Scientific NameCommon NameState StatusGlobal Rank (b)State Rank (c)BirdsHaliaeetus IeucocephalusBald eagle (d)Special Concern (Fully Protected) (e)G5S4 (breeding);S4 (non-breeding)FishAcipenser fulvescens lake sturgeonSpecial Concern (Regulated by harvest seasons) (e)G3; G4S3Moxostoma valenciennesigreater redhorseThreatened (f)G4S3InsectsOphiogomphus smithisand snaketailSpecial Concern (No regulations) (e)G2; G3S3 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-56Rev. 0a)Traffic count for the hour between 00:00 and 09:59 hours with the greatest traffic volume.b)Traffic count for the hour between 10:00 and 14:59 hours with the greatest traffic volume.c)Traffic count for the hour between 15:00 and 23:59 hours with the greatest traffic volume.Table 19.5.2-5 Annual Average Hourly Traffic Counts in the Chippewa Falls Site AreaAnnual Average Hourly Traffic (WDOT, 2011) AM Peak (a)Middday Peak (b)PM Peak (c)Daily TotalCounty Highway S between WI-124 and 149th Street4302984054,573County Highway S west of WI-1783382223623,831WI-178 between Lake View and Chippewa Drive2242052512,7771st Avenue east of State Street258N/A3843,253 Commerce Parkway between Bergman and Warren Street3844124505,211County Highway I between Scheidler Road an d WI-1784844555715,643WI-178 between County Highway I and Chippewa River7046047838,283 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-57Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-6 Minority and Poverty Populations within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Chippewa Falls Site (a)(Sheet 1 of 2)Minority Population (%)Block Group and TractHouseholdsLiving BelowPoverty LevelBlack orAfricanAmericanAmericanIndian andAlaska NativeAsianNative Hawaiianand Other PacificIslander alone SomeOtherRace aloneTwo or More RacesHispanicor LatinoAggregateBlock Group 1, Census Tract 10212.4%0.5%0.6%1.3%0.0%0.1%0.5%1.3%4.3%Block Group 2, Census Tract 1022.1%0.6%0.3%2.6%0.0%0.1%1.0%2.4%7.0%Block Group 3, Census Tract 1028.8%0.4%0.6%0.8%0.0%0.1%1.2%1.7%4.7%Block Group 1, Census Tract 10336.5%1.6%0.5%0.1%0.0%0.0%1.4%2.2%5.9%Block Group 2, Census Tract 10314.5%0.0%0.6%0.1%0.1%0.3%1.1%1.8%4.0%Block Group 3, Census Tract 10310.4%0.7%0.5%0.5%0.0%0.0%1.1%0.5%3.3%Block Group 4, Census Tract 10325.0%0.6%0.7%0.1%0.0%0.0%1.0%1.4%3.8%Block Group 5, Census Tract 1033.1%0.3%0.3%1.1%0.0%0.0%0.9%1.1%3.7%Block Group 6, Census Tract 1036.0%0.1%0.2%2.0%0.0%0.0%0.7%2.6%5.6%Block Group 1, Census Tract 1047.0%0.1%0.3%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.9%2.2%Block Group 3, Census Tract 1041.0%0.4%0.4%4.2%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.7%5.9%Block Group 1, Census Tract 1058.4%0.9%0.0%0.5%0.0%0.0%0.6%1.8%3.9%Block Group 2, Census Tract 10518.3%1.2%0.1%1.3%0.1%0.0%2.0%1.0%5.7%Block Group 3, Census Tract 1057.0%0.6%1.2%0.6%0.0%0.0%2.4%0.7%5.4%Block Group 4, Census Tract 10516.5%6.4%1.5%1.1%0.0%0.0%1.2%2.2%12.4%Block Group 1, Census Tract 1075.9%0.4%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%1.0%0.7%2.6%Block Group 2, Census Tract 1076.5%0.3%0.1%0.7%0.0%0.0%0.8%0.8%2.8%Block Group 3, Census Tract 10713.7%0.5%0.4%1.0%0.0%0.0%1.2%1.1%4.2%Block Group 3, Census Tract 1081.0%0.1%1.1%0.9%0.0%0.0%1.0%0.4%3.5%Block Group 4, Census Tract 1102.3%0.1%0.1%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.9%0.5%2.0%Block Group 5, Census Tract 1105.4%0.6%0.1%0.3%0.0%0.1%1.1%0.4%2.6%Block Group 4, Census Tract 1121.9%0.1%0.0%0.2%0.0%0.0%0.2%0.5%1.0% Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-58Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-6 Minority and Poverty Populations within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Chippewa Falls Site (a)(Sheet 2 of 2)a)Shaded cells indicate "Above Average Populations" (USCB, 2012c).Minority Population (%)Block Group and TractHouseholdsLiving BelowPoverty LevelBlack orAfricanAmericanAmericanIndian andAlaska NativeAsianNative Hawaiianand Other PacificIslander alone SomeOther RacealoneTwo orMore RacesHispanicor LatinoAggregateTotal Area, 5 Mi. Radius9.5%0.9%0.5%1.0%0.0%0.0%1.0%1.2%4.6%Chippewa County10.9%1.5%0.4%1.2%0.0%0.0%0.9%1.3%5.4%State of Wisconsin11.2%6.2%0.9%2.3%0.0%0.1%1.4%5.9%16.7% Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-59Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-7 Potentially Significant Projects Identified within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Cippewa Falls Site Vicinity(Sheet 1 of 2)Project/Company NameSummary of ProjectLocationDistancefrom SiteStatusReferenceEOG Resources Inc.Silica sand processing plant.Chippewa Falls 1 mi. (1.6 km)Operating, achieved full operation in May 2012.The Chippewa Herald, 2012EOG Resources, 2012Wissota Green Housing DevelopmentBuilding of a traditional neighborhood, complete with neighborhood parks and a home owners association park with access to Lake Wissota. (100 lots, with varying lot sizes).Chippewa Falls1 mi. (1.6 km)Conditional Use Permit approved in 2005; developer went bankrupt in 2009; land scheduled to be sold to continue development individually.The Chippewa Herald, 2009CN Railway Intermodal Train-Truck ProjectRail to truck transfer facility; future expansion that will allow an estimated 400 trucks per week. Chippewa Falls2 mi. (3.2 km)Operating, with plans for expansion.Rubenzer, 2011Chippewa Falls Irvine Park and ZooUpdates to current exhibits. Next step is to design the primate/small animal building and visitor/artifact center.Chippewa Falls2 mi. (3.2 km)Approved by Chippewa Falls Park Board in December 2011; progress will not occur until fundraising completed.Vetter, 2012Indianhead Plating, Inc.Construction of a hard chrome plating tank.Chippewa Falls2 mi. (3.2 km)Applied for air construction permit in December 2011, waiting for approval.WDNR, 2012cSpectrum Industries Construction of burn off oven for paint hangers.Chippewa Falls2 mi. (3.2 km)Air construction permit issued in February 2011.WDNR, 2012dGreat Northern Corporation Construction of printers.Chippewa Falls2 mi. (3.2 km)Air construction permit issued in March 2011.WDNR, 2012eDairyland Power Cooperative -Seven Mile Creek Landfill Gas to Renewable Energy StationModifications to an existing internal combustion engine and existing landfill gas to energy generating facility.Eau Claire 2 mi. (3.2 km)Air construction permit issued in March 2011.WDNR, 2012f Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-60Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-7 Potentially Significant Projects Identified within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Cippewa Falls Site Vicinity(Sheet 2 of 2)Project/Company NameSummary of ProjectLocationDistancefrom SiteStatusReferenceWRR Environmental Services Company, Inc.Construction of tanks Q and R and modifications to the F-V (Full - Vacuum) Fractionation Distillation Column.Eau Claire 4 mi. (6.4 km)Air construction permit issued in February 2011.WDNR, 2012gWheaton Generating Station(430 MW maximum, fuel oil)Operating power plant with potential air pollution control projects for compliance with future regulatory requirements.Chippewa County5 mi. (8.0 km)Operating, with possible addition of air pollution control equipment in the
future.ThinkResources, Inc. 2008Elk Mound Generating
Station (71 MW, Combustion Turbines )Operating power plant with potential air pollution control projects for compliance with future regulatory requirements.Chippewa County5 mi. (8.0 km)Operating, with possible addition of air pollution control equipment in the future.McCarthy, 2011USEPA, 2012cEDI Aftermarket Services FacilityAdditional facility with new machining/ grinding capabilities for flat die rework.Chippewa Falls5 mi. (8.0 km)Scheduled to finish by October 2012.EDI, 2011 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-61Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-8 Sensitive Features in the Stevens Point Site Area Measured fromSite Nearest BoundaryMeasured from Center PointNearest Residence 10.20 mi.(0.33 km) 0.39 mi.(0.63 km)Nearest Residence 20.21 mi.(0.34 km) 0.41 mi.(0.65 km)Little Scholars Child Center and Preschool0.60 mi.(0.97 km) 0.83 mi.(1.34 km)Children's Discovery Center (day care)0.66 mi. (1.06 km) 0.85 mi.(1.37 km)Stockton School (potential historical site)0.69 mi.(1.12 km) 0.92 mi.(1.48 km)Conifer Park (city park)0.78 mi.(1.26 km) 1.03 mi.(1.67 km)Little Scholars Beginnings (day care)0.74 mi. (1.19 km) 0.93 mi.(1.50 km)Medical Office Building0.89 mi.(1.43 km)1.11 mi.(1.79 km)Unnamed Cemetery (potential historical site)0.85 mi.(1.37 km) 1.10 mi.(1.78 km)Oakview Dental Center0.83 mi.(1.34 km) 1.04 mi.(1.68 km)Aspirus Stevens Point Medical Clinic0.98 mi.(1.58 km) 1.21 mi.(1.95 km)Bannach Elementary School (nearest public school)1.53 mi.(2.46 km) 1.86 mi.(2.99 km)Saint Michael's Hospital (nearest hospital)3.54 mi.(5.69 km) 3.77 mi.(6.07 km)Nelson Hall (nearest listed historical site)3.54 mi.(5.69 km) 3.74 mi.(6.01 km) Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-62Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-9 Potential Land Use and Natural Habitat Impacts at the Stevens Point Site (USGS, 2006)Land Use CategoryPermanentlyDeveloped AreaTemporarilyDisturbed Area Remaining Areawithin Site BoundariesTotal WithinSite BoundariesTotal Within 5-Mile RadiusPercentage of 5-MileRadius within Site BoundariesDeveloped land 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)13,555.3 ac. (5,485.6 ha) 0.0%Cultivated Crops3.6 ac.(1.4 ha)13.6 ac.(5.5 ha)13.4 ac.(5.4 ha)30.6 ac.(12.4 ha)18,062.4 ac. (7,309.6 ha)0.17%Pasture/Hay 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)3,616.6 ac. (1,463.6 ha) 0.0%Grassland/Herbaceous 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)262.9 ac.(106.4 ha) 0.0%Shrub/Scrub 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)50.8 ac.(20.6 ha) 0.0%Deciduous Forest13.9 ac.(5.6 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)34.3 ac.(13.9 ha) 48.2 ac.(19.5 ha)7,537.7 ac. (3,050.4 ha)0.64%Evergreen Forest 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)1,566.5 ac.(633.9 ha) 0.0%Mixed Forest 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)1.6 ac.(0.6 ha)1.6 ac.(0.6 ha)935.2 ac.(378.4 ha)0.17%Woody Wetlands 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)2,627.1 ac. (1,063.2 ha) 0.0%Emergent, Herbaceous Wetlands 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)814.9 ac.(329.8 ha) 0.0%Open Water 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)1,126.8 ac.(456.0 ha) 0.0%Barren Land (Rock/ Sand/Clay) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha) 0 ac.(0 ha)108.5 ac.(43.9 ha) 0.0%Totals 17.4 ac.(7.1 ha) 13.6 ac.(5.5 ha) 49.3 ac.(20.0 ha) 80.4 ac.(32.5 ha)50,264.9 ac.(20,341.5 ha)0.16% Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-63Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-10 Plant Species Observed at the Stevens Point Site(Sheet 1 of 2)Site LocaleScientific NameCommon Name Forested AreaAbies balsameabalsam firAcer saccharum sugar maple Carex sp. sedgeOstrya virginianahop hornbeamPinus strobuswhite pinePinus sylvestris scotch pinePrunus serotinablack cherryQuercus alba white oakQuercus macrocarpabur oakQuercus rubrared oakQuercus speciesother oak species Ribes sp.gooseberry Rubus sp. blackberry Smilax sp.green briarTilia americana American basswoodViburnum sp.viburnum Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-64Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-10 Plant Species Observed at the Stevens Point Site(Sheet 2 of 2)Site LocaleScientific NameCommon NameCultivated Field EdgesAmbrosia artemisiifoliacommon ragweedAmorpha canescensleadplantBromus inermissmooth bromeConyza canadensishorseweedEuthamia graminifoliaflattop goldenrodPanicum sp.panic grassPotentilla quinquefoliacreeping cinquefoilRubus flagellarusdewberrySetaria glaucafoxtail grass Solidago sp.goldenrod Symphyotrichum sp. aster Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-65Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-11 Endangered Resources Known or Likely to Occur in the Stevens Point Site Area (a)a)Species designated by the WDNR in Endangered Resources Review (WDNR, 2011b). b)Global ranking system ranging from G1: critically imperiled globally to G5: common, widespread, and abundant according to the Wisconsin Natural Heritage Working List. c)State ranking system ranging from S1: critically imperiled in Wisconsin to S5: demonstrably secure in Wisconsin according to the Wisconsin Natural Heritage Working List. d)Classification signifying an issue with abundance or distribution to increase awareness before species becomes threatened or endangered. Species not legally protected by state or federal endangered species laws, but may be protected by other laws, policies, or permitting processes requiring or strongly encouraging protection of these resources. e)The term "threatened" is defined in the Endangered Species Act as "any species which is likely to become an endangered specie s within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range". Scientific NameCommon NameState StatusGlobal Rank (b)State Rank (c)MammalsMicrotus ochrogasterprairie voleSpecial Concern (No regulations) (d)G5S2PlantsAsclepias lanuginose woolly milkweedThreatened (e)G4S1Arabis missouriensisMissouri rock-cressSpecial Concern (d)G5S2ReptilesGlyptemys insculpta wood turtleThreatened (e)G4S2 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-66Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-12 Annual Average Hourly Traffic Counts in the Stevens Point Site Area(Sheet 1 of 2)Annual Average Hourly Traffic (WDOT, 2011)AM Peak (a)Midday Peak (b)PM Peak (c)Daily TotalI-39 southbound off-ramp from US-103724966416,898I-39 southbound on-ramp from US-103154374975,710 I-39 northbound off-ramp from US-103041881872,787I-39 northbound on-ramp from US-107746276118,734US-10 between I-39 and Maple Bluff 1,8952,8232,54932,681County Highway R north of US-101892612953,440County Highway R south of US-103966037047,962I-39 between US-10 and County Highway HH1,4221,4071,77022,086Old Highway 18 west of Burbank Road (d)181929281Old Highway 18 between Burbank and Stockton Road (d)222845390Burbank Road south of Old Highway 18 (d)151830260 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-67Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-12 Annual Average Hourly Traffic Counts in the Stevens Point Site Area(Sheet 2 of 2)a)Traffic count for the hour between 00:00 and 09:59 hours with the greatest traffic volume.b)Traffic count for the hour between 10:00 and 14:59 hours with the greatest traffic volume.c)Traffic count for the hour between 15:00 and 23:59 hours with the greatest traffic volume. d)Annual average hourly traffic counts from 2009. e)Annual average hourly traffic counts from 2010.Annual Average Hourly Traffic (WDOT, 2011) AM Peak (a)Midday Peak (b)PM Peak (c)Daily TotalI-39 southbound off-ramp to County Highway HH1712483203,383I-39 southbound on-ramp from County
Highway HH1071862252,302I-39 northbound off-ramp to County Highway HH1692172312,888I-39 northbound on-ramp from County Highway HH2262182553,272County Highway HH between I-39 and
County Highway R3514265226,125County Highway R north of Porter Road (e)413N/A7236,565 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-68Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-13 Minority and Poverty Populations within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Stevens Point Site (a)(Sheet 1 of 2)Minority Population (%)Block Group and TractHouseholdsLiving BelowPoverty LevelBlack orAfricanAmericanAmericanIndian andAlaska NativeAsianNative Hawaiianand Other PacificIslander aloneSomeOther RacealoneTwo orMore RacesHispanicor LatinoAggregateBlock Group 3, Census Tract 96015.6%0.0%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.6%2.0%3.0%Block Group 4, Census Tract 96025.3%0.1%0.2%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.4%1.1%Block Group 1, Census Tract 960339.2%0.9%0.1%5.0%0.0%0.1%0.9%1.6%8.8%Block Group 2, Census Tract 960318.1%0.9%0.1%16.8%0.1%0.1%1.3%2.8%22.1%Block Group 3, Census Tract 960336.4%1.4%0.8%4.7%0.1%0.2%2.0%3.3%12.7%Block Group 4, Census Tract 960348.7%0.3%0.8%6.9%0.0%0.2%0.9%2.4%11.6%Block Group 1, Census Tract 960459.5%0.7%0.5%2.2%0.2%0.0%1.6%2.3%7.4%Block Group 2, Census Tract 960418.0%0.7%0.0%3.7%0.0%0.0%0.6%4.0%9.1%Block Group 3, Census Tract 960428.9%1.6%0.3%5.8%0.0%0.0%0.7%2.9%11.3%Block Group 4, Census Tract 960414.8%0.0%0.7%3.0%0.0%0.0%0.8%1.6%6.1%Block Group 5, Census Tract 960416.1%1.4%0.5%3.6%0.2%0.1%1.5%2.3%9.5%Block Group 1, Census Tract 96050.0%0.0%0.1%2.4%0.0%0.0%1.0%1.4%5.0%Block Group 2, Census Tract 96055.8%0.3%0.3%1.3%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.8%3.1%Block Group 3, Census Tract 960511.0%0.3%0.6%0.9%0.0%0.0%0.9%5.7%8.5%Block Group 4, Census Tract 96051.4%0.5%0.5%2.8%0.0%0.1%0.6%1.5%6.0%Block Group 1, Census Tract 96062.3%0.1%0.2%0.7%0.0%0.0%0.4%1.3%2.7%Block Group 4, Census Tract 96062.5%0.3%0.1%0.4%0.0%0.4%1.0%0.9%3.1%Block Group 1, Census Tract 9607.0111.7%0.5%0.3%4.2%0.0%0.1%1.5%6.0%12.5%Block Group 2, Census Tract 9607.012.6%0.3%0.2%2.8%0. 0%0.0%0.8%1.4%5.5%Block Group 3, Census Tract 9607.017.5%0.3%0.2%2.7%0. 0%0.1%1.1%2.3%6.7%Block Group 1, Census Tract 9607.025.3%0.8%0.2%4.4%0. 1%0.0%1.1%1.8%8.4%Block Group 2, Census Tract 9607.021.7%0.4%0.0%3.4%0. 0%0.1%0.5%1.6%6.0% Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-69Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-13 Minority and Poverty Populations within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Stevens Point Site (a)(Sheet 2 of 2)a)Shaded cells indicate "Above Average Populations" (USCB, 2012c) Minority Population (%)Block Group and TractHouseholdsLiving BelowPoverty LevelBlack orAfricanAmericanAmericanIndian andAlaska NativeAsianNative Hawaiianand Other PacificIslander alone SomeOther RacealoneTwo orMore RacesHispanicor LatinoAggregateBlock Group 1, Census Tract 96086.5%0.6%0.0%2.8%0.0%0.0%0.9%2.0%6.3%Block Group 2, Census Tract 960824.5%1.3%0.4%5.9%0.0%0.5%1.7%2.4%12.3%Block Group 3, Census Tract 960819.3%1.4%0.3%4.8%0.0%0.0%1.3%1.0%8.7%Block Group 4, Census Tract 960810.8%0.9%0.2%5.1%0.0%0.0%3.0%3.0%12.4%Block Group 1, Census Tract 96099.9%1.3%0.5%3.4%0.0%0.0%1.0%2.9%9.1%Block Group 2, Census Tract 960919.1%0.4%0.5%2.6%0.0%0.0%1.8%2.6%7.8%Block Group 3, Census Tract 960924.8%0.2%0.0%4.2%0.0%0.0%2.1%3.5%10.0%Block Group 4, Census Tract 96099.6%1.4%0.5%3.3%0.0%0.0%2.0%4.2%11.4%Block Group 1, Census Tract 961038.1%0.9%0.3%2.0%0.1%0.0%1.2%3.3%7.7%Block Group 2, Census Tract 961025.8%1.9%0.2%2.2%0.1%0.0%0.9%2.1%7.4%Block Group 1, Census Tract 96113.0%0.2%0.1%3.9%0.1%0.0%1.2%2.6%8.1%Block Group 2, Census Tract 961115.0%0.0%0.4%0.4%0.0%0.0%1.1%2.2%4.1%Block Group 3, Census Tract 961110.9%0.5%0.5%6.3%0.1%0.1%0.8%2.5%10.7%Block Group 4, Census Tract 961114.9%0.2%0.2%0.6%0.0%0.0%1.3%2.1%4.4%Block Group 2, Census Tract 96124.2%0.4%0.3%3.7%0.0%0.0%1.0%5.1%10.6%Block Group 3, Census Tract 961215.6%0.7%0.5%5.3%0.0%0.0%1.1%4.6%12.2%Total Area, 5 Mi. Radius13.6%0.6%0.3%3.5%0.0%0.1%1.1%2.5%8.1%Portage County12.4%0.5%0.3%2.8%0.0%0.0%1.0%2.6%7.3%State of Wisconsin11.2%6.2%0.9%2.3%0.0%0.1%1.4%5.9%16.7% Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-70Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-14 Potentially Significant Projects Identified within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Stevens Point Site Vicinity(Sheet 1 of 2)Project/Company NameSummary of ProjectLocationDistancefrom SiteStatusReferenceCentral Wisconsin Alcohol, Inc.Construction of an ethanol plant based on whey fermentation.Plover1 mi. (1.6 km)Air construction permit denied by the state March 20, 2012. WDNR, 2012hNAPA Distribution Center Replacing current parking lot with a new lot with 105 stalls. Also planning a 25,000 sq. ft. addition to distribution center.Stevens Point1 mi. (1.6 km)Plans approved in January 2012.City of Stevens Point, 2012aDonaldson Company Inc.Modifications to equipment configurations at existing filter manufacturing facility.Stevens Point1 mi. (1.6 km)Air construction permit issued in Oct. 2011, expires June 2013.WDNR, 2012iMunicipal Transit CenterDevelopment of a 35,070 sq. ft vacant lot for a parking lot with 57 parking spaces.Stevens Point1 mi. (1.6 km)Plans approved in January 2012.City of Stevens Point, 2012aFocus on Energy Methane/ Natural Gas-Fueled Electric
Generator New generator to be installed at existing Wastewater Treatment Facility; will burn digester gas (methane) produced there. Stevens Point3 mi. (4.8 km)Received funding in July 2012.City of Stevens Point, 2012bColumbia Energy Center (455 MW baseload, coal fired)Operating power plant with potential air pollution control projects for compliance with future regulatory requirements.Portage3 mi. (4.8 km)Operating, with possible addition of air pollution control equipment in the future.Jerde, 2011Copps Food CenterConstruction of a 70,000 sq. ft. store with 385 stall parking lot.Stevens Point3 mi. (4.8 km)Plans approved in January 2012.City of Stevens Point, 2012a Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReasonable AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-71Rev. 0Table 19.5.2-14 Potentially Significant Projects Identified within a 5-Mile (8-Km) Radius of the Stevens Point Site Vicinity(Sheet 2 of 2)Project/Company NameSummary of ProjectLocationDistancefrom SiteStatusReferenceSchmeeckle Trails Housing DevelopmentExpansion of existing residential development.Stevens Point3.5 mi. (5.6 km)Beginning second phase of building "essential houses" in the development. iMakeSense, LLC, 2010WIMME Sand & GravelSand and gravel plant.Plover(Portage County)5 mi. (8.0 km)Operating.WDNR, 2012jU.S. Highway 10 Expansion ProjectNew four lane highway that will bypass downtown Stevens Point.Stevens Point5 mi. (8.0 km)Construction started in 2006, scheduled for completion in 2012.WDOT, 2012Water and Sewer Reconstruction Project Michigan Avenue and Fourth Avenue mains to be reconstructed.Stevens Point4 mi. (6.4 km)5 mi. (8.0 km)Scheduled to be completed in 2012.City of Stevens Point, 2012c Lake Dredging (several locations)Several areas are to be dredged and fill material hauled off-site.McDill Lake District(Portage County)5 mi. (8.0 km)Scheduled to start in 2012.City of Stevens Point, 2011bNeenah Paper Inc. Whiting Mill Biomass Plant (wood and waste fibers to steam)Operating power plant with potential air pollution control projects for compliance with future regulatory requirements.Stevens Point5 mi. (8.0 km)Operating, with possible addition of air pollution control equipment in the future.Environmental Leader, LLC, 2008 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-72Rev. 019.5.3COST-BENEFIT OF THE ALTERNATIVESThis section discusses the costs and benefits of each reasonable alternative and the proposed action, including a qualitative discussion of environmental impacts and identification of any assumptions and uncertainties. The following information on costs and benefits is provided:*Qualitative discussion of environmental degradation (including impacts to air and water quality; biotic resources; aesthetic resources; socioeconomic impacts, such as noise, traffic congestion, and increased demand for public services; and land use changes). *Qualitative discussion of effects on public health and safety.*Other costs (including lost tax revenue, decreased recreational value, and transportation, as appropriate).*Qualitative discussion of environmental benefits (comparable to the discussion of environmental degradation).*Average annual production of commercial products.
- Expected increase in tax payments to state and local tax jurisdictions during (1) the construction period and (2) facility operations.*Creation and improvement of transportation infrastructure and other facilities.*Other benefits.The following types of alternatives are discussed:*Alternative sites
- Alternative technologies19.5.3.1ALTERNATIVE SITESThis subsection discusses the costs and benefits of the proposed site (Janesville) and the two alternative sites (Chippewa Falls and Stevens Point). For this evaluation, the SHINE facility design, described in Section 19.2, and the construction and operation practices, described in Section 19.4, are assumed to be the same for each site. This assumption allows for a comprehensive and consistent comparison of costs and benefits.19.5.3.1.1Janesville (Proposed) Site19.5.3.1.1.1Environmental DegredationThe environmental impacts expected to result from construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Janesville site are summarized below.
Air Quality*Facility construction results in fugitive dust emissions and exhaust emissions due to on road and off-road vehicles.*Facility operation results in minor emissions of nitrogen oxides (NO x), particulate matter (PM), and sulfur dioxide (SO 2). Preliminary modeling indicates that the air quality impacts of these criteria pollutants are minimal and do not approach ambient air quality standards. However, the Significant Impact Level for 1-hour NO x may be exceeded, requiring more detailed modeling for state air pollution permitting. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-73Rev. 0Water Quality*Facility construction results in some discharge of suspended solids to local drainage ditch systems. Very small probability of affecting identified water resources due to low surface runoff potential and distance from the nearest surface water body (approximately 1.6 mi. [2.6 km]).*Construction activities will not reach groundwater. Dewatering of groundwater is not anticipated. *Increased potential for oil or chemical discharges to surface water and groundwater due to accidental spills during construction and operation. Very small probability of release, because of oil and chemical control measures. *Facility operation requires discharge of wastewater to the City of Janesville sanitary sewer system, which has adequate capacity. *Facility operation requires water withdrawal from the City of Janesville water supply system, which has adequate capacity. *Developed facility site results in minor pollutant loads and increased runoff from roadways, parking areas, industrial activities, and landscaping.Biotic Resources*Facility construction results in limited disturbance to on-site agriculture lands and minor displacement of migrating birds that use the agricultural lands to feed.*Construction activities, noise, and lighting result in some displacement of fauna, particularly birds and mammals.*Potential for bird collisions with man-made structures, such as cranes and buildings during construction.*Facility operation does not result in additional impacts except minor potential for bird collisions with buildings and minor disturbance of wildlife due to security lighting at night.Aesthetic Resources*During facility construction, dust, cranes, and facility structures partially obstruct views of existing landscape and create some visual elements that are out-of-character with the site setting. *During facility operation, the existing agricultural landscape is permanently altered, but the facility appearance is consistent with light industrial uses associated with the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport.*During both construction and operation, aesthetic impacts are limited by the presence of relatively few sensitive receptors in close proximity. Socioeconomics*Facility construction results in some temporary increases in noise, due to use of heavy equipment on the site and construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon.*Facility operation results in minor increases in noise primarily due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. Normal operations include noise from stationary equipment, such as heating, cooling, and ventilation equipment. Continuous noise levels at the site boundary are maintained below local and state noise limit criteria. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-74Rev. 0*During both construction and operation, noise impacts are limited by the presence of relatively few sensitive receptors in close proximity.*Facility construction results in some temporary increase in local traffic due to construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon and periodic construction vehicle traffic throughout the work day.*Facility operation results in minor increase in local traffic due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. *During both construction and operation, traffic impacts are limited by the capacity and good condition of the existing roads that serve the site area.*Facility construction results in some temporary increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and wastewater treatment facilities to serve construction workers who move into the site area.*Facility operation results in minor increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and treatment facilities to serve operations workers who move into the site area.*During both construction and operation, socioeconomic impacts are limited because most workers are expected to reside in Rock County (not relocate to the area) and because the housing market, public education resources, etc., generally have excess capacity.Land Use*Facility construction results in the permanent conversion of approximately 26 acres (ac.) (10.5 hectare [ha]) of agricultural lands to industrial land use, and the temporary conversion of approximately 14 ac. (5.7 ha) of agricultural lands to industrial land use.*All of the land permanently or temporarily converted to industrial land use is classified as Prime Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance.*Facility operation does not result in additional on-site land use impacts.
- No off-site land use impacts are expected during construction or operation except for minor construction of housing to serve facility workers who move into the site area.19.5.3.1.1.2Effects on Public Health and SafetyDuring facility construction, minor impacts to public health and safety may result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and fugitive dust), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. Any such impacts are expected to be temporary and restricted to the immediate vicinity of the project site.
During facility operation, minor impacts to public health and safety may result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and emissions of conventional pollutants from stationary equipment), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. In addition, the public is exposed to minor doses of radiation due to transportation of radioactive materials to and from the site, as well as direct radiation and releases of gaseous effluents from the SHINE process. All radioactive materials are strictly controlled, and all radiological doses comply with regulatory limits. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-75Rev. 019.5.3.1.1.3Other CostsNo other environmental costs, such as lost tax revenues or decreased recreational values, have been identified. The project is not expected to result in any transportation impacts except for the minor traffic impacts on local roads discussed in Subsection 19.5.3.1.1.1.19.5.3.1.1.4Environmental Benefits Facility construction is expected to create approximately 420 construction jobs during the peak of construction activities. Facility operation is expected to create approximately 150 permanent operational jobs. In addition, the wages earned and money spent by facility employees will stimulate additional economic activity, but this benefit has not been quantified. In addition to economic benefits, the project also will benefit the health of people who need diagnostic tests that require technetium-99m (Tc-99m) and other isotopes. The facility is expected to satisfy approximately half of the annual demand for Tc-99m in the United States, and to provide a more reliable supply of this isotope than currently exists. This represents a significant health benefit. The facility will also produce I-131 and Xe-133, which will have additional health benefits.19.5.3.1.1.5Production of Commercial ProductsThe facility has the capacity to produce an average of approximately 156,000 6-day Ci of Mo-99 per year. This translates to millions of doses of Tc-99m per year for diagnostic tests.In addition, the facility is expected to produce an average of approximately 100,000 Ci of I-131 and 100,000 Ci of Xe-133 per year.19.5.3.1.1.6Increase in Tax Payments The facility is expected to pay property taxes of approximately $635,000 per year during construction and approximately $660,000 per year during operation (after expiration of an initial 10-year TIF agreement), representing an increase of approximately 0.30 percent in the annual property tax revenues of Rock County. 19.5.3.1.1.7Creation and Improvement of InfrastructureNo creation or improvement of infrastructure is expected to result directly from the project. The City of Janesville plans to install a water main and a sewer main along the northern boundary of the site, but the project is not dependent on this construction.19.5.3.1.1.8Other BenefitsNo other significant benefits have been identified. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-76Rev. 019.5.3.1.2Chippewa Falls Site19.5.3.1.2.1Environmental DegredationThe environmental impacts that would be expected to result from construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Chippewa Falls site are summarized below. Air Quality*Facility construction results in fugitive dust emissions and exhaust emissions due to on road and off-road vehicles.*Facility operation results in minor emissions of NO x, PM, and SO
- 2. Although air quality modeling has not been performed at the Chippewa Falls site, it is expected that air quality impacts would be similar to those modeled at the Janesville site, meaning that pollutant concentrations would not approach ambient air quality standards but may exceed the Significant Impact Level for 1-hour NO x, requiring more detailed modeling for state air pollution permitting.Water Quality*Facility construction results in some discharge of suspended solids to local drainage ditch systems. Very small probability of affecting identified water resources due to low surface runoff potential and distance from the nearest surface water body (0.75 mi. [1.2 km]).*Construction activities will not reach groundwater. Dewatering of groundwater is not anticipated. *Increased potential for oil or chemical discharges to surface water and groundwater due to accidental spills during construction and operation. Very small probability of release, because of oil and chemical control measures. *Facility operation results in discharge of wastewater to City of Chippewa Falls sanitary sewer system, which has adequate capacity. *Facility operation requires water withdrawal from City of Chippewa Falls water supply system, which has adequate capacity. *Developed facility site results in minor pollutant loads and increased runoff from roadways, parking areas, industrial activities, and landscaping.Biotic Resources*Facility construction results in limited disturbance to on-site agricultural lands and minor displacement of migrating birds that use the agricultural lands to feed.*Construction activities, noise, and lighting result in some displacement of fauna, particularly birds and mammals.*Potential for bird collisions with man-made structures, such as cranes and buildings during construction.*Facility operation does not result in additional impacts except minor potential for bird collisions with buildings and minor disturbance of wildlife due to security lighting at night.
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-77Rev. 0Aesthetic Resources*During facility construction, dust, cranes, and facility structures partially obstruct views of existing landscape and create some visual elements that are out of character with the site setting. *During facility operation, the existing agricultural landscape is permanently altered, but the facility appearance is generally consistent with nearby commercial land uses.*During facility construction, aesthetic impacts may result in complaints from the public about a changed sense of place or a diminution in enjoyment of the physical environment, due to the presence of several sensitive receptors in close proximity to the site. Socioeconomics*Facility construction results in some temporary increases in noise, due to use of heavy equipment on the site and construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon.*Facility operation results in minor increases in noise primarily due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. Normal operations include noise from stationary equipment, such as heating, cooling, and ventilation equipment. Continuous noise levels at the site boundary are maintained below local and state noise limit criteria. *During facility construction, noise impacts may result in complaints from the public due to the presence of several sensitive receptors in close proximity to the site.*Facility construction results in some temporary increase in local traffic due to construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon and periodic construction vehicle traffic throughout the work day.*Facility operation results in minor increase in local traffic due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. *During facility construction, project-related traffic may noticeably alter transportation conditions on local roads, due to the condition of the existing roads that serve the site area.*Facility construction results in some temporary increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and wastewater treatment facilities to serve construction workers who move into the site area.*Facility operation results in minor increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and treatment facilities to serve operations workers who move into the site area.*During both construction and operation, socioeconomic impacts are limited because most workers are expected to reside in Chippewa County (not relocate to the area) and because the housing market, public education resources, etc., generally have excess capacity.Land Use*Facility construction results in the permanent conversion of approximately 15 ac. (6.1 ha) of agricultural lands and 3 ac. (1.2 ha) of fallow lands to industrial land use, and the temporary conversion of approximately 14 ac. (5.7 ha) of agricultural lands to industrial land use. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-78Rev. 0*Almost all of the land permanently or temporarily converted to industrial land use is classified as Prime Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance.*Facility operation does not result in additional on-site land use impacts.*No off-site land use impacts are expected during construction or operation except for minor construction of housing to serve facility workers who move into the site area.19.5.3.1.2.2Effects on Public Health and SafetyDuring facility construction, minor impacts to public health and safety might result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and fugitive dust), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. Any such impacts would be temporary and restricted to the immediate vicinity of the project site.During facility operation, minor impacts to public health and safety might result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and emissions of conventional pollutants from stationary equipment), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. In addition, the public would be exposed to minor doses of radiation due to transportation of radioactive materials to and from the site, as well as direct radiation and releases of gaseous effluents from the SHINE process. All radioactive materials would be strictly controlled, and all radiological doses would comply with regulatory limits.19.5.3.1.2.3Other CostsNo other environmental costs, such as lost tax revenues or decreased recreational values, have been identified. The project would not be expected to result in any transportation impacts except for the traffic impacts on local roads discussed in Subsection 19.5.3.1.2.1.19.5.3.1.2.4Environmental BenefitsFacility construction is expected to create approximately 420 construction jobs during the peak of construction activities. Facility operation is expected to create approximately 150 permanent operational jobs. In addition, the wages earned and money spent by facility employees will stimulate additional economic activity, but this benefit has not been quantified. In addition to economic benefits, the project also would benefit the health of people who need diagnostic tests that require Tc-99m and other isotopes. The facility is expected to satisfy approximately half of the annual demand for Tc-99m in the United States, and to provide a more reliable supply of this isotope than currently exists. This represents a significant health benefit. The facility will also produce I-131 and Xe-133, which will have additional health benefits.19.5.3.1.2.5Production of Commercial Products The facility has the capacity to produce an average of approximately 156,000 6-day Ci of Mo-99 per year. This translates to millions of doses of Tc-99m per year for diagnostic tests.In addition, the facility is expected to produce an average of approximately 100,000 Ci of I-131 and 100,000 Ci of Xe-133 per year. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-79Rev. 019.5.3.1.2.6Increase in Tax PaymentsThe facility would be expected to pay approximately the same amount of property taxes at the Chippewa Falls site as at the Janesville site. This means that the facility would pay approximately $635,000 per year during construction and approximately $660,000 per year during operation, representing an increase of approximately 4.4 percent in the annual property tax revenues of Chippewa County.19.5.3.1.2.7Creation and Improvement of InfrastructureNo creation or improvement of infrastructure is expected to result directly from the project. However, improvements such as widening or adding turning lanes to existing roads near the project site might be necessary to alleviate traffic congestion during construction.19.5.3.1.2.8Other BenefitsNo other significant benefits have been identified.19.5.3.1.3Stevens Point Site19.5.3.1.3.1Environmental DegredationThe environmental impacts that would be expected to result from construction and operation of the SHINE facility at the Stevens Point site are summarized below. Air Quality*Facility construction results in fugitive dust emissions and exhaust emissions due to on road and off-road vehicles.*Facility operation results in minor emissions of NO x, PM, and SO
- 2. Although air quality modeling has not been performed at the Stevens Point site, it is expected that air quality impacts would be similar to those modeled at the Janesville site, meaning that pollutant concentrations would not approach ambient air quality standards but may exceed the Significant Impact Level for 1-hour NO x, requiring more detailed modeling for state air pollution permitting.Water Quality*Facility construction results in some discharge of suspended solids to local drainage ditch systems. Very small probability of affecting identified water resources due to low surface runoff potential and distance from the nearest surface water body (2.0 mi. [3.2 km]). *Construction activities will likely reach groundwater. Soil borings drilled on-site encountered groundwater at a depth of 8 to 11 ft. (2.4 to 3.4 m), and groundwater was observed inside water wells between the depths of 7 and 20 ft. (2.1 and 6.1 m). Dewatering of groundwater is anticipated during construction. *Increased potential for oil or chemical discharges to surface water and groundwater due to accidental spills during construction and operation. Very small probability of release, because of oil and chemical control measures.
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-80Rev. 0*Facility operation results in discharge of wastewater to the City of Stevens Point sanitary sewer system, which has adequate capacity. *Facility operation requires water withdrawal from the City of Stevens Point water supply system, which has adequate capacity. *Developed facility site results in minor pollutant loads and increased runoff from roadways, parking areas, industrial activities, and landscaping.Biotic Resources*Facility construction results in limited disturbance to on-site agricultural lands and minor displacement of migrating birds that use the agricultural lands to feed.*Facility construction results in clearing of on-site woodlot (partial or complete) and some displacement of fauna, particularly birds and mammals that inhabit the woodlot. *Construction activities, noise, and lighting result in some displacement of fauna, particularly birds and mammals.*Potential for bird collisions with man-made structures, such as cranes and buildings during construction.*Facility operation does not result in additional impacts except minor potential for bird collisions with buildings and minor disturbance of wildlife due to security lighting at night.Aesthetic Resources*During facility construction, dust, cranes, and facility structures partially obstruct views of existing landscape and create some visual elements that are out-of-character with the site setting. *During facility operation, the existing agricultural landscape and woodlot is permanently altered, but the facility appearance may be consistent with the City of Stevens Point's plan to develop the area as a business park. *During facility construction, aesthetic impacts may result in complaints from the public about a changed sense of place or a diminution in enjoyment of the physical environment, due to the presence of several sensitive receptors in close proximity to the site. Socioeconomics*Facility construction results in some temporary increases in noise due to use of heavy equipment on the site and construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon.*Facility operation results in minor increases in noise primarily due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. Normal operations include noise from stationary equipment, such as heating, cooling, and ventilation equipment. Continuous noise levels at the site boundary are maintained below local and state noise limit criteria. *During facility construction, noise impacts may result in complaints from the public due to the presence of several sensitive receptors in close proximity to the site.*Facility construction results in some temporary increase in local traffic due to construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon and periodic construction vehicle traffic throughout the work day.*Facility operation results in minor increase in local traffic due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-81Rev. 0*During facility construction, project-related traffic may noticeably alter transportation conditions on local roads, due to the condition of the existing roads that serve the site area.*Facility construction results in some temporary increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and wastewater treatment facilities to serve construction workers who move into the site area.*Facility operation results in minor increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and treatment facilities to serve operations workers who move into the site area.*During both construction and operation, socioeconomic impacts are limited because most workers are expected to reside in Portage County (not relocate to the area) and because the housing market, public education resources, etc., generally have excess capacity.Land Use*Facility construction results in the permanent conversion of approximately 3.6 ac. (1.4 ha) of agricultural lands and 13.9 ac. (5.6 ha) of wooded lands to industrial land use, and the temporary conversion of approximately 13.6 ac. (5.5 ha) of agricultural lands to industrial land use.*Almost all of the land permanently or temporarily converted to industrial land use is classified as Prime Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance.*Facility operation does not result in additional on-site land use impacts.*Off-site land use impacts expected are construction of two public streets along the northern and western site boundaries and minor construction of housing to serve facility workers who move into the site area. 19.5.3.1.3.2Effects on Public Health and SafetyDuring facility construction, minor impacts to public health and safety might result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and fugitive dust), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. Any such impacts would be temporary and restricted to the immediate vicinity of the project site.During facility operation, minor impacts to public health and safety might result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and emissions of conventional pollutants from stationary equipment), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. In addition, the public would be exposed to minor doses of radiation due to transportation of radioactive materials to and from the site, as well as direct radiation and releases of gaseous effluents from the SHINE process. All radioactive materials would be strictly controlled, and all radiological doses would comply with regulatory limits.19.5.3.1.3.3Other Costs No other environmental costs, such as lost tax revenues or decreased recreational values, have been identified. The project would not be expected to result in any transportation impacts except for the traffic impacts on local roads discussed in Subsection 19.5.3.1.3.1. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-82Rev. 019.5.3.1.3.4Environmental BenefitsFacility construction is expected to create approximately 420 construction jobs during the peak of construction activities. Facility operation is expected to create approximately 150 permanent operational jobs. In addition, the wages earned and money spent by facility employees will stimulate additional economic activity, but this benefit has not been quantified.In addition to economic benefits, the project also would benefit the health of people who need diagnostic tests that require Tc-99m and other isotopes. The facility is expected to satisfy approximately half of the annual demand for Tc-99m in the United States, and to provide a more reliable supply of this isotope than currently exists. This represents a significant health benefit. The facility will also produce I-131 and Xe-133, which will have additional health benefits.19.5.3.1.3.5Production of Commercial ProductsThe facility has the capacity to produce an average of approximately 156,000 6-day Ci of Mo-99 per year. This translates to millions of doses of Tc-99m per year for diagnostic tests.In addition, the facility is expected to produce an average of approximately 100,000 Ci of I-131 and 100,000 Ci of Xe-133 per year.19.5.3.1.3.6Increase in Tax PaymentsThe facility would be expected to pay approximately the same amount of taxes at the Stevens Point site as at the Janesville site. This means that the facility would pay approximately $635,000 per year during construction and approximately $660,000 per year during operation, representing an increase of approximately 2.7 percent in the annual property tax revenues of Portage County .19.5.3.1.3.7Creation and Improvement of InfrastructureThe City of Stevens Point would be expected to construct public streets along the northern and western site boundaries of the site in connection with the project. Other potential modifications of transportation infrastructure, such as widening or adding turning lanes to existing roads, might be necessary to alleviate traffic congestion during construction. 19.5.3.1.3.8Other BenefitsNo other significant benefits have been identified. 19.5.3.2ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGIESThis subsection discusses the costs and benefits of the proposed SHINE SHINE technology and the two alternative technologies. For this evaluation, the alternative technologies are assumed to be constructed at the proposed Janesville site. This assumption allows for a comprehensive and consistent comparison of costs and benefits. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-83Rev. 019.5.3.2.1SHINE (Proposed) Technology19.5.3.2.1.1Environmental DegredationThe environmental impacts expected to result from construction and operation of the SHINE SHINE technology are summarized below. Air Quality*Facility construction results in fugitive dust emissions and exhaust emissions due to on road and off-road vehicles.*Facility operation results in minor emissions of NO x, PM, and SO
- 2. These emissions result primarily from natural gas heating of the facility buildings and periodic testing of the emergency diesel generator, plus small amounts of NO x from the SHINE process. Water Quality*Facility construction results in some discharge of suspended solids to local drainage ditch systems. *Construction activities will not reach groundwater. Dewatering of groundwater is not anticipated. *Increased potential for oil or chemical discharges to surface water and groundwater due to accidental spills during construction and operation. Very small probability of release, because of oil and chemical control measures. *Facility operation requires water for use in SHINE (target solution and makeup water for the Target Solution Vessel), isotope processing (isotope extraction and purification, uranium extraction, and waste processing), potable water, fire protection, and facility heating and cooling systems. All required water is withdrawn from the City of Janesville water supply system. *Facility operation requires discharge of wastewater, including sanitary wastes, blowdown from building heating boilers, and liquid wastes from thermal denitration and vent system scrubbers. All wastewater is discharged to the City of Janesville sanitary sewer system and complies with local, state, and federal pre-treatment and wastewater discharge requirements.*Developed facility site results in minor pollutant loads and increased runoff from roadways, parking areas, industrial activities, and landscaping.Biotic Resources*Facility construction results in limited disturbance to on-site agriculture lands and minor displacement of migrating birds that use the agricultural lands to feed.*Construction activities, noise, and lighting result in some displacement of fauna, particularly birds and mammals.*Potential for bird collisions with man-made structures, such as cranes and buildings during construction.*Facility operation does not result in additional impacts except minor potential for bird collisions with buildings and minor disturbance of wildlife due to security lighting at night.
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-84Rev. 0Aesthetic Resources*During facility construction, dust, cranes, and facility structures partially obstruct views of existing landscape and create some visual elements that are out-of-character with the site setting.*During facility operation, the existing agricultural landscape is permanently altered, but the facility appearance is consistent with light industrial uses associated with the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport. Socioeconomics*Facility construction results in some temporary increases in noise due to use of heavy equipment on the site and construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon.*Facility operation results in minor increases in noise primarily due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. Normal operations include noise from stationary equipment, such as heating, cooling, and ventilation equipment. Continuous noise levels at the site boundary are maintained below local and state noise limit criteria. *Facility construction results in some temporary increase in local traffic due to construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon and periodic construction vehicle traffic throughout the work day.*Facility operation results in minor increase in local traffic due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. *Facility construction results in some temporary increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and wastewater treatment facilities to serve construction workers who move into the site area.*Facility operation results in minor increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and treatment facilities to serve operations workers who move into the site area.Land Use*Facility construction results in the permanent conversion of approximately 26 ac. (10.5ha) of agricultural lands to industrial land use, and the temporary conversion of approximately 14 ac. (5.7 ha) of agricultural lands to industrial land use.*Facility operation does not result in additional on-site land use impacts.*No off-site land use impacts are expected during construction or operation except for minor construction of housing to serve facility workers who move into the site area.19.5.3.2.1.2Effects on Public Health and SafetyDuring facility construction, minor impacts to public health and safety may result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and fugitive dust), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. Any such impacts are expected to be temporary and restricted to the immediate vicinity of the project site. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-85Rev. 0During facility operation, minor impacts to public health and safety may result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and emissions of conventional pollutants from stationary equipment), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. In addition, the public is exposed to minor doses of radiation due to transportation of radioactive materials to and from the site, as well as direct radiation and releases of gaseous effluents from the SHINE process. All radioactive materials are strictly controlled, and all radiological doses comply with regulatory limits.19.5.3.2.1.3Other CostsNo other environmental costs, such as lost tax revenues or decreased recreational values, have been identified. The project is not expected to result in any transportation impacts except for the minor traffic impacts on local roads discussed in Subsection 19.5.3.2.1.1.19.5.3.2.1.4Environmental BenefitsFacility construction is expected to create approximately 420 construction jobs during the peak of construction activities. Facility operation is expected to create approximately 150 permanent operational jobs. In addition, the wages earned and money spent by facility employees will stimulate additional economic activity, but this benefit has not been quantified .In addition to economic benefits, the project also will benefit the health of people who need diagnostic tests that require Tc-99m and other isotopes. The facility is expected to satisfy approximately half of the annual demand for Tc-99m in the United States, and to provide a more reliable supply of this isotope than currently exists. This represents a significant health benefit. The facility will also produce I-131 and Xe-133, which will have additional health benefits.19.5.3.2.1.5Production of Commercial ProductsThe facility has the capacity to produce an average of approximately 156,000 6-day Ci of Mo-99 per year. This translates to millions of doses of Tc-99m per year for diagnostic tests.In addition, the facility is expected to produce an average of approximately 100,000 Ci of I-131 and 100,000 Ci of Xe-133 per year.19.5.3.2.1.6Increase in Tax Payments The facility is expected to pay property taxes of approximately $635,000 per year during construction and approximately $660,000 per year during operation (after expiration of an initial 10-year TIF agreement), representing an increase of approximately 0.30 percent in the annual property tax revenues of Rock County .19.5.3.2.1.7Creation and Improvement of InfrastructureNo creation or improvement of infrastructure is expected to result directly from the project. The City of Janesville plans to install a water main and a sewer main along the northern boundary of the site, but the project is not dependent on this construction.19.5.3.2.1.8Other BenefitsNo other significant benefits have been identified. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-86Rev. 019.5.3.2.2Linear Accelerator Approach (Production of Mo-99 Only)19.5.3.2.2.1Environmental DegradationThe environmental impacts expected to result from construction and operation of the linear accelerator technology are summarized below.
Air Quality*Facility construction results in fugitive dust emissions and exhaust emissions due to on road and off-road vehicles.*Facility operation results in minor emissions of conventional air pollutants. Similarly to the SHINE facility, these emissions would be expected to result from natural gas heating of the facility buildings, periodic testing of the emergency diesel generator, and the SHINE process. Water Quality*Facility construction results in some discharge of suspended solids to local drainage ditch systems. *No information is available on the depth of excavation required for this type of facility. However, the depth to the lowest subfloor is assumed to be similar to the SHINE facility, and on that basis dewatering of groundwater is not expected to be required. *Increased potential for oil or chemical discharges to surface water and groundwater due to accidental spills during construction and operation. Very small probability of release, because of oil and chemical control measures. *Facility operation requires water for use in SHINE, isotope processing, potable water, fire protection, and facility heating and cooling systems. All required water is withdrawn from the City of Janesville water supply system. *Facility operation requires discharge of wastewater, including sanitary wastes, blowdown from building heating boilers, and liquid wastes from SHINE and isotope processing. All wastewater is discharged to the City of Janesville sanitary sewer system and complies with local, state, and federal pre-treatment and wastewater discharge requirements. *Developed facility site results in minor pollutant loads and increased runoff from roadways, parking areas, industrial activities, and landscaping.Biotic Resources*Facility construction results in limited disturbance to on-site agriculture lands and minor displacement of migrating birds that use the agricultural lands to feed.*Construction activities, noise, and lighting result in some displacement of fauna, particularly birds and mammals.*Potential for bird collisions with man-made structures, such as cranes and buildings during construction.*Facility operation does not result in additional impacts except minor potential for bird collisions with buildings and minor disturbance of wildlife due to security lighting at night. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-87Rev. 0Aesthetic Resources*During facility construction, dust, cranes, and facility structures partially obstruct views of existing landscape and create some visual elements that are out-of-character with the site setting. *During facility operation, the existing agricultural landscape is permanently altered, but the facility appearance is consistent with light industrial uses associated with the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport. Socioeconomics*Facility construction results in some temporary increases in noise due to use of heavy equipment on the site and construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon.*Facility operation results in minor increases in noise primarily due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. Normal operations include noise from stationary equipment, such as heating, cooling, and ventilation equipment. Continuous noise levels at the site boundary are maintained below local and state noise limit criteria. *Facility construction results in some temporary increase in local traffic due to construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon and periodic construction vehicle traffic throughout the work day.*Facility operation results in minor increase in local traffic due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. *Facility construction results in some temporary increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and wastewater treatment facilities to serve construction workers who move into the site area.*Facility operation results in minor increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and treatment facilities to serve operations workers who move into the site area.Land Use*Facility construction would result in the permanent conversion of approximately 30 ac. (12.1 ha) of agricultural lands to industrial land use. Temporary conversion of land to support construction activities would be expected to be similar to the SHINE facility, which means that approximately 14 ac. (5.7 ha) of agricultural lands would be temporarily converted to industrial use.*Facility operation does not result in additional on-site land use impacts.
- No off-site land use impacts are expected during construction or operation except for minor construction of housing to serve facility workers who move into the site area.19.5.3.2.2.2Effects on Public Health and SafetyDuring facility construction, minor impacts to public health and safety might result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and fugitive dust), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. Any such impacts would be temporary and restricted to the immediate vicinity of the project site.
Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-88Rev. 0During facility operation, minor impacts to public health and safety might result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and emissions of conventional pollutants from stationary equipment), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. In addition, the public would be exposed to minor doses of radiation due to transportation of radioactive materials to and from the site, as well as direct radiation and releases of gaseous effluents from the SHINE process. All radioactive materials would be strictly controlled, and all radiological doses would comply with regulatory limits.19.5.3.2.2.3Other CostsNo other environmental costs, such as lost tax revenues or decreased recreational values, have been identified. The project is not expected to result in any transportation impacts except for the minor traffic impacts on local roads discussed in Subsection 19.5.3.2.2.1.19.5.3.2.2.4Environmental BenefitsConstruction of this type of facility would be expected to create approximately the same number of construction jobs as the SHINE facility, which means approximately 420 construction jobs during the peak of construction activities. Facility operation would create approximately 150 permanent operational jobs. In addition, the wages earned and money spent by facility employees will stimulate additional economic activity, but this benefit has not been quantified. In addition to economic benefits, the project would also benefit the health of people who need diagnostic tests that require Tc-99m. The facility would be expected to produce approximately the same amount of Tc-99m as the SHINE facility, which means it would satisfy approximately half of the annual demand for these isotopes in the United States. This represents a significant health benefit. However, this type of facility would not produce I-131 and Xe-133, as the SHINE facility does.19.5.3.2.2.5Production of Commercial ProductsThe linear accelerator SHINE facility is designed for increasing production when required by demand. However, at full production the facility would be expected to produce 3,000 6-day Ci per week, which means it has the capacity to produce up to approximately 156,000 6-day Ci of Mo-99 per year. 19.5.3.2.2.6Increase in Tax PaymentsThe facility would be expected to pay approximately the same amount of taxes as the SHINE facility. This means that the facility would pay property taxes of approximately $635,000 per year during construction and approximately $660,000 per year during operation (after expiration of an initial 10-year TIF agreement), representing an increase of approximately 0.30 percent in the annual property tax revenues of Rock County .19.5.3.2.2.7Creation and Improvement of InfrastructureNo creation or improvement of infrastructure would be expected to result directly from the project. The City of Janesville plans to install a water main and a sewer main along the northern boundary of the site, but the project is not dependent on this construction. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-89Rev. 019.5.3.2.2.8Other BenefitsNo other significant benefits have been identified.19.5.3.2.3Low Enriched Uranium (LEU) Aqueous Homogeneous Reactor Approach (Production of Mo-99, I-131, and Xe-133)19.5.3.2.3.1Environmental DegradationThe environmental impacts expected to result from construction and operation of the LEU Aqueous Homogeneous Reactor technology are summarized below.
Air Quality*Facility construction results in fugitive dust emissions and exhaust emissions due to on road and off-road vehicles.*Facility operation results in minor emissions of conventional air pollutants. Similarly to the SHINE facility, these emissions would be expected to result from natural gas heating of the facility buildings, periodic testing of the emergency diesel generator, and the SHINE process. Water Quality*Facility construction results in some discharge of suspended solids to local drainage ditch systems. *No information is available on the depth of excavation required for this type of facility. However, the depth to the lowest subfloor is assumed to be similar to the SHINE facility, and on that basis dewatering of groundwater is not expected to be required. *Increased potential for oil or chemical discharges to surface water and groundwater due to accidental spills during construction and operation. Very small probability of release, because of oil and chemical control measures. *Facility operation requires water for use in SHINE, isotope processing, reactor cooling, potable water, fire protection, and facility heating and cooling systems. All required water is withdrawn from the City of Janesville water supply system. *Facility operation requires discharge of wastewater, including sanitary wastes, blowdown from building heating boilers, and liquid wastes from SHINE and isotope processing. All wastewater is discharged to the City of Janesville sanitary sewer system and complies with local, state, and federal pre-treatment and wastewater discharge requirements. *Developed facility site results in minor pollutant loads and increased runoff from roadways, parking areas, industrial activities, and landscaping.Biotic Resources*Facility construction results in limited disturbance to on-site agriculture lands and minor displacement of migrating birds that use the agricultural lands to feed.*Construction activities, noise, and lighting result in some displacement of fauna, particularly birds and mammals.*Potential for bird collisions with man-made structures, such as cranes and buildings during construction. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-90Rev. 0*Facility operation does not result in additional impacts except minor potential for bird collisions with buildings and minor disturbance of wildlife due to security lighting at night.Aesthetic Resources*During facility construction, dust, cranes, and facility structures partially obstruct views of existing landscape and create some visual elements that are out-of-character with the site setting. *During facility operation, the existing agricultural landscape is permanently altered, but the facility appearance is consistent with light industrial uses associated with the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport. Socioeconomics*Facility construction results in some temporary increases in noise due to use of heavy equipment on the site and construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon.*Facility operation results in minor increases in noise primarily due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. Normal operations include noise from stationary equipment, such as heating, cooling, and ventilation equipment. Continuous noise levels at the site boundary are maintained below local and state noise limit criteria. *Facility construction results in some temporary increase in local traffic due to construction workforce traffic in early morning and late afternoon and periodic construction vehicle traffic throughout the work day.*Facility operation results in minor increase in local traffic due to vehicle movements associated with employees and deliveries/shipments of supplies and products. *Facility construction results in some temporary increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and wastewater treatment facilities to serve construction workers who move into the site area.*Facility operation results in minor increase in demand for housing, public education resources, police, fire, medical and social services, parks and recreation facilities, and water supply and treatment facilities to serve operations workers who move into the site area.Land Use*Construction of this type of facility would be expected to result in approximately the same land disturbance as the SHINE facility, which means the permanent conversion of approximately 26 ac. (10.5 ha) of agricultural lands to industrial land use and the temporary conversion of approximately 14 ac. (5.7 ha) of agricultural lands to industrial land use.*Facility operation does not result in additional on-site land use impacts.*No off-site land use impacts are expected during construction or operation except for minor construction of housing to serve facility workers who move into the site area. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-91Rev. 019.5.3.2.3.2Effects on Public Health and SafetyDuring facility construction, minor impacts to public health and safety might result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and fugitive dust), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. Any such impacts would be expected to be temporary and restricted to the immediate vicinity of the project site.During facility operation, minor impacts to public health and safety might result from vehicle traffic, air pollution emissions (vehicle exhaust and emissions of conventional pollutants from stationary equipment), sanitary wastes, and conventional solid wastes. In addition, the public would be exposed to minor doses of radiation due to transportation of radioactive materials to and from the site, as well as direct radiation and releases of gaseous effluents from the SHINE process. All radioactive materials would be strictly controlled, and all radiological doses would comply with regulatory limits.19.5.3.2.3.3Other Costs No other environmental costs, such as lost tax revenues or decreased recreational values, have been identified. The project is not expected to result in any transportation impacts except for the minor traffic impacts on local roads discussed in Subsection 19.5.3.2.4.1.19.5.3.2.3.4Environmental BenefitsConstruction of this type of facility would be expected to create approximately the same number of construction jobs as the SHINE facility, which means approximately 420 construction jobs during the peak of construction activities. Facility operation would create approximately 150 permanent operational jobs. In addition, the wages earned and money spent by facility employees will stimulate additional economic activity, but this benefit has not been quantified. In addition to economic benefits, the project also would benefit the health of people who need diagnostic tests that require Tc-99m and other isotopes. The facility would be expected to produce approximately the same amount of Tc-99m as the SHINE facility, which means it would satisfy approximately half of the annual demand for these isotopes in the United States. This represents a significant health benefit. The facility would also produce I-131 and Xe-133, which would have additional health benefits.19.5.3.2.3.5Production of Commercial ProductsThe facility would be expected to produce 3,000 6-day Ci per week, which means it would produce approximately 156,000 6-day Ci of Mo-99 per year. This translates to approximately 9,500,000 doses of Tc-99m per year for diagnostic tests. In addition, the facility would be expected to produce approximately 100,000 Ci of I-131 and 100,000 Ci of Xe-133 per year.19.5.3.2.3.6Increase in Tax PaymentsThe facility would be expected to pay approximately the same amount of taxes as the SHINE facility. This means that the facility would pay property taxes of approximately $635,000 per year during construction and approximately $660,000 per year during operation (after expiration of an initial 10-year TIF agreement), representing an increase of approximately 0.30 percent in the annual property tax revenues of Rock County. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewCost-Benefit of the AlternativesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.5-92Rev. 019.5.3.2.3.7Creation and Improvement of InfrastructureNo creation or improvement of infrastructure would be expected to result directly from the project. The City of Janesville plans to install a water main and a sewer main along the northern boundary of the site, but the project is not dependent on this construction.19.5.3.2.3.8Other BenefitsNo other significant benefits have been identified. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewComparison of the Potential Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-93Rev. 019.5.4COMPARISON OF THE POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS19.5.4.1ALTERNATIVE SITESThis section compares the environmental impacts, costs, and benefits di scussed in Subsections 19.5.2 and 19.5.3 for the alternative sites with the impacts, costs, and benefits expected at the SHINE project site, and evaluates whether any of the alternatives would reduce or avoid adverse effects. Table 19.5.4-1 summarizes the expected environmental impacts of project construction at the SHINE project site (Janesville), each of the alternative sites (Chippewa Falls and Stevens Point), and the No-Action Alternative. Construction impacts at the SHINE project site are SMALL for every resource category. Both of the alternative sites have MODERATE construction impacts in several resource categories. Chippewa Falls and Stevens Point both have a MODERATE construction impact in Visual Resources, Noise, and Socioeconomic Transportation. In addition, Stevens Point has a MODERATE construction impact in Land Use and Ground Water Resources. As expected, the No-Action Alternative impacts are SMALL for every resource category as no construction would occur. However, the No-Action Alternative would not produce any of the benefits that would be produced by construction at the SHINE site or the alternative sites. These benefits include the creation of jobs and increases in tax payments to the local jurisdictions in which the site is located.Table 19.5.4-2 summarizes the expected environmental impacts of project operation at the SHINE project site, each of the alternative sites, and the No-Action Alternative. Operation impacts at the SHINE project site and both of the alternative sites are SMALL for every resource category. As expected, the No-Action Alternative impacts are SMALL for every resource category as project operation would not occur. Again, however, the No-Action Alternative would not produce any of the benefits that would be produced by operation at the SHINE project site or the alternative sites. These benefits include the of jobs, increases in tax payments to the local jurisdictions in which the site is located, the production of valuable commercial products, and the significant health benefits of having a reliable domestic source of diagnostic isotopes. Based on the information summarized above, neither of the alternative sites would reduce or avoid adverse effects as compared with the SHINE project site. The No-Action Alternative would avoid the environmental impacts associated with construction and operation, but since all of these impacts are SMALL at the SHINE project site, avoiding these impacts is not significant. The No-Action Alternative would not produce any of the benefits associated with the project.19.5.4.2ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGIESThis section compares the environmental impacts, costs, and benefits di scussed in Subsections 19.5.2 and 19.5.3 for the alternative technologies with the impacts, costs, and benefits expected for the SHINE technology, and evaluates whether any of the alternatives would reduce or avoid adverse effects. Table 19.5.4-3 summarizes the expected environmental impacts of project construction for the SHINE technology, each of the alternative technologies (linear accelerator technology and LEU aqueous homogeneous reactor), and the No-Action Alternative. Construction impacts for the SHINE technology are SMALL for every resource category. The alternative technologies also have SMALL construction impacts for every resource category. As expected, the No-Action Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewComparison of the Potential Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-94Rev. 0Alternative impacts are SMALL for every resource category as no construction would occur. However, the No-Action Alternative would not produce any of the benefits that would be produced by construction of the SHINE technology or the alternative technologies. These benefits include the creation of jobs and increases in tax payments to the local jurisdictions in which the project is located. Table 19.5.4-4 summarizes the expected environmental impacts of project operation for the SHINE technology, each of the alternative technologies, and the No-Action Alternative. Operational impacts for the SHINE technology are SMALL for every resource category. The alternative technologies also have SMALL operational impacts for every resource category. As expected, the No-Action Alternative impacts are SMALL for every resource category as project operation would not occur. Again, however, the No-Action Alternative would not produce any of the benefits that would be produced by operation of the SHINE technology or the alternative technologies. These benefits include the creation of jobs, increases in tax payments to the local jurisdictions in which the site is located, the production of valuable commercial products, and the significant health benefits of having a reliable domestic source of diagnostic isotopes. Based on the information summarized above, none of the alternative technologies would reduce or avoid adverse effects as compared with the SHINE technology. The No-Action Alternative would avoid the environmental impacts associated with construction and operation, but since all of these impacts are SMALL for the SHINE technology, avoiding these impacts is not significant. The No-Action Alternative would not produce any of the benefits associated with the project. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewComparison of the Potential Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-95Rev. 0Table 19.5.4-1 Comparison of Construction Impacts for the SHINE Site and Alternative SitesCategorySHINE (Janesville)Chippewa FallsStevens PointNo-Action Land Use Impacts SMALLSMALLMODERATESMALLVisual Resources Impacts SMALLMODERATEMODERATESMALLAir Quality Impacts SMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLNoise Impacts SMALLMODERATEMODERATESMALLGeology, Soils, and Seismology Impacts SMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLWater Resources Impacts Surface Water Impacts SMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL Ground Water ImpactsSMALLSMALLMODERATESMALLEcological Resources Impacts Aquatic Resource sSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL Terrestrial Resour cesSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLHistorical and Cultural Resources Impacts SMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLSocioeconomic Impacts HousingSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL Public Services SMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL Public EducationSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL TaxesSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL TransportationSMALLMODERATEMODERATESMALLHuman Health Impacts Nonradiological ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL Radiological ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLWaste Management Impacts SMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLTransportation Impacts SMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLPostulated Accident Impacts SMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLEnvironmental Justice Impacts SMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLEnvironmental Benefits - Jobs 420420 420 NoneEnvironmental Benefits - HealthNoneNoneNoneNoneProduction of Commercial ProductsNoneNoneNoneNoneProperty Tax Payments$635,000 per year$635,000 per year$635,000 per yearNone Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewComparison of the Potential Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-96Rev. 0Table 19.5.4-2 Comparison of Operation Impacts for the SHINE Site and Alternative Sitesa)The number of required operation workers and property tax payments are expected to be the same for all sites.CategorySHINE (Janesville)Chippewa FallsStevens PointNo-Action Land Use ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLVisual Resources ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLAir Quality ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLNoise ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLGeology, Soils, and Seismology ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLWater Resources Impacts Surface Water ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL Ground Water ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLEcological Resources Impacts Aquatic ResourcesSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL Terrestrial ResourcesSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLHistorical and Cultural Resources ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLSocioeconomic Impacts HousingSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL Public ServicesSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL Public EducationSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL TaxesSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL TransportationSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLHuman Health Impacts Nonradiological ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALL Radiological ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLWaste Management ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLTransportation ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLPostulated Accident ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLEnvironmental Justice ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLEnvironmental Benefits - Jobs150150150NoneEnvironmental Benefits - HealthReliable source ofdiagnostic isotopesReliable source ofdiagnostic isotopesReliable source ofdiagnostic isotopesNoneProduction of Commercial Products Mo-99, I-131, Xe-133Mo-99, I-131, Xe-133Mo-99, I-131, Xe-133 NoneProperty Tax Payments(a)$660,000 per year$660,000 per year$660,000 per year None Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewComparison of the Potential Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-97Rev. 0Table 19.5.4-3 Comparison of Construction Impacts for the SHINE Technology and Alternative TechnologiesCategorySHINE TechnologyLinear Accelerator TechnologyLow Enriched Uranium Aqueous Homogeneous ReactorNo-Action Land Use ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLVisual Resources ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLAir Quality ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLNoise ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLGeology, Soils, and Seismology ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLWater Resources ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLEcological Resources ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLHistorical and Cultural Resources ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLSocioeconomic ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLHuman Health ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLWaste Management ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLTransportation ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLPostulated Accident ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLEnvironmental Justice ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLEnvironmental Benefits - Jobs420 420 420 NoneEnvironmental Benefits - HealthNoneNoneNoneNoneProduction of Commercial ProductsNoneNoneNoneNoneProperty Tax Payments$635,000 per year$635,000 per year$635,000 per yearNone Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewComparison of the Potential Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.5-98Rev. 0Table 19.5.4-4 Comparison of Operation Impacts for the SHINE Technology and Alternative Technologiesa)The number of required operation workers and property tax payments are assumed to be the same for all technologies.CategorySHINE TechnologyLinear Accelerator TechnologyLow Enriched Uranium Aqueous Homogeneous ReactorNo-Action AlternativeLand Use ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLVisual Resources ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLAir Quality ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLNoise ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLGeology, Soils, and Seismology ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLWater Resources ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLEcological Resources ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLHistorical and Cultural Resources ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLSocioeconomic ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLHuman Health ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLWaste Management ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLTransportation ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLPostulated Accident ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLEnvironmental Justice ImpactsSMALLSMALLSMALLSMALLEnvironmental Benefits - Jobs150 150 150 NoneEnvironmental Benefits - HealthReliable source of diagnostic isotopesReliable source of diagnostic isotopesReliable source of diagnostic isotopesNoneProduction of Commercial ProductsMo-99, I-131, Xe-133Mo-99 Mo-99, I-131, Xe-133NoneProperty Tax Payments (a)$660,000 per year$660,000 per year$660,000 per yearNone Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTable of ContentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-iRev. 0SECTION
19.6CONCLUSION
STable of Contents SectionTitlePage
19.6CONCLUSION
S.................................................................................................19.6-119.6.1UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS............................19.6-119.6.2RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SHORT-TERM USES AND LONG-TERMPRODUCTIVITY OF THE ENVIRONMENT....................................................19.6-1319.6.3IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCES.................................................................................................19.6-15 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-iiRev. 0List of Tables NumberTitle19.6.1-1Construction-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts19.6.1-2Operations-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts19.6.3-1United States Inventories for Minerals Used in Construction Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of FiguresSHINE Medical Technologies 19.6-iiiRev. 0List of Figures NumberTitleNone Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewAcronyms and AbbreviationsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.6-ivRev. 0Acronyms and AbbreviationsAcronym/Abbreviation Definition ac.acreBMPbest management practice hahectarekgkilogramLOSlevel of service NOxnitrogen oxidesOSHAOccupational Safety and Health AdministrationROIRegion of InfluenceSHState HighwaySHINESHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. SWPPPStorm Water Pollution Prevention PlanUSU.S. HighwayWDNRWisconsin Department of Natural ResourcesWHSWisconsin Historical Society Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.6-1Rev. 0CHAPTER 19
19.6CONCLUSION
S19.6.1UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTSUnavoidable adverse impacts are predicted adverse environmental impacts that cannot be avoided and for which there are no practical means of further mitigation. This section considers unavoidable adverse impacts from construction and operation of the proposed SHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. (SHINE) facility.19.6.1.1Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts of ConstructionConstruction impacts and measures and controls available to reduce or eliminate impacts are discussed in detail in Section 19.4. As described in the section, all impacts are SMALL, as they are either not detectable or are minor compared to the availability of the affected resources. Table 19.6.1-1 summarizes construction-related impacts that result in a measurable loss or permanent change in resources, the mitigation and control measures available to reduce those impacts, and the remaining unavoidable adverse impacts after mitigation and control measures are applied. For many of the impacts related to construction activities, the mitigation measures are referred to as best management practices (BMPs). Typically, these mitigation measures are based on the types of activities that are to be performed. The mitigation measures are implemented through permitting requirements, and plans and procedures developed for the construction activities.Unavoidable adverse impacts from construction of the SHINE facility include changing land use on 25.67 acres (ac.) (10.39 hectares [ha]) of agricultural/cultivated crop land to industrial facilities, the conversion of prime farmland and farmland of statewide importance to industrial land, and partial obstruction of views of the existing landscape. Since there are no streams, ponds, or water bodies present on the SHINE site, potential construction-related impacts to water resources are limited to off-site impacts associated with runoff and siltation. Impacts to agricultural/cultivated crop land from construction of the facility are mitigated by returning lands within the site boundary that surround the interior developed areas to either cultivated fields or restored native landscapes upon completion of construction. To minimize impacts to visual resources, landscaping of the site along U.S. Highway 51 (US 51) street frontage and bordering access road will be performed. Open spaces around the facility structures are vegetated with cool-season lawn and shrub borders. Impacts from stormwater runoff are mitigated with stormwater management plans and BMPs during construction. Construction activities also temporarily impact 14.54 ac. (5.88 ha) of agricultural lands used for the construction parking area, construction material staging or lay down area, and water and sewer line installation. Temporary impact areas are either returned to agriculture or restored with either cool-season grasses or native prairie.Construction activities result in unavoidable localized increases in air emissions and noise. Activities associated with the use of construction equipment may result in varying amounts of dust, air emissions, noise, and vibration that may potentially impact both on-site workers and off-site residents of the community. Potential noise impacts also include traffic noise associated with the construction workforce traveling to and from the SHINE site, particularly during shift Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.6-2Rev. 0changes. Emissions from construction activities and equipment are minimized through implementation of mitigation measures, including proper maintenance of construction equipment and vehicles. Posted speed limits, traffic control and administrative measures, such as staggered shift hours, will reduce traffic noise during the weekday business hours. By implementation of mitigation measures, emissions and noise impacts associated with construction activities are temporary and localized at and near the SHINE site.19.6.1.2Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts of OperationsOperational impacts and measures and controls available to reduce or eliminate impacts are discussed in detail in Section 19.4. As described in the section, all impacts are SMALL, as they are either not detectable or are minor compared to the availability of the affected resources. Table 19.6.1-2 summarizes operations-related impacts that result in a measurable loss or permanent change in resources, the mitigation and control measures available to reduce these impacts, and the remaining adverse impacts after mitigation and control measures are applied. As indicated in Table 19.6.1-2 most of the adverse impacts are either avoidable or negligible after mitigation and control measures are considered. Unavoidable adverse impacts from operation of the SHINE facility include a change to the viewshed, potential storm water runoff to the intermittent stream or Rock River, and infrequent bird collisions with buildings. Minor visual impacts to the viewshed will occur as a result of the main building and exhaust vent stack. However, the surrounding viewshed includes light industrial development, therefore impacts are minor. Stormwater runoff during plant operation is controlled through a vegetated on-site detention swale. Infrequent bird collisions with buildings at the SHINE facility and associated structures may result in some bird mortality. Most buildings on the SHINE site have a relatively low profile, therefore effects on bird populations from collisions with buildings is minimized.The operation of the SHINE facility will result in a slight degradation in the level of service (LOS) at the signalized intersection of US 51 and State Highway (SH) 11. Specifically, the westbound SH 11 to southbound US 51 left-turning movement is affected during the morning peak hour. This condition is easily mitigated by optimizing the signal timing for this turning movement, which will improve the LOS to its existing level. 19.6.1.3Summary of Adverse Environmental Impacts from Construction and OperationsTables 19.6.1-1 and 19.6.1-2 indicate that all of the adverse environmental impacts associated with the new facility construction and operation are SMALL and are further reduced through the application of mitigation and control measures. Most of the impacts from construction and operation are SMALL due to design features that result in lower levels of impacts, BMPs that control and mitigate emissions and discharges to air and water, use of agricultural/cultivated crop lands that were previously altered or disturbed, and applicable federal and state permitting requirements designed to protect humans and biota. These SMALL impacts generally have no detectable adverse impacts or only minor adverse impacts. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.6-3Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-1 Construction-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 1 of 6)ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsLand Use and Visual ResourcesConstruction of new facility will permanently impact 25.67 ac. (10.39 ha) of agricultural/cultivated crop land.Impacts include conversion of prime farmland and farmland of statewide importance to industrial land.Construction activities comply with all relevant federal, state, and local regulatory requirements, including BMPs and stormwater management plans to control erosion and runoff.Impacts to agricultural/cultivated crop land are mitigated by returning lands within the site boundary that surround the interior developed areas to cultivated fields or restored native landscapes or cool-season grasses upon construction completion.A total of 25.67 ac. (10.39 ha) of agricultural/cultivated crop land is lost.Amount of prime farmland or farmland of statewide importance lost is minor in context of region.Partial obstruction of views of the existing landscape.Visual impacts are minimized through landscaping of the site. Open spaces around the facility structures are vegetated with cool-season lawn and shrub borders.A minor change in existing landscape is expected.Temporary impact of 14.54 ac. (5.88ha) of agricultural lands used for construction parking area, construction material staging or lay down area, and water and sewer line installation.Temporary impact areas are either returned to agriculture or restored with either cool-season grasses or native prairie.Some localized short-term impacts to temporary impact areas are expected. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.6-4Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-1 Construction-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 2 of 6)ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsGeologic ResourcesPotential local adverse impacts due to excavation and other construction related activities.Geologic resources at the site are the same throughout the region and do not include any unique or rare geological resources.No mitigation measures beyond compliance with local building codes are anticipated as no significant impacts due to large scale or local hazards are identified.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Water UseAll public water supplies in Rock County are sourced from groundwater. Additional needs during construction are identified and are satisfied under existing system capacities.Water and sewer utility lines will be installed by the City of Janesville in support of the overall TIF development on the north side of the site. No additional upgrades or mitigation measures are expected.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Water QualityPotential impacts are limited to off-site areas and are associated with runoff and siltation into roadside swales. BMPs will be used in accordance with the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) as required by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) to prevent sediment runoff and subsequent siltation in off-site areas during construction.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Terrestrial EcologyWildlife potentially affected by construction, includes bird, mammal, and/or herpetofauna
species.Area is routinely disturbed for agriculture and there are no water resources on-site, therefore wildlife use of the site is low.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.6-5Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-1 Construction-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 3 of 6) ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsTerrestrial Ecology, cont'dThere is a potential for bird collisions with man-made structures such as cranes and buildings during construction.Based on findings of NUREG-1437, the effects of avian collisions with man-made structures occur at very low frequencies.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Artificial lighting could create or exacerbate an avian-collision hazard if tall cranes are illuminated during nighttime construction.For any nighttime construction, BMPs such as shielding and appropriate directional lighting are used to mitigate the hazards to wildlife associated with artificial nighttime illumination.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Potential impacts to state or federal threatened/endangered species or species of special concern identified within the region.Consultation identified state and federally listed species in the region, however none on the SHINE site. None of the listed species were observed on-site during field reconnaissance surveys.Sensitive species located in off-site riparian areas could be affected indirectly during construction via stormwater runoff from the site. The use of appropriate BMPs during construction combined with the distance to the nearest off-site areas minimizes impacts to any protected species.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Aquatic EcologyPotential impacts are limited to off-site areas associated with runoff and siltation into the small intermittent stream and Rock River.BMPs will be used in accordance with the SWPPP as required by the WDNR to prevent sediment runoff and subsequent siltation in receiving streams during construction.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.6-6Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-1 Construction-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 4 of 6)ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSocioeconomicsThere is a minor potential increase in the local population and associated increased demand for local public services, schooling, housing, and land.Estimated population increases are relatively small compared to the population in the ROI. Increases in local tax revenues support increased services. Specific measures and controls are not needed as impacts are minor.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Potential impacts in traffic infrastructure and patterns due to increased traffic from
construction-related vehicles.Construction-related traffic does not affect the level of service anywhere in the transportation infrastructure and no modifications to the infrastructure are necessary.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Human HealthPotential impacts to the general public and construction workforce include dust and other air emissions during construction.BMPs including dust control plans are implemented during construction to minimize fugitive dust.Minor localized increases in air emissions will occur, mostly at and near the SHINE site. Radiation ExposurePotential adverse impacts to the general public and construction workforce from the construction and handling of isotope production equipment and supplies.Exposure is minimized through safe handling procedures and robust Radiation Protection and ALARA Programs.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Air QualityActivities associated with the use of construction equipment may result in varying amounts of dust, air emissions, noise, and vibration and may potentially impact both on-site workers and off-site residents of the community.BMPs and dust control plans are used for controlling fugitive dust.Proper maintenance of construction equipment and vehicles is used to control air emissions.Minor localized increases in air emissions will occur, mostly at and near the SHINE site.Detectable changes to local meteorology are not anticipated. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.6-7Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-1 Construction-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 5 of 6)ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsAir Quality, cont'dPainting, coating and similar operations also generate emissions from the use of volatile organic compounds.Contractors, vendors, and subcontractors will adhere to appropriate federal and state occupational health and safety regulations. Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.On-site equipment use and traffic due to construction activities can result in local increases in emissions. Potential air quality impacts are limited as the project is in an attainment area and is largely surrounded by agricultural fields and other undeveloped areas.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated. NoisePotential impacts due to increase in noise levels from construction equipment, including to nearby residences, churches, and recreational areas.On-site noise level exposure is controlled through appropriate training, personnel protective equipment, periodic health and safety monitoring, and industry good practices. Noise levels from equipment are expected attenuate rapidly between the site and the nearest sensitive noise receptors.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Potential increase in traffic noise associated with construction workforce traveling to and from the SHINE site, particularly during shift changes.Posted speed limits, traffic control and administrative measures, such as staggered shift hours reduces traffic noise during weekday business hours.Potential noise impacts are intermittent and limited primarily to shift changes. Environmental
JusticeThere is potential for adverse impacts to low-income and minority populations.Populations classified as low income are distant from the site not impacted by the SHINE facility.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.6-8Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-1 Construction-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 6 of 6)ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsHistoric and Cultural ResourcesNo adverse impacts on cultural or historic resources have been identified.A Phase I study was performed and the Wisconsin Historical Society (WHS) reviewed the findings and indicated that no further consultation is needed.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies 19.6-9Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-2 Operations-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 1 of 4)ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsLand Use and Visual ResourcesVisual impacts as a result of the main building and exhaust vent stack.The majority of the facility structures have a relatively low profile. The exhaust vent stack will extend to 96 feet (29 meters) above grade. No mitigation is required.Minor impacts to viewscape will occur, however the surrounding viewshed includes similar light industrial development, therefore impacts are small.Geologic ResourcesPotential impacts from sediment erosion at the site.The primary soils present at the site are classified as slightly erodible and the secondary soils are classified as moderately erodible. No mitigation is required.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Water UsePotential impact on water supply for the region based on demand from SHINE facility.The City of Janesville has determined the current system has more than enough capacity to support the increase in demand. No mitigation is required.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Water QualityPotential impacts from stormwater runoff to the intermittent stream or Rock River.A vegetated on-site detention swale is used to control stormwater runoff.Mitigation measures in combination with the distance to the water bodies will minimize runoff and siltation to off-site areas.Terrestrial EcologyPossible exposure of terrestrial fauna and flora to herbicides due to vegetation management practices may occur.Herbicides are applied per an integrated pest management plan and applicable permit/BMP requirements.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Infrequent bird collisions with buildings resulting in mortality can occur.Most buildings on the SHINE site have a relatively low profile, minimizing bird collisions.Effects on bird populations from collisions with buildings are minimized and are not anticipated to be significant. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-10Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-2 Operations-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 2 of 4)ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsAquatic EcologyPotential impacts from stormwater runoff to the off-site intermittent stream or Rock River.A vegetated on-site detention swale is used to control storm water runoff.Mitigation measures in combination with the distance to the water bodies will minimize runoff and siltation to off-site receiving streams.SocioeconomicsAn increase in the Region of Influence (ROI) population of 0.08 percent will occur to support the operations workforce, potentially impacting social services.Adequate housing, school capacity, water supply and water treatment capacities exist to accommodate minor population increase; therefore, mitigation is not required.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Potential beneficial impacts to tax revenues to Janesville and Rock County.There is an increase in tax revenues collected by county and regional taxing authorities which does have beneficial impacts.No mitigation is required.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated. Increased traffic along US 51 coming from the north, resulting in a slight decrease in LOS at the intersection of US 51 and SH 11 during morning peak hour.Traffic impacts are mitigated by optimizing the signal timing at the intersection to accommodate a greater turning movement from westbound SH11 to southbound US 51.By optimizing signal timing at the intersection, the LOS for the intersection is improved to its existing level.Human HealthPotential pathways of public exposure to chemicals include air, land, and water.Control systems to minimize potential exposure to the public include conveyance of all wastewater produced from the facility to the City of Janesville wastewater treatment facility, use of swales to control off-site runoff, erosion control measures, and air emission controls. Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-11Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-2 Operations-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 3 of 4)ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsRadiation ExposurePotential adverse impacts to the general public and operations workforce from isotope production and associated waste.Site shielding design of the buildings minimizes radiation exposure of the public outside the buildings. Exposure of the workforce is minimized through compliance with OSHA standards.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Air QualityIncreased vehicle emissions and dust from the commuting workforce and routine deliveries to/from the SHINE facility.The volume of traffic during operations is considerably lower than during construction. Vehicles are largely limited to paved areas, reducing the emissions of fugitive dust.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.Emissions from the natural gas-fired boiler and heaters.Emissions of nitrogen oxides (NO x) from the boiler are controlled using low-NO x burners, which produces lower NO x emissions during the combustion process.Emissions from the heaters are controlled using combustion controls and properly designed and tuned burners.No impacts exceed the primary ambient air quality standards that are established to protect public health; therefore unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.NoiseNoise generated during operations relates primarily to vehicular movements associated with employees and deliveries.The number of work-related trips is minor relative to the existing traffic flow on US 51 and does not result in notable increased noise emissions.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated.External noise emissions from the SHINE facility during operation may impact surrounding sensitive noise receptors.Operational noise from the facility is primarily limited by the walls and other physical barriers of the facility itself.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-12Rev. 0Table 19.6.1-2 Operations-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts(Sheet 4 of 4)ElementAdverse ImpactMitigation MeasureUnavoidable Adverse Environmental ImpactsEnvironmental JusticeNo adverse impacts on minority or low-income populations have been identified.Level of impact is comparable for all populations and mitigation is not required.Impacts to low income and minority populations are not anticipated.Historic and Cultural
ResourcesNo adverse impacts on cultural or historic resources have been identified.A Phase I study was performed and the WHS reviewed the findings and indicated that no further consultation is needed.Unavoidable adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewRelationship Between Short-Term Uses and Long-Term Productivity of the EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-13Rev. 019.6.2RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SHORT-TERM USES AND LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY OF THE ENVIRONMENTThis Environmental Report focuses on the analyses and resulting conclusions associated with the environmental impacts from activities during the new plant construction and operation at the SHINE site. These activities are considered short-term uses for purposes of this section. In this section, the long-term is considered to be initiated with the conclusion of new facility decommissioning at the SHINE site. This section includes an evaluation of the extent that the short-term uses preclude any options for future long-term use of the SHINE site.19.6.2.1Construction of the SHINE Facility and Long-Term ProductivitySubsection 19.6.1.1 summarizes the potential unavoidable adverse environmental impacts of construction and the measures proposed to reduce those impacts. Some SMALL adverse environmental impacts could remain after all practical measures to avoid or mitigate them are taken. However, none of these impacts represent long-term effects that preclude any options for future use of the SHINE site.The acreage disturbed during construction of the facility is larger than that required for the actual structures and other ancillary facilities because of the need for construction parking areas, and construction material staging and laydown areas. Preparation of these on-site areas coupled with noise from construction activities, may displace some wildlife and alter existing vegetation. Once the new facility is completed, the areas not needed for operations are returned to agricultural land or restored with either cool-season grasses or native prairie.Construction of the SHINE facility includes the installation of water and sewer lines that connect the facility to the City of Janesville water supply system. This additional infrastructure will be available and beneficial to any future use of the SHINE site after decommissioning.Noise emitted by some construction activities increases the ambient noise levels on-site and in adjacent off-site areas. During construction, the workforce is protected from excessive noise levels by adherence to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requirements within high noise environments. There are no effects on the long-term productivity of the SHINE site as a result of these impacts.Construction traffic increases the volume of traffic on local roads, but does not have an adverse impact on the LOS. Consequently, no modifications to the traffic infrastructure are necessary and there are no effects on long-term productivity.Facility construction has beneficial socioeconomic effects on the local area such as new construction-related jobs, local spending by the construction workforce, and payment of taxes within the area and region. The in-migration of the construction and operation workforce support the expansion of existing small businesses or locations for new small businesses that might serve SHINE and its employees. The beneficial impacts from the in-migration of the construction workforce and indirect economic output and employment resulting from construction expenditures to the communities within the region of influence (ROI) cease once construction is complete. However, the changes that are the result of increased tax revenues continue throughout the operational life of the facility. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewRelationship Between Short-Term Uses and Long-Term Productivity of the EnvironmentSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-14Rev. 0Construction of the SHINE facility will have no impacts on populations identified as minority or low-income as minority populations are lacking within the region around the SHINE site, and low income populations are limited to isolated areas in the center of Janesville. Therefore, there are no effects on the long-term productivity of the SHINE site as a result of impacts on environmental justice. 19.6.2.2Operation of the SHINE Facility and Long-Term Productivity Subsection 19.6.1.2 summarizes the potential unavoidable adverse environmental impacts of operation and the measures proposed to reduce or eliminate those impacts. Some SMALL adverse environmental impacts could remain after all practical measures to avoid or mitigate them are taken. However, none of these impacts represent long-term effects that preclude any options for future use of the SHINE site.The SHINE site is located in an area that has previously been disturbed for agricultural use and is currently zoned for industrial use as an amendment to the Tax Increment Financing No.35 Project Plan. Therefore, operation of the new facility represents a continuation of the planned land use. Once the facility is decommissioned to Nuclear Regulatory Commission standards, the land could be available for other industrial or non-industrial uses.During operation, noise levels are expected to decrease to ambient levels as facility-generated noise is limited by the walls and other physical barriers of the facility itself. Operation of the new facility will slightly increase air emissions from the boiler and stacks. The equipment is operated in accordance with applicable federal, state, and local regulations, and is not expected to result in any long-term decrease in regional air quality. Preliminary modeling shows that for all pollutants except for the 1-hour nitrogen oxides (NO x), the maximum concentrations are below the Significant Impact Level.Operation of the SHINE facility will have a comparable impact on all populations in the region around the site. No impacts are expected to either minority or low income populations as minority populations are lacking within the region around the SHINE site, and low income populations are limited to isolated areas in the center of Janesville. Therefore there are no long-term effects to environmental justice that preclude any options for future use of the SHINE site. 19.6.2.3Summary of the Relationship Between Short-Term Use and Long-Term ProductivityThe impacts resulting from the SHINE facility construction and operation result in both adverse and beneficial short-term impacts. The principal short-term adverse impacts are SMALL residual impacts (after mitigation measures are implemented) to land use, terrestrial ecology, local traffic, and air quality. There are no long-term impacts to the environment. The principal short-term benefits are the creation of additional jobs, additional tax revenues, and improvements to local infrastructure. The principal long-term benefit is the continued availability of the improved infrastructure and potential benefits from increased tax revenues after facility decommissioning. The short-term impacts and benefits and long-term benefits do not affect long-term productive use of the SHINE site. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIrreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-15Rev. 019.6.3IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIE VABLE COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCESThis subsection describes the expected irreversible and irretrievable environmental resource commitments used in the new facility construction and operation. The term irreversible commitments of resources describes environmental resources that are potentially changed by the new facility construction or operation and that could not be restored at some later time to the resource's state prior to construction or operation. Irretrievable commitments of resources are generally materials that are used for the new facility in such a way that they could not, by practical means, be recycled or restored for other uses.19.6.3.1Irreversible Environmental Commitments of ResourcesIrreversible environmental resource commitments resulting from the new facility, in addition to the materials used for radioisotope production are described in the following sections.19.6.3.1.1Land Use The land used for the SHINE facility is not irreversibly committed because once SHINE ceases operations and the facility is decommissioned in accordance with Nuclear Regulatory Commission requirements, the land supporting the facilities could be returned to other industrial or nonindustrial uses. There is no storage or disposal of radioactive and nonradioactive wastes at the site. Medical isotopes are not stored for any significant time period as these items are transported to clients as quickly as possible. Irradiated enriched uranium is not an issue as the facility cleans up and recycles this material rather than storing spent nuclear fuel. Approximately 26ac. (10.5ha) of prime farmland or farmland of statewide importance on the SHINE site could be irreversibly converted to developed land or experience surface soil damage during temporary use such that the soil properties responsible for the prime farmland designation would be irreversibly damaged.19.6.3.1.2Hydrologic ResourcesThe new facility requires water from the Janesville Water Utility to use for construction, isotope production, potable water, fire protection, and facility heating and cooling. The City of Janesville provides water supply for both public drinking and fire protection through groundwater wells. The average estimated water usage by the SHINE facility during operations is 6070 gallons (22,977 L) per day and a consumptive water use of 1560 gallons (5905 L) per week. According to the city of Janesville, the total pumping capacity of its eight groundwater wells is 29 Mgd (109.8 Mld). Average water usage is about 11 Mgd (41.6 Mld). Accordingly, the excess capacity of the Janesville water supply system is approximately 18 Mgd (68.1 Mld). Because there is excess capacity within the Janesville water supply system, there are no indirect effects associated with the demand from the SHINE facility. There are no direct impacts to water quality or hydrology from the SHINE facility; therefore there will be no irreversible impacts.19.6.3.1.3Ecological Resources Long-term irreversible losses of terrestrial biota are not anticipated. Subsequent to the completion of construction, floral and faunal resources are expected to recover in areas that are not affected by on-going operations. Floral resources at the site and in the region are limited to agricultural/cultivated crop plants. Losses of fauna due to operations are primarily attributable to Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIrreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-16Rev. 0bird collisions with buildings at the facility as wildlife occurrence on the site is relatively infrequent. There are no wetlands or water bodies located at the SHINE site.All water for the SHINE facility is provided by the Janesville Water Utility, therefore, water supply intake or cooling water intake structures on the Rock River are not needed. Thus, there are no operational impacts associated with impingement or entrainment of aquatic biota. Furthermore, the SHINE facility does not discharge directly into the Rock River or any other nearby water body thus, avoiding any impacts associated with pollutant or thermal discharges to aquatic resources. In addition, a vegetated on-site detention swale is used to control stormwater runoff which, when combined with the distance to the nearest off-site water bodies minimizes runoff and siltation to off-site receiving streams.19.6.3.1.4Socioeconomic Resources No irreversible commitments will be made to socioeconomic resources because they are reallocated for other purposes once the facility is decommissioned. 19.6.3.1.5Historic and Cultural ResourcesNo known historic or cultural resources are irreversibly altered due to the SHINE facility.19.6.3.1.6Air Quality Dust and other emissions, such as vehicle exhaust, are released to the air during construction activities. Implementation of controls and limits at the source of emissions on the construction site result in reduction of impacts off-site. The dust control program reduces dust due to construction activities to minimize dust reaching site boundaries. Specific mitigation measures are discussed in Subsection 19.4.2.1.1. During operations, emissions will be a product of vehicle exhaust, isotope production, and fuel combustion resulting in very low levels of gaseous pollutants and particulates released from the facility into the air. Contractors, vendors, and subcontractors are required to adhere to appropriate federal and state occupational health and safety regulations to protect workers from adverse conditions, including air emissions. Emissions during operations are in compliance with applicable Federal and State regulations, minimizing their impact on public health and the environment.19.6.3.1.7Irretrievable Commitments of ResourcesIrretrievable commitments of resources during new plant construction are generally similar to that of any small-scale medical facility construction project. Unlike previous industrial construction, asbestos and other materials considered hazardous are not used or are used sparingly and in accordance with safety regulations and practices. Materials consumed during the construction phase are shown in Table 19.2.0-1. These materials are irretrievable unless they are recycled at decommissioning. Additionally, approximately 24,587gallons of diesel fuel (as a bounding assumption all fuel is assumed to be diesel) is expected to be used on an average monthly basis (Subsection 19.2.0). Use of construction materials in the quantities associated with the facility has a SMALL impact with respect to the availability of such resources. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIrreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-17Rev. 0During operations, the main resource that is irreversibly and irretrievably committed is the uranium used as the source for the molybdenum isotope. The amount of uranium that SHINE will require on an annual basis and over the lifetime of the operating license (assuming a 30-year operating license) is very small when compared to the amount consumed by other users and the total global supply of uranium. The World Nuclear Association studies of supply and demand of uranium indicate that a total of 5,327,200 metric tons of uranium were available in 2011, representing an 80-year supply of uranium at current market prices based on known resources (World Nuclear Association, 2012). This could increase to a 200-year supply as market prices rise and other conventional sources of uranium are used. Therefore, the uranium that is used to generate the medical radioisotopes has a negligible impact with respect to the long-term availability of uranium worldwide. The inventories of minerals used in the construction of power plants, as tabulated by the U.S. Census Bureau for 2000, 2008, and 2009, are shown in Table 19.6.3-1. The table also provides estimated inventories for 2010. Aluminum supplies have dropped since 2000 from 3,688,000 metric tons in 2000 to 1,727,000 metric tons in 2009 and have remained reasonably stable from 2009 to 2010. The supply of most other minerals has remained reasonably stable since 2000, with only minor fluctuations in availability during 2008 to 2010. The reasonably stable supply of minerals suggests that they will continue to be available for the foreseeable future in response to demand. While a given quantity of material consumed during new facility construction and operation at the SHINE site is irretrievable, except for materials recycled during decommissioning, the impact on their availability is SMALL. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewIrreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of ResourcesSHINE Medical Technologies19.6-18Rev. 0Table 19.6.3-1 United States Inventories for Minerals Used in Construction
Reference:
US Census Bureau, 2012 MineralsYear2000200820092010Inventory in 1000 Metric Tons by Year Aluminum3688265817271720Copper1450131011801120 Lead449399406385 Titanium300200200200 Zinc796748710699Inventory in Million Metric Tons by YearIron Ore61542850 Portland Cement84836261 Masonry Cement4322 Construction Sand and Gravel11201040844760 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewTable of ContentsSHINE Medical Technologies19.7-iRev. 0SECTION
19.7REFERENCES
Table of Contents SectionTitlePage
19.7REFERENCES
................................................................................................19.7-119.
7.1INTRODUCTION
OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW............................19.7-119.7.2PROPOSED ACTION..................................................................................19.7-219.7.3DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT...............................19.7-219.7.4IMPACTS OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION, OPERATIONS, AND DECOMMISSIONING..................................................................................19.7-1919.7.5ALTERNATIVES..........................................................................................19.7-2319.
7.6CONCLUSION
S...........................................................................................19.7-28 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of TablesSHINE Medical Technologies19.7-iiRev. 0List of Tables NumberTitleNone Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewList of FiguresSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-iiiRev. 0List of Figures NumberTitleNone Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-1Rev. 0CHAPTER 19
19.7REFERENCES
19.
7.1INTRODUCTION
OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWBonet, 2005. Bonet, Henri, David Bernard, and Ponsard, Bernard, Production of Mo 99 in Europe: Status and Perspectives, April 2005.City of Janesville, 2012. Correspondence from Gale Price, Community Development Department, to Timothy Krause, Sargent & Lundy, January 13, 2012.
COE, 2010. Interim Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Northcentral and Northeast Region, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Regulatory Assistance Program, March 1, 2010.Fissile Material, 2010. HFR Reactor at Petten Resumed Operations, Fissile Material, September 9, 2010, Website: http://www.fissilematerials.org/blog/2010/09/hfr_reactor_ar_petten_res.html, Date accessed: November 22, 2011.MSNBC, 2010. Isotope Shortage Makes Vital Medical Scans Costlier, Riskier, MSNBC, Website: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38882222/ns/technology_and_science-science/t/isotope-shortage-makes-vital-medic al-scans-costlier-riskier, Date accessed: November, 22, 2011.NM, 2012. News Medical, website: http://www.news-medical.net/health/Iodine-131-Medical-Use.aspx, Date accessed: August 9, 2012. NRCL, 2009. Medical Isotope Production Highly Enriched Uranium, National Academies Press, 2009.OECD, 2010. The Supply of Medical Radioisotopes: Interim Report of the OECD/NEA High-level Group on Security of Supply of Medical Isotopes, Nuclear Energy Agency, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2010.RxList, 2012. RxList, The Internet Drug IndexState of Wisconsin, 2012. License, Permit and Registration Services, Website: http://ww2.wisconsin.gov/state/license/app?COMMAND=gov.wi.state.cpp.license.command.LoadLicenseHome, Date accessed: February 1, 2012.U.S. Government, 1992. Energy Policy Act of 1992, 1992.Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 2012. Small Business Assistance - Permit Primer, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/permitprimer/, Date accessed: February 3, 2012.WNN, 2009. Restart for Isotope Reactor, World Nuclear News, February 13, 2009, Website: http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/newsarticle.aspx?id=24658, Date accessed: November 22, 2011. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-2Rev. 019.7.2PROPOSED ACTION N/A19.7.3DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENTAASHTO, 2012. Census Transportation Planning Products (CTPP) 3-year Data Based on 2006 -2008 American Community Survey (ACS), American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Website: http://ctpp.transportation.org/Pages/3yrdas.aspx , Date accessed: May 16, 2012. AFCCC, 1999. Engineering Weather Data, 2000 Interactive Edition, Air Force Combat Climatology Center, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, 1999.American Society of Mammologists, 2012. Mammals of Wisconsin, American Society of Mammologists, Website: http://www.mammalogy.org/mammals-wisconsin, Date accessed: July 11, 2012.
ASCE, 2006. Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, ASCE Standard ASCE/SEI 7-05 Including Supplement No. 1, American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, Virginia, 2006.ASHRAE, 2009. 2009 ASHRAE Handbook - Fundamentals, American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc., IP edition. Chapter 14.6, American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc., Atlanta, Georgia, 2009.Bean, T., 2008. Noise on the Farm Can Cause Hearing Loss, University of Ohio, Agricultural Extension Fact Sheet AEX-590-08, Website: http://ohioline.osu.edu/aex-fact/pdf/AEX_590_08.pdf, Date accessed: August 13, 2012.Bird Nature, 2012. Migration Flyways: Mississippi Flyway, Bird Nature, Website: http://www.birdnature.com/mississippi.html, Date accessed: August 13, 2012.Bing Maps, 2012. Bing Maps Aerial, Microsoft Corporation and its Data Supplies, Website: http://www.esri.com/software/arcgis/arcgisonline/bing-maps.html, Date accessed: August 15, 2012.BLS, 2009. May 2009 Metropolitan and Nonmetropolitan Area Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Website: http://www.bls.gov/oes/2009/may/oes_27500.html, Date accessed: July 19, 2012.BLS, 2011. May 2009 Metropolitan and Nonmetropolitan Area Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Website: http://stat.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_27500.html, Date accessed: June 10, 2012.BLS, 2012a. Local Area Unemployment Statistics, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Website: http://www.bls.gov/data/#unemployment, Date accessed: June 8, 2012.BLS, 2012b. Consumer Price Index (CPI) Inflation Calculator, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Website: http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm, Date accessed: June 14, 2012. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-3Rev. 0BLS, 2012c. Injuries, Illnesses, and Fatalities, Bureau of Labor Statistics, OSHA Recordable Case Rates - Latest Incidence Rates, by Industry, for Nonfatal Work-Related Injuries and Illnesses, Website: http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/osh/os/ostb3191.pdf, Date accessed: February 14, 2013. BLS, 2012d. Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries (CFOI) - Current and Revised Data, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Hours-Based Fatal Injury Rates by Industry, Occupation, and Selected Demographic Characteristics, 2011, Website: http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfoi/cfoi_rates_2011hb.pdf, Date accessed: February 14, 2013.Buchwald, Cheryl A., 2011. Water Use in Wisconsin, 2005, U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2009-1076, Version 1.1, USGS, Wisconsin Water Science Center, November 2011.The CADMUS Group, Inc., 2011. Total Maximum Daily Loads for Total Phosphorus and Total Suspended Solids in the Rock River Basin. Columbia, Dane, Dodge, Fond du Lac, Green, Green Lake, Jefferson, Rock, Walworth, Washington, and Waukesha Counties, Wisconsin, Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/TMDLs/RockRiver/Final_Rock_River_TMDL_Report_with_Tables.pdf, Date accessed: June 11, 2012.California Department of Transportation, 1998. Technical Noise Supplement. http://i80.dot.ca.gov/hq/env/noise/pub/Technical%20Noise%20Supplement.pdf, Date accessed: August 3, 2012. CERI, 2012. Seismic Information. Center for Earthquake Research and Information, Website: http://folkworm.ceri.memphis.edu/recenteqs/Quakes/quakes0.html), Date accessed: July25, 2012.Chagnon et al., 2004. Changnon, S. A., J. R. Angel, K. E. Kunkel, C. M. B. Lehmann, Climate Atlas of Illinois, Illinois State Water Survey, Champaign Illinois, March, 2004.City of Janesville, 2010. Water Utility, Water Conservation Plan, Website: http://www.ci.janesville.wi.us/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=573, Date accessed: October 5, 2012.City of Janesville, 2011a. City Ordinance Book. http://www.ci.janesville.wi.us/index.aspx?page=359, Date accessed: January 4, 2013City of Janesville, 2011b. Janesville Wisconsin's Park Plac e, Development Guide, City of Janesville, Wisconsin, Community Development, Draft April 6, 2011.City of Janesville, 2012a. Water Utility, Summary of Services, Website: http://www.ci.janesville.wi.us /index.aspx?page=115, Date accessed: December 21, 2012.City of Janesville, 2012b. Bus Transit, Website, http://www.ci.jane sville.wi.us/index.aspx?page=124, Date accessed: June 29, 2012.City of Janesville, 2012c. Janesville Transit System Map and Route Guide, http://www.ci.janesville.wi.us/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=854 , Date accessed: July 26, 2012. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-4Rev. 0City of Janesville, 2012d. Economic Development, Business Climate, Taxes, Website: http://www.ci.janesville.wi.us /index.aspx?page=334 , Date accessed: June 29, 2012.City of Janesville, 2012e. Water Utility, Summary of Services, Website: http://www.ci.janesville.wi.us /index.aspx?page=115, Date accessed: August 1, 2012.City of Janesville, 2012f. Park Locations and Amenities, Website: http://www.ci.janesville.wi.us /index.aspx?page=218, Date accessed: May 22, 2012.Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe, 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States, U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, FWS/OBS-79/31, December 1979.Del Greco, 2006. S. A. Del Greco and collaborators, Surface Data Integration at NOAA's National Climatic Data Center: Data Format, Processing, QC and Product Generation, 86th AMS Annual Meeting, 29 January - 2 February 2006, Atlanta, Georgia.Design Perspectives Inc, 2009. Rock County, WI 2009-2014 Parks, Outdoor Recreation & Open Space Plan, Website: http://www.co.rock.wi.us/images/web_documents/departments/parks/poros_rock_county_2009_final.pdf .DOR, 2011. The WI Corporate Income and Franchise Taxes, Wisconsin Department of Revenue, Division of Research and Policy, November 16, 2011, Website: http://www.revenue.wi.gov/ra/ CorpIncFranchTax.pdf , Date accessed: June 12, 2012.DOR, 2012. Tax Rates, Wisconsin Department of Revenue, Website: http://www.dor.state.wi.us/faqs/pcs/taxrates.html, Date accessed: July 7, 2012.DPI, 2012. 2011-2012 Public Enrollment by County by District by School by Gender, Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction, Website: http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/lbstat/pubdata2.html, Date accessed: June 4, 2012.DWD, 2012. Local Area Unemployment Statistics and Current Employment Statistics programs, Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development, Website: http://dwd.WI.gov/oea/employment_by_industry/#employment_by_industry, Date accessed: June11, 2012.EDS, 1968. Climatic Atlas of the United States, Environmental Data Service, U. S. Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington D. C., 1968.Ellefson, B.R., G.D. Mueller, and C.A. Buchwald, 2002. Water Use in Wisconsin in 2000. U.S.Geological Survey Open-File Report 02-356, prepared by the USGS in Cooperation with the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. Exelon, 2012. Byron Generating Station, Exelon Corporation, Website: http://www.exeloncorp.com/powerplant s/byron/Pages/profile.aspx, Date accessed: April 4, 2012.FAA, 1992. Non-Federal Navigational Aids and Air Traffic Control Facilities, Federal Aviation Administration Order 6700.20A, December 11, 1992. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-5Rev. 0FAA, 2011. Automated Weather Observing Systems (AWOS) for Non-Federal Applications, Federal Aviation Administration Advisory Circular AC 150/5220-16D. April 28, 2011.FEMA, 2008. Flood Insurance Rate Map, Rock County, Wisconsin and Incorporated Areas, Map Number 55105C0316D, Federal Emergency Management Agency, August 19, 2008.Fenneman, Nevin Melancthon, 1946. Physical Divisions of the United States. Department of the Interior, Geological Survey.Find the Data, 2012. Unbiased, data-driven comparisons, Website: http://active-mines.findthedata.org/compare/2770-2771-2772-6438-6439-6440/Little-Limestone-Inc-vs-Custom-Ditching-Inc-vs-Frank-Bros-Inc-vs-Janesville-Sand-And-Gravel-Co-vs-Frank-Bros-Inc-vs-Paririe-Ave-Concrete-Inc, Date accessed: January 27, 2012.Flynn, Kathleen M., William H. Kirby, and Paul R. Hummel, 2006. User's Manual for Program PeakFQ, Annual Flood-Frequency Analysis Using Bulletin 17B Guidelines, Techniques and Methods 4-B4, U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey, Chapter 4 of Book4, Section B, Techniques and Methods 4-B4.Fry, J., Xian, G., Jin, S., Dewitz, J., Homer, C., Yang, L., Barnes, C., Herold, N., and Wickham, J., 2011. Completion of the 2006 National Land Cover Database for the Conterminous United States, PE&RS, Vol. 77(9):858-864. Google, 2012. Google Maps, Google, http://maps.google.com/, Date accessed: April 4, 2012.Higgins, J.J; G.E. Larson; and K.F. Higgins, 2001. Floristic Comparisons of Tallgrass Prairie Remnants Managed by Different Land Stewardships in Eastern South Dakota, Proceedings of the 17th North American Prairie Conference: 21-31, 2001, Proceedings of the 17 th North American Prairie Conference Website: http://images.library.wisc.edu/EcoNatRes/EFacs/NAPC/NAPC17/reference/econatres.napc17.jhiggins.pdf, Date accessed: August 15, 2012.Holzworth, G.C., 1972. "Mixing Heights, Wind Speeds, and Potential for Urban Air Pollution throughout the Contiguous United States", U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air Programs, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, January 1972. Hormel, 2013. Hormel Foods Corporation, Locations, Website: http://www.hormelfoods.com/About/DivisionsLocations/Locations.aspx, Date accessed: February 14, 2013.Huff, Floyd A. and James R. Angel, 1992. Rainfall Frequency Atlas of the Midwest, Midwestern Climate Analysis Center, National Weather Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and Illinois State Water Survey, A Division of the Illinois Department of Energy and Natural Resources, Bulletin 71, MCC Research Report 92-03, Midwestern Climate Center and Illinois State Water Survey, Champaign, Illinois.Hughes, Denis A., Pauline Hannart and Deidre Watkins, 2003. Continuous Baseflow Separation from Time Series of Daily and Monthly Streamflow Data, Institute for Water Research, Rhodes University, Water SA Vol. 29 No. 1, January 30, 2003. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-6Rev. 0IAEA, 1987. Siting of Research Reactors, Internati onal Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Report IAEA-TECDOC-403, Vienna, Austria. 1987.IHPA, 2013. Historic Architectural Resource Geographic Information System, Illinois Historic Preservation Agency, Website: http://gis.hpa.state.il.us/hargis/, Date accessed: February 14, 2013.Janesville School District, 2012. Welcome to the School District of Janesville, Contact Us, School/Principal Contacts, Website, http://www.janesville.k12.wi.us/default.aspx , Date accessed: July 26, 2012.Knopf, Chad and Kari Krause, 2012. A Phase I Archaeological Survey of the Proposed SHINE Medical Isotope Production Facility Near Janesville, Rock County, Wisconsin. AMEC, Louisville, Kentucky.Korshover, J., 1967. "Climatology of Stagnating Anticyclones East of the Rocky Mountains 1936-1965", U.S. Department of Health Education and Welfare Public Health Service (PHS), PHS Publication No. 999-AP-34, National Center for Air Pollution Control, Cincinnati, Ohio, 1967.LeRoux E.F., 1963. Geology and Ground-Water Resources of Rock County, Wisconsin, Geological Survey, Water-Supply Paper 1619-X, Prepared in cooperation with the Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey.MacFarlane Pheasants, Inc., 2012. MacFarlane Pheasants, Inc., Website: http://www.pheasant.com/Home/tabid/38/Default.aspx, Date accessed: June 22, 2012.MHS, 2012a. Mercy Clinic South, Mercy Health System, Website: http://www.mercyhealthsystem.org/body.cfm?xyzpdqabc=0&id=10&acti on=detail&ref=42 , Date accessed: April 4, 2012.
MHS, 2012b. Mercy Hospital and Trauma Center, Mercy Health System, Website: http://www.mercyhealthsystem.org/body.cfm?xyzpdqabc=0&id=10&acti on=detail&ref=54 , Date accessed: April 4, 2012.Moran, J. M. and E. J. Hopkins, 2002. Wisconsin's Weather and Climate, The University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, Wisconsin, 2002. NAIP, 2010a. USDA NAIP Imagery. Website: http://www.fsa.usda.gov/FSA/apfoapp?area=home&subject=prog&topic=nai, Date accessed: August 15, 2012.NAIP, 2010b. The National Map Seamless Server Viewer, U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agriculture Imagery Program. Website: http://seamless.usgs.gov/website/seamless/viewer.htm, Date accessed: April 6, 2012. NCDC, 1960. Storm Data, November 1960, Volume 2 No. 11, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-7Rev. 0NCDC, 1961. Storm Data, September 1961, Volume 3 No. 9, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 1967a. Storm Data, April 1967, Volume 9 No. 4, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. NCDC, 1967b. Storm Data, August 1967, Volume 9 No. 8, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 1970. Storm Data, October 1970, Volume 12 No. 10, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. NCDC, 1971. Storm Data, November 1971, Volume 13 No. 11, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 1975. Storm Data, June 1975 Volume 17 No. 6, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. NCDC, 1980. Storm Data, June 1980, Volume 22 No. 6, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 1988. Storm Data, May 1988, Volume 30 No. 5, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. NCDC, 1991. Storm Data, March 1991, Volume 33 No. 3, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 1992. Storm Data, June 1992, Volume 34 No. 6, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. NCDC, 1996a. Daily Weather Maps, Weekly Series, July 15-21, 1996, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: October, 2011.NCDC, 1996b. International Station Meteorological Climate Summary, Ver 4.0, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ .NCDC, 1997. Storm Data, July 1996, Volume 38 No. 7, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. NCDC, 1998. Storm Data, June 1998, Volume 40 No. 6, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-8Rev. 0NCDC, 1999. Daily Weather Maps, Weekly Series, December 28 1998 - January 3, 1999, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011. NCDC, 2000. Storm Data, January 1999, Volume 41 No. 1, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 2001a. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Arboretum Univ Wis, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011. NCDC, 2001b. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Arlington Univ Farm, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011. NCDC, 2001c. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Baraboo, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011.
NCDC, 2001d. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Beaver Dam, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011. NCDC, 2001e. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Beloit, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011.
NCDC, 2001f. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Brodhead, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011. NCDC, 2001g. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Charmany Farm, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011. NCDC, 2001h. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Dalton, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011.
NCDC, 2001i. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, DeKalb, IL, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 2001j. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Fond du Lac, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-9Rev. 0NCDC, 2001k. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Fort Atkinson, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011. NCDC, 2001l. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Hartford 2 W, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011. NCDC, 2001m. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Horicon, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011.
NCDC, 2001n. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Lake Geneva, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011. NCDC, 2001o. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Lake Mills, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011.
NCDC, 2001p. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Madison Dane Co AP, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011. NCDC, 2001q. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Marengo, IL, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011. NCDC, 2001r. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Oconomowoc, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011. NCDC, 2001s. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Portage, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011. NCDC, 2001t. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Prairie du Sac 2 N, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011.
NCDC, 2001u. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Rockford, IL, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011. NCDC, 2001v. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Stoughton, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-10Rev. 0NCDC, 2001w. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Watertown, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011. NCDC, 2001x. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Wisconsin Dells, WI, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ , Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 2002. Climate Atlas of the United States, Version 2.0 CD, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ .NCDC, 2005a. Data Documentation for Data Set 3280 (DSI-3280) Surface Airways Hourly, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, May 4, 2005. NCDC, 2005b. Storm Data, August 2005, Volume 47 No. 8, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 2006. Federal Climate Complex Data Documentation for Integrated Surface Data, National Climatic Data Center Air Force Combat Climatology Center Fleet Numerical Meteorology and Oceanography Detachment, Asheville, North Carolina, August 25, 2006. NCDC, 2008. Storm Data, January 2008 Volume 50 No. 1, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, Date accessed: November, 2011.NCDC, 2011a. 2010 Local Climatological Data, Annual Summary with Comparative Data, Madison, Wisconsin (KMSN), National Climatic Data Center, Asheville North Carolina, 2011. NCDC, 2011b. 2010 Local Climatological Data, Annual Summary with Comparative Data, Moline, Illinois (KMLI), National Climatic Data Center, Asheville North Carolina, 2011. NCDC, 2011c. 2010 Local Climatological Data, Annual Summary with Comparative Data, Rockford, Illinois (KRFD), National Climatic Data Center, Asheville North Carolina, 2011.
NCDC, 2011d. 2010 Local Climatological Data, Annual Summary with Comparative Data, Springfield, Illinois (KSPI), National Climatic Data Center, Asheville North Carolina, 2011. NCDC, 2011e. Climatological Data Annual Summary Illinois 2010, Volume 115, Number 13, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ .NCDC, 2011f. Climatological Data Annual Summary Wisconsin 2010, Volume 115 Number 13, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ .NCDC, 2011g. NCDC Storm Event Database, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina, Website: http://www4.ncdc.noaa.gov/cgi-wi n/wwcgi.dll?wwEvent~Storms , Date accessed: November, 2011. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-11Rev. 0NCDC, 2011h. TD3280 - Airways Surface Observations, Surface weather observations in TD 3280 digital format from 1948-2009, for NWS-Madison, WI. National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), data purchased from NCDC, Asheville, NC. NCDC, 2011i. TD 3280 - Airways Surface Observations, Surface weather observations in TD 3280 digital format from 1973-2009, for NWS-Rockford, IL. National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), data purchased from NCDC, Asheville, NC. NCDC, 2011j. TD3505 - Airways Surface Observations, Surface weather observations in TD 3505 digital format from 2005-2010, for NWS-Madison, WI. National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), data purchased from NCDC, Asheville, NC. NCDC, 2011k. TD3505 - Airways Surface Observations, Surface weather observations in TD 3505 digital format from 2005-2010, for NWS-Rockford, IL. National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), data purchased from NCDC, Asheville, NC. NCDC, 2011l. TD3505 - Airways Surface Observations, Surface weather observations in TD 3505 digital format from 2005-2010, for Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, Janesville, WI. National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), data purchased from NCDC, Asheville, NC. NCDC, 2011m. TD3505 - archive data server. Accessed from: ftp://ftp3.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/noaa/. National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), data purchased from NCDC, Asheville, NC, Date accessed: December, 2011. NCDC, 2012a. Data file "anem_elev_inf" referenced in "Data Documentation for Data Set 6421 (DSI-6421) Enhanced hourly wind station data for the contiguous United States" National Climatic Data Center, Asheville North Carolina. Website: http://www.wcc.nrcs.usda.gov/ftpref/support/climate/wind_daily/td6421.pdf . NCDC, 2012b. Data file "ISH-HISTORY.TXT" Integrated Surface Database Station History, June 2012. National Climatic Data Center, Asheville North Carolina. Website: ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/inventories/ISH-HISTORY.TXT. Date accessed: July, 2012.NLSI, 2011. Vaisala 5-Year Flash Density Map - U. S. (1996-2000), National Lightning Safety Institute (NLSI), Website: http://www.lightningsafety.com/nlsi_info/lightningmaps/US_FD_Lightning.pdf, Date accessed: December, 2011.NOAA, 1999. Air Stagnation Climatology for the United States (1948-1998), Julian X.L. Wang and J.K. Angell. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Air Resources Laboratory, Environmental Research Laboratories, Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research Silver Spring, MD 20910, April 1999.NOAA, 2012. Summary of Monthly Normals, 1981-2010, Afton, Wisconsin.NPS, 2011. Class I Area Locations, National Park Service, U.S. Department of Interior (NPS). Available from: http://www.nature.nps.gov/air/Maps/classILoc.cfm, Date accessed: December, 2011.NRC, 2012a. Sources of Radiation, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Website: http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/radiat ion/around-us/sources.html, Date accessed: April 4, 2012. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-12Rev. 0NRC, 2012b. Natural Background Sources, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Website: http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/radiation/around-us/sources/nat-bg-sources.html, Date accessed: April 4, 2012.NRC, 2012c. Man-Made Sources, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Website: http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/radiation/around-us/sources/man-made-sources.html, Date accessed: April 4, 2012.Olcott, Perry G., 1968. A Summary of Geology and Mineral and Water Resources of Rock County, Open-File Report 68-4. University of Wisconsin-Extension, Geological and Natural History Survey, Madison, Wisconsin.Olcott, Perry G., 1992. Groundwater Atlas of the United States Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin. HA 730-J, United States Geologic Survey. Omernik, J.M, S.S. Chapman, R.A. Lillie, and R.T. Dumke, 2008. Ecoregions of Wisconsin. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. May 2008. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/org/water/swims/datasets/omernik_eco/index.htm, Dated accessed: July 24, 2012.Rand McNally, 1982. Goode's World Atlas, 16th edition, Rand McNally & Company, Skokie, Illinois, 1982. Rand McNally, 2005. Goode's World Atlas, 21st edition , Rand McNally & Company, Skokie, Illinois, 2005. Robertson, Ken, 2008. The Tallgrass Prairie in Illinois, Illinois Natural History Survey. Website: http://www.inhs.uiuc.edu/~kenr/tallgrass.html, Date accessed: August 6, 2012.Rock County, 2005. Rock County Floodplain Zoning, Chapter 32 of the Code of Ordinances, Adopted July 14, 2005, Resolution 05-6B-248, Amended June 26, 2008, Resolution 08-6A-024, and Amended August 28, 2008, Resolution 08-8A-060.Rock County, 2009. Rock County Comprehensive Plan 2035, Rock County, WI, http://www.co.rock.wi.us/images/w eb_documents/departments/pl anning_developm ent/plans/comprehensive_plan_2035/2035_final_II_1_issues_opportunities.pdf .Rock County, 2011. Rock County GIS Website. Website: http://199.233.45.152/Rock/, Date accessed: August 15, 2012. Rock County, 2012a. County Facts, Rock County, Wisconsin Website: http://www.co.rock.wi.us , Date accessed: January, 2012. Rock County, 2012b. Magnolia Bluff State Natural Area, Rock County, Wisconsin Website: http://www.co.rock.wi.us/, Date accessed: January, 2012.Rock County, 2012c. Rock County Parks-Happy Hollow Park. State of Wisconsin, Rock County, Website: http://www.co.rock.wi.us/images/web_documents/departments/parks/park_happy_hollow/happy_hollow_brochure.pdf, Date accessed: August 13, 2012 Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-13Rev. 0Rock County Development Alliance, 2011. Rock County Bond Rating Data, Website: http://www.rockcountyalliance.com/Portals/1/Aug%202011%20Bond%20Rating%20ED%20Report.pdf , Date accessed: March 1, 2012.Rock County Planning, Economic & Community Development Agency, 2009 . Rock County Comprehensive Plan 2035, Map 3.2, Website: http://www.co.rock.wi.us/images/web_documents/departments/planning_development/plans/comprehensive_plan_2035/2035_final_table_of_contents.pdf, Adopted September 9, 2009.Sloto, Ronald A. and Michele Y. Crouse, 1996. HYSEP: A Computer Program for Streamflow Hydrograph Separation and Analysis, U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 96-4040.Smith, Daryl D., 1990. Tallgrass Prairie Settlement: Prelude to Demise of the Tallgrass Ecosystem, Proceedings of the 12th North American Prairie Conference: 195-200, 1990, Proceedings of the 12th North American Prairie Conference, Website: http://images.library.wisc.edu/EcoNatRes/EFacs/NAPC/NAPC12/reference/econatres.napc12.dsmith.pdf, Date accessed: August 15, 2012.Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, 2004. Noise Contour Map, Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, Land Use Drawing, prepared by Mead & Hunt. Latest revision date, August, 2004. Date accessed: July 3, 2012.Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, 2012a. Airport, Facilities and Facts, Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, Website: http://www.jvlairport.com/Air port/FacilitiesFacts.aspx , Date accessed: April 2, 2012.Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, 2012b. Airport Facilities and Facts, Website: http://www.jvlairport.com/Airport/FacilitiesFacts.aspx, Date accessed: July 12, 2012.Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, 2012c. General Aviation Terminal Project Advances, Website: http://www.jvlairport.com/NewsUpdates/CapitalImprovementPlans.aspx, Date accessed: July 20, 2012. SSURGO, 2010. Soil Survey Staff, NRCS,USDA, SSUR GO Database for Rock County, WI. Website: http://soildatamart.nrcs.usda.gov, Date accessed: August 15, 2012.Stern, A.C., 1973. "Fundamentals of Air Pollution", Academic Press, New York, New York, 1973.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.SWWDB, 2009. Rock County Profile, Website: http://www.swwdb.org/PDFs/Region/Rock%20County%20Profile%20-%20Revised%2011-23-09.pdf, Date accessed: June 7, 2012. TBEES, 2011. Byron Nuclear Generating Station Units 1 and 2: Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report, 1 January Through 31 December 2010, ADAMS Database Accession Number ML11137A061, Exelon Nuclear, May 13, 2011. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-14Rev. 0Trewartha, G. T., 1954. An Introduction to Climate, McGraw Hill Book Company, New York, New York, 1954.Trewartha, G. T., 1961. The Earth's Problem Climates, The University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, Wisconsin, 1961. Turner, D.B, 1964. A Diffusion Model for an Urban Area, Journal of Applied Meteorology, Vol. 3, pp 83-91. February, 1964. USACE, 2009. Interim Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Northcentral and Northeast Region, ERDC/EL TR-09-19, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, October 2009.USCB, 2000a. Summary File 1, American FactFinder, U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, Website: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml . Date accessed: June 7, 2012.USCB, 2000b. Summary File 3, American FactFinder, U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S.Census Bureau, Website: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml, Date accessed: June 7, 2012.USCB, 2008-2010. Three Year American Community Survey (ACS), American Factfinder, U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, Website: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml, Date accessed: June14, 2012.USCB, 2010a. 2010 Census TIGER/Line Shapefiles. U.S. Census Bureau, Geography Division, Geographic Productions Branch, Website: http://www.census.gov/geo/www/tiger/tgrshp2010/tgrshp2010.html, Date accessed: August 15, 2012.USCB, 2010b. 2010 Census TIGER/Line Shapefiles, United States Census Bureau, Geography Division, Geographic Productions Branch, Website: http://www.census.gov/geo/www/tiger/tgrshp2010/tgrshp2010.html Date Accessed: August 15, 2012.USCB, 2010c. Demographic Profile 1, American Factfinder http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml, Date accessed: April 25, 2012.USCB, 2010d. Summary File 1, American FactFinder, U.S. Department of Commerce, US Census Bureau, Website: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml , Date accessed: June 7, 2012.USCB, 2011. County and City Data Book: 2007, Website: http://www.census.gov/prod/www/abs/ccdb07.html, Date accessed: November, 2011.USCB, 2012. Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) System web page: http://www.census.gov/epcd/ec97brdg/E97B1325.HTM, Date accessed: December 20, 2012. USDA NRCS, 2012a. SSURGO Database for Rock County, WI, Soil Data Mart. Website: http://soildatamart.nrcs.usda.gov, Date accessed: August 15, 2012. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-15Rev. 0USDA NRCS, 2012b. Web Soil Survey. Website: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/HomePage.htm, Date accessed: August 13, 2012USDA, 1998. Rural Utilities Service Summary of Items of Engineering Interest, U. S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), August, 1998.USDA, 2011. Census of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Website: http://www.nass.usda.gov/Dataandstatistics/index.asp. Date accessed: June 24, 2012.USDA-SCS, 1974. Soil Survey of Rock County, Wisconsin. In cooperation with University of Wisconsin Department of Soil Science, Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey and the Wisconsin Agricultural Experiment Station, July 1974. USDOC, 1978. Probable Maximum Precipitation Estimates, United States East of the 105th Meridian, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of the Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Department of Commerce (USDOC), Hydrometeorological Report No. 51. Washington, D.C. 1978. USDOI-BIA, 2012. Agency Letter: Map of All Ho-Chunk Trust Lands within a 50-Mile Radius of the Proposed SHINE Isotope Facility of Janesville WI, U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Great Lakes Agency, March 2012. USDOI-BLM, 1984. Visual Resource Inventory Manual H-8410-1, U.S. Department of Land Management, Bureau of Land Management, January 1986.
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, 1999. PCRAMMET.FOR," FORTRAN program, version 99169. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Technology Transfer Networks Support Center for Regulatory Atmospheric Modeling. Computer code available from: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/metobsdata_procaccprogs.htm, June, 1999. USEPA. 2008. Clean Watersheds Needs Survey, 2008 Data and Reports, Detailed listing of Wastewater Treatment Plant Flows for State of Wisconsin, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Website: http://water.epa.gov/scitech/datait/databases/cwns/2008reportdata.cfm, Date accessed: July 19, 2012. USEPA, 2009. Environmental Radiation Data, Report 139, July - September 2009, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Radiation and Indoor Air.
USEPA, 2011. Non-Attainment Status for Each County by year in Wisconsin as of August 30, 2011. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), Website: http://www.epa.gov/oaqps001/greenbk/anay_wi.html, Date accessed: December, 2011. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-16Rev. 0USEPA, 2012a. Level III and IV Ecoregions of the Wisconsin U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Western Ecology Division, Level III and IV Ecoregions of the Continental United States, Website: http://www.epa.gov/wed/pages/ecoregions/level_iii_iv.htm, Date accessed: March 7, 2012.USEPA, 2012b. http://cfpub.epa.gov/surf/huc.cfm?huc_code=07090001. Date accessed: August 13, 2012.
USEPA, 2012c. Designated Sole Source Aqui fers in EPA Region V, Website:
(http://www.epa.gov/safewater/sourcewater/pubs/qrg_ssamap_reg5.pdf), Date accessed: October 5, 2012.
USEPA, 2012d. Ecoregion Maps and GIS Resources, USEPA Western Ecology Division, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Website: http://www.epa.gov/wed/pages/ ecoregions.htm, Date accessed: July 24, 2012. USEPA, 2012e. EnviroMapper for Envirofacts, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Website: http://www.epa.gov/emefdata/em4ef.html?ve=11,42.70109176635742,-89.08168029785156&pText=Janesville,%20WIUSFWS, 2012. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Resource Review and Input Response Letter from Peter J. Fasbender dated January 25, 2012.USGS, 1980. Rockford, Illinois; Wisconsin (Eastern U. S.) 1:250,000 Series (Topographic) Map, U. S. Geological Survey (USGS), Reston, Virginia 1980.USGS, 1981. U.S. Geological Survey Janesville quadrangle,Wisconsin [map].1:24,000. 7.5 Minute Series.Washington D.C.: USGS, 1981. USGS, 2007. Protecting Wisconsin's Groundwater Through Comprehensive Planning, Rock County, U.S. Geological Survey, Website: http://wi.water.usgs.gov/gwcomp/find/rock/ index_full.html, Date accessed: July 19,2012.USGS, 2012a. Volcano Environments, U.S. Geological Survey, Website: http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/volc/environments.html, Date accessed: September 11, 2012.USGS, 2012b. National Water Information System: Web Interface: http://waterdata.usgs.gov/wi/ nwis/sw, Date accessed: August 13, 2012.USGS, 2012c. Protecting Wisconsin's Groundwater Through Comprehensive Planning, Website: (http://wi.water.usgs.gov/gwcomp/find/rock/index_full.html), Date accessed: December 21, 2012.USGS, 2012d. North American Breeding Bird Survey-Route 91320 (Beloit), 1966-2007. United States Geological Survey, Website: http://www.mgr-pwrc.usgs.gov /cgi-bin.rtena226.pl?91320 , Date accessed: February 2, 2012.UWNR, 2011a. University of Wisconsin - Issuance of Renewed Facility License No. R-74 for the University of Wisconsin Nuclear Reactor (TAC. No. ME1585), ADAMS Database Accession Number ML102370104, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, March 25, 2011. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-17Rev. 0UWNR, 2011b. University of Wisconsin - Madison Nuclear Reactor Laboratory Ltr. Enclosing Copy of 2010-2011 Annual Report as Required by Technical Specification 6.7.1 (1), ADAMS Database Accession Number ML11216A303, University of Wisconsin Nuclear Reactor, August 1, 2011.Vandewalle & Associates, 2006. City of Beloit 2006-2010 Parks and Open Space Plan, Adopted: November 20, 2006. Website: http://www.ci.beloit.wi.us/vertical/sites/%7B4AECD64A-01FA-4C24-8F53-D3281732C6AB%7D/uploads/%7B6900F9BC-BC53-49B3-99F4-B0C1670991FA%7D.PDF, Date accessed: July 26, 2012.Vandewalle & Associates, 2009a. City of Janesville Comprehensive Plan, Volume 1: Existing Conditions Report , Adopted on March 9, 2009, Website: http://www.ci.janesvi lle.wi.us/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=1449, Date accessed: July 26, 2012.Vandewalle & Associates, 2009b. City of Janesville Comprehensive Plan, Volume 2: Policies and Recommendations, 2009, March 2009. Walker, J.F. and W.R. Krug, 2003. Flood-Frequency Characteristics of Wisconsin Streams, Water-Resources Investigations Report 03-4250. U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Wisconsin Department of Transportation. WBBA, 2012. Wisconsin Breeding Bird Atlas, Breeding Birds from the Janesville East Quad and the Janesville West Quad, 1995-2000. University of Wisconsin-Green Bay, Website: http://www.uwgb.edu/birds/wbba/quadlist.asp, Date accessed: February 2, 2012. WDNR, 2009. State Wildlife Areas, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/org/land/wildlife/wildlife_areas/ , Date accessed: June 14, 2012. WDNR, 2010a. DNR Managed Lands web mapping application. Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/Lands/DMLmap/, Date accessed: August 15, 2012. WDNR, 2010b. Regulated Terrestrial Invasive Plants in WI, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, DNR PUB-FR-464-2010, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/files/pdf/pubs/fr/FR0464.pdf, Date accessed: August 6, 2012. WDNR, 2011a. Air Monitoring Network Plan 2012, June 2011. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR), Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/air/pdf/2012_Network_Plan_FINAL.pdf , Date accessed: December, 2012 .WDNR, 2011b. Water Use Registration and Reporting, June 2011, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/WaterUse/documents/RegReportFactSheet.pdf, Date accessed: February 14, 2013. WDNR, 2012a. Ozone Non Attainment Areas, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR), Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/air/aq/ozone/nonattainment.htm#2007request, Date accessed: January, 2012. WDNR, 2012b. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Wisconsin Lakes web page - maps and inventory, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/lakes/, Date accessed: August 15, 2012. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-18Rev. 0WDNR, 2012c. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Endangered Resources Review (ERR#12-020), Proposed SHINE Medial Technologies Industrial Development, Town of Janesville, Rock County, WI. WDNR, 2012d. Rock River Prairie State Natural Area, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/org/land/er/sna/index.asp?SNA=289, Date accessed: August13, 2012 WDNR, 2012e. WDNR Fish Mapping Application. Search Criteria: >1980, Rock River, Rock County. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: http://infotrek.er.usgs.gov/ fishmap, Date accessed: July 11, 2012. WDNR, 2012f. Wisconsin Wildlife Primer: Reptiles and Amphibians. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/org/land/wildlife/PUBL/wildlifeprimam.pdf, Date accessed: August 15, 2012. WDNR, 2012g. Blanding's Turtle (Emydoidea blandingii). Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/EndangeredResources/Animals.asp?mode=detail&SpecCode=ARAAD04010. Date accessed: August 14, 2012. WDNR, 2012h. Invasives Rule - NR 40, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/invasives/classification.html, Date accessed: August 6, 2012.WHS, 2012a. Response to AMEC GIS Data Information Request for Properties within 10-mile Radius of SHINE Site, Wisconsin Historical Society.WHS, 2012b, Request for SHPO Comment and Consultation on a Federal Undertaking, Wisconsin Historical Society February 16, 2012.WHS, 2013. Wisconsin National Register of Historic Properties, Wisconsin Historical Society, Website: http://www.wisconsinhistory.org/hp/register/, Date accessed: February 13, 2013.Will-Wolf, S, and T.C. Montague, 1994. Landscape and Environmental Constraints on the Distribution of Presettlement Savannas and Prairies in Southern Wisconsin, Proceedings, North American Conference on Savannas and Barrens. Website: http://www.epa.gov/ecopage/upland/oak/oak94/Proceedings/Will-wolf.html, Date accessed: August 6, 2012.Wisconsin Department of Health Services, 2010. Rock County Environmental Health Profile, 2010, Website: http://www.dhs.wisconsin.gov/epht/CHP/Rock_profile.pdf .Wisconsin Department of Health Services, 2012. Rock County Environmental Health Profile, Website: http://www.dhs.wisconsin.gov/epht/CHP/Rock_profile.pdf, October 2010.Wisconsin Geological Survey, 2011. Educational Series 51, Available at: http://wisconsingeologicalsurvey.org/pdfs/espdf/ES51.pdf, Date accessed: November 8, 2012Wisconsin State Climatology Office, 2006. Monthly Historical State Climate Summaries, South Central Wisconsin Divisional Average Precipitation (inches), Website: http://www.aos.wisc.edu/~sco/clim-history/division/4708-R.html, Date accessed: August 15, 2012. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-19Rev. 0WisDOT, 2010. 2010, Lower Half, City of Janesville, Rock County, Daily Traffic Volume Map, Wisconsin Department of Transportation, Website: http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/travel/counts/docs/rock/janesville-2-2010.pdf , Date accessed: March 1, 2012.Woods, A.J., J.M. Omernik, C.L. Pederson, and B.C. Moran. 2006. Level III and IV Ecoregions of Illinois, September 2006.Zaporozec, Alexander, 1982. Ground-Water Quality of Rock County, Wisconsin, Information Circular Number 41, Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey in cooperation with Rock County Division Of Environmental Health, March 1982.19.7.4IMPACTS OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION, OPERATIONS, AND DECOMMISSIONINGAirNav, 2013. Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, Website: http://www.airnav.com/airport/KJVL, Date accessed: January 16, 2013.Beloit Daily News, 2011. High-tech firm picks Beloit for $194 million development, Website: http://www.beloitdailynews.com/news/top_news/high-tech-firm-picks-beloit-for-million-d/, Date accessed: August 21, 2012.BLS, 2009. May 2009 Metropolitan and Nonmetropolitan Area Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Website: http://www.bls.gov/oes/2009/may/oes_27500.html, Date accessed: July 19, 2012.BLS, 2011. May 2009 Metropolitan and Nonmetropolitan Area Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Website: http://stat.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_27500.html, Date accessed: June 10, 2012.Bureau of Indian Affairs, 2012. Indian Reservations in the Continental United States, Website: http://www.nps.gov/nagpra/DOCUMENTS/RESERV.PDF, Date accessed: August 30, 2012. California Energy Commission, 2009. Orange Grove Energy, L.P., Orange Grove Project, Application for Certification (08-AFC-4), San Diego County, Volume 3, Appendix 6.12 B, April 2009.Chepesiuk, Ron, 2009. Missing the Dark, Health Effects of Light Pollution, Environmental Health Perspectives, Volume 117, Number 1, January 2009.City of Janesville, 2012a. Tax Increment Finance District No. 35 Project Plan, Adopted August 22, 2011, Amendment No. 1, February 13, 2012.City of Janesville, 2012b. Tax Increment Finance District No. 35 Project Plan. Amendment No. 1, Website: http://www.ci.janesville.wi.us/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=1463, Date accessed: October 9, 2012. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies19.7-20Rev. 1CEQ, 1997. Considering Cumulative Effects Under the National Environmental Policy Act, Council on Environmental Quality, Executive Office of the President.DOE, 2012. Environmental Assessment for Northstar Medical Technologies LLC Commercial Domestic Production of the Medical Isotope Molybdenum-99 (DOE/EA-1929), U.S. Department of Energy, Website: http://energy.gov/sites/prod /files/EA-1929-FEA-2012.pdf , Date accessed: October 9, 2012. DOR, 2012. County and Municipal Revenues and Expenditures 2010, Bulletin No. 110, January 2012, Website: http://www.revenue.wi.gov/ slf/cotvc/cmreb10.pdf, Date accessed: August 19, 2012.DPI, 2012a. 2011-2012 Staff to Students Ratio, Website: http://data.dpi.state.wi.us/data/StaffPage.aspx?OrgLevel=st&GraphFile=BlankPageUrl&, Date accessed: October 22, 2012.DPI, 2012b. 2011-2012 Public Enrollment by County by District by School by Gender, Website: http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/lbstat/pubdata2.html, Date accessed: June 4, 2012.Fry, J., Xian, G., Jin, S., Dewitz, J., Homer, C., Yang, L., Barnes, C., Herold, N., and Wickham, J., 2011. National Land Cover Database 2006, Land Cover Change 2001/2006, National Land Cover Database for the Conterminous United States, PE&RS, Volume 77(9):858-864, September 2011.Hastings, 2011. Hastings HVAC Bulletin No. IRHS-1. Ha stings HVAC, Hastings, NE, December 2011, 20 pp, Website: http://www.hastingshvac.com/UserFiles/File/Bulletin%20IRHS-1%20December%202011.pdf , Date accessed: October 3, 2012.JSD, 2011a. Janesville School District Strategic Plan, Website: http://www.janesv ille.k12.wi.us/Portals/1/Strategic_Plan_Action_Steps_and_Dates_Final_w-o_Action_Steps%5B1%5D.pdf , Date accessed: October 18, 2012.JSD, 2011b. School District of Janesville, 2011-12 Budget, Website, http://www.janesville.k12.wi.us/Portals/1/Budget%202011-12.pdf,Date accessed: March 1, 2013.Karl, T. R., J.M. Melillo, and T.C. Peterson, eds., 2009. Global Climate Change Impacts, Cambridge University Press.Mercy Health System, 2012a. Mercy Clinic South, Website: http://www.mercyhealthsystem.org/body.cfm?xyzpdqabc=0&id=10&action=detail&ref=42 , Date accessed: October 16, 2012.Mercy Health System, 2012b. Mercy Hospital and Trauma Center, Website: http://www.mercyhealthsystem.org/body.cfm?xyz pdqabc=0&id=10&action=detail&ref=54, Date accessed: October 16, 2012. NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, 2012. NorthStar Medical Technologies, Hendricks Commercial Properties Sign Agreement for Beloit Facility Development, Website: http://www.northstarnm.com/index.php?module=cms&page=31, Date accessed: October 9, 2012. NRC, 1977. Methods for Estimating Atmospheric Transport and Dispersion of Gaseous Effluents in Routine Releases from Light-Water-Cooled Reactors, Regulatory Guide 1.111, Revision 1, U.S.Nuclear Regulatory Commission, July 1977. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies19.7-21Rev. 1NRC, 2004. Policy Statement on the Treatment of Environmental Justice Matters in NRC Regulatory and Licensing Actions (69 FR 52040), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, August 24, 2004. NRC, 2009. Office Instruction No. LIC 203, Revision 2, Procedural Guidance for Preparing Environmental Assessments and Considering Envi ronmental Issues, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, February 17, 2009.Ogden, L.J.E., 1996. Collision Course: The Hazards of Lighted Structures and Windows to Migrating Birds, Published by World Wildlife Fund Canada and the Fatal Light Awareness Program, September 1996.Olcott, Perry G., 1969. A Summary of Geology and Mineral and Water Resources of Rock County, Open-File Report 69-3, Geological and Natural History Survey.PNNL, 2012. GENII Version 2 Users' Guide, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, PNNL-14583, Revision4, September 2012.Reznor, 2002. The Reznor Gas-Fired Space Heating Handbook, Thomas & Betts Corp., 76 pp., Website: www.rezspec.com, Date accessed: October 3, 2012.State of Wisconsin Bureau of Migrant Labor Services, 2011. Migrant Population Report, Website: http://dwd.wisconsin.gov/migrants/pdf/migrantpoprep2011.pdf, Date accessed: September 4, 2012.Town of Rock, 2006. Official Zoning Map, Rock County Geographic Information Systems (GIS), Planning, Economic, and Community Development Agency, Website: http://199.233.45.158/images/web_documents/departments/planning_development/zoning_maps/trockzoning.pdf , Date accessed: October 03, 2012.Town of Rock, 2008. Zoning Ordinance Town of Rock, Rock County, Wisconsin, Website: http://www.tn.rock.wi.gov/docview.asp?docid=4000&locid=181, Date accessed: October 29, 2012.University of Wisconsin, 2009. Environmentally friendly upgrade planned for Charter Street plant, Website: http://www.news.wisc.edu/16755, Date accessed: October 9, 2012.USCB, 2006-2010. Table B17017, Poverty Status in the Past 12 Months by Household Type by Age of Householder, 2010 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, American Factfinder, Website: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml, Date accessed: August 20, 2012. USCB, 2010a. Demographic Profile 1, American Factfinder, Website: http://factfinder 2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml, Date accessed: April 25, 2012. USCB, 2010b. Summary File 1: Table P14, Sex by Age for the Population under 20 Years, American FactFinder, Website: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/js f/pages/index.xhtml, Date accessed: October 22, 2012. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-22Rev. 0USCB, 2010c. Demographic Profile 1, Profile of General Population and Housing Characteristics: 2010, American Factfinder, Website: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml. Date accessed: August 20, 2012. USEPA, 1995. Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors - Volume I: Stationary Point and Area Sources (AP-42), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Fifth Edition, January 1995. USEPA, 2012. U.S. Greenhouse Gas Inventory Report, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Website: http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/usinventoryreport.html , Date accessed: September 5, 2012.USFWS, 2012. Resource Review and Input Response Letter from Peter J. Fasbender dated January 25, 2012.USGS, 2012. The USGS Water Science School, Website: http://ga.water.usgs.gov/edu/qa-home-percapita.html, Date accessed: October 18, 2012. WDNR, 2010a. Air Pollution Control Operation Permit. West Campus Cogeneration Facility, Permit No. 113151500-P01, September 8, 2010.
WDNR, 2010b. Air Pollution Control Operation Permit, Generac Power Systems-Whitewater, Permit No. 128105230-P20, November 22, 2010.
WDNR, 2011a. PM2.5 Regional Background Concentrations (Draft) Memorandum from John Roth, dated April 15, 2011. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/AirPermits/documents/RegionalBackgroundConcentrationsIncDRAFTPM25.pdf, Date accessed: August 2012. WDNR, 2011b. Air Pollution Control Operation Permit, Alliant Energy- WP&L Turtle Generating Facility, Permit No. 154121880-P20, June 30, 2011. WDNR, 2011c. Air Pollution Control Operation Permit, University of Wisconsin Madison-Charter St., Permit No. 113008390-P04, November 8, 2011. WDNR, 2012a. Policy for Dispersion Modeling of Intermittent Operating Units, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Memorandum from Andrew Stewart dated March 6, 2012, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/AirPermits/documents/IntermittentSources2012.pdf , Date accessed: October 1, 2012. WDNR, 2012b. Endangered Resources Review (ERR #12-020), Proposed SHINE Medial Technologies Industrial Development, Town of Janesville, Rock County, WI. WDNR, 2012c. Air Pollution Control Construction Permit, University of Wisconsin Madison-Charter St., Permit No. 11-SDD-099, February 8, 2012. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-23Rev. 0WDNR, 2012d. Air Pollution Control Construction Permit, United Ethanol, LLC, Permit No. 11-DCF-056, May 2, 2012. WDNR, 2012e. Air Pollution Control Construction a nd Operation Permit, Kraft Foods Global, Inc.-Madison, Permit Nos. 09-SSS-127-R1 and 113004650-P13, June 27, 2012.WHS, 2012. Wisconsin Historical Society, Response Received from Mr. Dan Duchrow re "Request for SHPO Comment and Consultation on a Federal Undertaking," dated March 7, 2012.Wisconsin Golf Courses, 2013. Glen Erin Golf Course Janesville WI, Website: http://www.gleneringolf.com/index.shtml, Date accessed: January 16, 2013.19.7.5ALTERNATIVESAmerican Engineering Testing, Inc., 2011. Report of Subsurface Exploration.B&W TSG, 2009a. B&W and Covidien to develop U.S. source of key medical isotope, Babcock & Wilcox Technical Services Group Inc., January 26, 2009, Website: http://www.babcock.com/news_and_events/2009/20090126a.html, Date accessed: February 3, 2012.B&W TSG, 2009b. Medical Isotope Production System, Babcock & Wilcox Technical Services Group Inc., 2011, Website: http://www.babcock.com/library/pdf/PS-301-110.pdf, Date accessed: February 3, 2012.B&W TSG, 2009c. B&W Medical Isotope Production System, Meeting with USNRC, Babcock & Wilcox Technical Services Group Inc., July 2009, Obtained from NRC Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS), ML091900270.Broihahn, 2011. Historic and Archaeological Resource Identification, Correspondence from John Broihahn, Wisconsin State Archeologist, to Katrina Pitas, SHINE Medical Technologies, November 1, 2011. City of Chippewa Falls, 2011. Zoning Map, Chippewa Falls Website: http://www.chippewafalls-wi.gov/Maps/Zoning_map.pdf, Date accessed: December 2011.City of Stevens Point, 2011a. Comprehensive Plan, Stevens Point Website: http://www.co.portage.wi.us/Comprehensive%20Plan/Planning%20Program/Stevens%20Point/ Stevens%20Point.html, Date accessed: December 2011.City of Stevens Point, 2011b. Report of City Plan Commission, Website: http://stevenspoint.com/archives/47/minutesPlan20111205.pdf , Date accessed: December 2011.City of Stevens Point, 2012a. City Plan Commission, Website: http://stevenspoint.com/archives/36/agendaPlan20120103b.pdf , Date accessed: September 2012.City of Stevens Point, 2012b. Stevens Point receives $225,640 from Focus on Energy, Website: http://www.ci.stevens-point.wi.us/CivicAlerts.aspx?AID=799&ARC=1671 , Date accessed: September 2012. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-24Rev. 0City of Stevens Point, 2012c. Website: http://stevenspoint.com, Date accessed: September 2012. CLS, 2012. Canadian Light Source, Inc., Medical Isotopes Backgrounder: Producing medical isotopes using X-rays, January 19, 2012, Website: http://www.lightsource.ca/medicalisotopes/ , Date accessed: April 17, 2012. DOE, 2012. Environmental Assessment for NorthStar Medical Technologies LLC Commercial Domestic Production of Medical Isotope Molybdenum-99 (EA-1929), U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation/Global Threat Reduction Initiative, August 2012.EDI, 2011. New "aftermarket services" facility will increase EDI's flat dies rework capabilities and reduce lead times for customers, Website: http://www.extrusiondies.com/news_leterature.phtml#1, Date accessed: September 17, 2012.Environmental Leader, LLC, 2008. Neenah paper to use biomass at Whiting Mill, Website: http://www.environmentalleader.com/2008/08/20/neenah-paper-to-use-biomass-at-whiting-mill/ , Date accessed: September 17, 2012. EOG Resources, 2012. EOG resources reports first quarter 2012 results and raises 2012 liquids production growth target, Website: http://investor.shareholder.com/eogresources/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=671644, Date accessed: September 17, 2012. GEH, 2010. Moly-99 Project Update for the US NRC August 2011, GE Hitach i Nuclear Energy, Obtained from NRC ADAMS, ML112240806.Greenberg and Brown, 1986. Bedrock Geology of Portage County, Wisconsin, Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey (WGNHS) Map 86-3. HI, 2011. Health Imaging, Northstar chooses Wisconsin for isotope production, June 23, 2011, Website: http://www.healthimaging.com/index.php?option=com_articles&view=article&id=28423:northstar-chooses-wisconsin-for-isotope-production, Date accessed: April 17, 2012.iMakeSense, LLC, 2010. Revelations Architects/Builders Corporation News, Website: http://www.revarch.com/news.html, Date accessed: September 17, 2012.Jerde, 2011. Columbia Energy Center state's number 1 mercury emitter, Website: http://www.wiscnews.com/portagedailyregister /news/article_bdc dca56-11a5-11e1-886d-001cc4c03286.html, Date accessed: September 17, 2012. Knolls, 2002. Nuclides and Isotopes, 16th edition, Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory, 2002.McCarthy, 2011. United State EPA Memorandum: Implementation of the Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard, Website: http://www.4cleanair.org/Documents/ImplementationoftheOzoneNAAQS92211.pdf , Date accessed: September 17, 2012.Mudrey et al., 1982. Bedrock Geologic Map of Wisconsin, University of Wisconsin Extension, Geological and Natural History Survey. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-25Rev. 0NAIP, 2010a. USDA NAIP Imagery. Website: http://www.fsa.usda.gov/FSA/apfoapp?area=home&subject=prog&topic=nai, Date accessed: August 15, 2012.National Atlas of the United States, 2012. Wisconsin Federal Lands and Indian Reservations, Website: http://nationalatlas.gov/printable/fedlands.html, Date accessed: September 14, 2012.NM, 2010. Nuclear Monitor, Medical Radioisotopes Production without a Nuclear Reactor, No.710/711, June 4, 2010. NRC, 2004. Policy Statement on the Treatment of Environmental Justice Matters in NRC Regulatory and Licensing Actions, 69 FR 52040, August 24, 2004. NRC, 2011. NRC Background Information, Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors Annual Meeting, May 2011.
NRCS, 2012. Natural Resource Conservation Service Soil Survey Website: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/HomePage.htm, Date accessed: July 2012.Portage County, 2012a. Zoning Maps, Portage County Website: http://www.co.portage.wi.us/planningzoning/zoning_maps.htm, Date accessed: July 2012.Portage County, 2012b. Comprehensive Plan, Portage County Website: http://www.co.portage.wi.u s/Comprehensive%20Plan/Pl anning%20Program/Index.html, Date accessed: July 2012. Rubenzer, 2011. City of Chippewa Falls Board of Public Works Meeting Minutes, Website: http://www.chippewafalls-wi.gov/m eeting%20minutes/2011/B oard%20of%20Public%20Works/May%209%20%202011.pdf, Date accessed: September 17, 2012.The Chippewa Herald, 2009. County Loses $1.8 million on Wissota Green foreclosure, Website: http://chippewa.com/news/county-loses-million-on-wissota-green-foreclosure/article_08701daa-ea8f-54af-ad5b-f8dfbe1b7f97.html, Date accessed: September 17, 2012. The Chippewa Herald, 2012. EOG sand operation underway, Website: http://chippewa.com/news/local/eog-sand-operation-underway/article_8f360c64-398f-11e1-91cf-001871e3ce6c.html , Date accessed: September 17, 2012. ThinkResources, Inc. 2008. Wisconsin Power Plants, Website: http://www.powerplantjobs.com/ppj.nsf/powerplants1?openform&cat=wi&Count=500, Date accessed: September 17, 2012.UM, 2006a. Redacted - Safety Analysis Report for the University of Missouri-Columbia Application for License Renewal Application - (Volume 1 of 2), University of Missouri-Columbia, August 18, 2006. Obtained from NRC ADAMS, ML092110573.UM, 2006b. MURR Environmental Report for License Renewal, Facility License No. R-103, Docket No. 50-186, University of Missouri-Columbia, August 2006. Obtained from NRC ADAMS, ML062540121. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-26Rev. 0USCB, 2012a. Demographic Profile 1: Profile of General Population and Housing, American Factfinder, Website: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml , Date accessed: August 19, 2012.USCB, 2012b. Chippewa County Quick Facts , Website:http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/55/55017.html, Date accessed: September 6, 2012.USCB, 2012c. Five Year American Community Survey Estimates, Table 17017: Poverty Status in the Past 12 Months by Household Type by Age of Householder, Summary File Retrieval Tool, Website: http://www.census.gov/acs/www/data_documentation /summary_file/, Date accessed: August 22, 2012.USCB, 2012d. Summary File 1, P5: Hispanic or Latino Origin by Race, American Factfinder, Website: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml, Date accessed: August 19, 2012.USCB, 2012e. Portage County Quick Facts , Website:http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/55/55097.html, Date accessed: September 6, 2012. USEPA, 2012a. Non-Attainment Status for Each County by year in Wisconsin as of July 20 2012. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), Website: http://www.epa.gov/oaqps001/greenbk/anay_wi.html, Date accessed: July, 2012. USEPA, 2012b. Non-Attainment Status for Each County by year in Minnesota as of July 20, 2012. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), Website: http://www.epa.gov/oaqps001/greenbk/anay_mn.html, Date accessed: July, 2012. USEPA, 2012c. Cross-State Air Pollution Rule, Website: http://www.epa.gov/airtransport , Date accessed: September 17, 2012. USFWS, 2012a. Possible Industrial Development, City of Chippewa Falls, Chippewa County, Wisconsin, Correspondence from Jill Utrup, Field Supervisor of the USFWS, to Katrina Pitas, SHINE Medical Technologies, January 19, 2012. USFWS, 2012b. Possible Industrial Development Project Site and Vicinity Portage County, Wisconsin, Correspondence from Peter Fasbender, Field Supervisor of the USFWS, to Katrina Pitas, SHINE Medical Technologies, March 5, 2012. USGS, 2006. National Land Cover Dataset, Website: http://viewer.nationalmap.gov/viewer, Date accessed: July 2012. ESRI ArcGIS 9.3.1 software.USGS, 2012a. National Seismic Hazard Maps, Website: http://gldims.cr.usgs.gov/website/nshmp2008/viewer.htm, Date accessed: July 2012.USGS, 2012b. National Seismic Hazard Maps, Website: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/states/wisconsin/history.php, Date accessed: July 2012.USGS, 2012c. EHP Quaternary Faults, Website: http://geohazards.usgs.gov/qfaults/map.php , Date accessed: July 2012. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-27Rev. 0USGS, 2012d. Water Site: http://wi.water.usgs.gov/gwcomp/find/chippewa/brrts.html , Date accessed: July 2012.USGS, 2012e. Water Site: http://wi.water.usgs.gov/gwcomp/find/portage/brrts.html, Date accessed: July 2012. UW, 1964. Ice Age Deposits of Wisconsin, Univer sity of Wisconsin Extension Office. UW, 1983. Thickness of Unconsolidated Material in Wisconsin, University of Wisconsin Extension Office. UW, 1989. Groundwater Contamination Susceptibility in Wisconsin, University of Wisconsin Extension Office. U.S. Government, 1992. Energy Policy Act of 1992, 1992.Vetter, 2012. Designs proposed for Irvine park Zoo addition, Website: http://www.leadertelegram.com/news/front_page/article_e30b61d6-5799-11e1-8b33-0019bb2963f4.html , Date accessed: September 17, 2012. WBN, 2011. NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, LLC moving to Beloit, Wisconsin, Wisconsin BrokerNET, June 22, 2011, Website: http://www.wisconsinbroker net.com/2011/northstar-radiosotopes-llc-moving-to-beloit-wisconsin/, Date accessed: February 7, 2012. WDNR, 2011a. Endangered Resources Review (ERR Log # 11-491) Proposed Industrial Development Project in Chippewa County, WI, Correspondence from Emma Pelton, Endangered
Resources Program WDNR, to Timothy Krau se, Sargent & Lundy, December 12, 2011. WDNR, 2011b. Endangered Resources Review (ERR Log # 11-492) Proposed Industrial Development Project in Portage County, WI, Correspondence from Lori Steckervetz, Endangered Resources Program WDNR, to Timothy Krause, Sargent & Lundy, December 7, 2011.WDNR, 2012a. Air Monitoring Network Plan 2013, June 2012. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR), Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/AirQuality/documents/2013NetworkPlanProposed.pdf, Date accessed: July, 2012 .WDNR, 2012b. WisconsinDNRWebView, Website: http://dnrmaps.wi.gov/imf/imf.jsp?site=webview, Date accessed: September 14, 2012. WDNR, 2012c. Air Management Program, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/cias/am/amexternal/AM_PermitTracking.aspx?id=3001907, Date accessed: September 17, 2012. WDNR, 2012d. Air Management Program, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/cias/am/amexternal/AM_PermitTracking.aspx?id=10641 , Date accessed: September 17, 2012. WDNR, 2012e. Air Management Program, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/cias/am/amexternal/AM_PermitTracking.aspx?id=19054951 , Date accessed: September 17, 2012. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-28Rev. 0WDNR, 2012f. Air Management Program, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/cias/am/amexternal/AM_PermitTracking.aspx?id=17105222 , Date accessed: September 17, 2012. WDNR, 2012g. Air Management Program, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/cias/am/amexternal/AM_PermitTracking.aspx?id=3001987 , Date accessed: September 17, 2012. WDNR, 2012h. Air Management Program, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/cias/am/amexternal/AM_PermitTracking.aspx?id=3002320, Date accessed: September 17, 2012. WDNR, 2012i. Air Management Program, Website: http://dnr.wi.gov/cias/am/amexternal/AM_PermitTracking.aspx?id=3002137 , Date accessed: September 17, 2012. WDNR, 2012j. Air Management Program, Websites: http://dnr.wi.gov/cias/am/amexternal/AM_PermitTracking.aspx?id=4003218 and http://dnr.wi.gov/cias/am/amexternal/AM_PermitTracking.aspx?id=13797133 , Date accessed: September 17, 2012.WDOR, 2012a. County and Municipal Revenues and Expenditures 2010, Bulletin No. 110, January 2012, Website: http://www.revenue.wi.gov/slf/cotvc/cmreb10.pdf, Date accessed: August 19, 2012.WDOT, 2011. Annual average hourly traffic counts, Website: http://transportal.cee.wisc.edu , Date accessed: August 2012, Wisconsin Hourly Traffic Data of The WisTransPortal Project. WDOT, 2012. US 10 (WIS 13 - I-39) expansion Marshfield to Stevens Point Portage and Wood counties, Website: http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/projects/us10/ , Date accessed: September 17, 2012. WDPI, 2012. 2011-2012 Enrollment by County by District by School by Gender, Website: http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/lbstat/pubdata2.html, Date accessed: August 19, 2012. WGNHS, 2004. Scanned Images of Wisconsin Well Constructor's Reports- Chippewa County 1936-1989, Open File Report 2001-02 CH. WGNHS, 2005. Scanned Images of Wisconsin Well Constructor's Reports- Portage County 1936-1989, Open File Report 2001-02 PT. WGNHS, 2012. Wisconsin Carbonate Bedrock Map Website; http://wisconsingeologicalsurvey.org/karstbedrock.htm, Date accessed: July 2012.WNN, 2011. Clinton moving into molybdenum production, September 14, 2011, World Nuclear News, Website: http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS-Clinton_moving_into_molybdenum_production-1409118.html, Date accessed: February 2, 2012.19.
7.6CONCLUSION
S US Census Bureau, 2012. The 2012 Statistical Abstract: Mining, Mineral Industries, Website, http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/cats/forestry_fishing_and_mining/mining_mineral_industries.html, Date accessed: January 18, 2013. Chapter 19 - Environmental ReviewReferencesSHINE Medical Technologies 19.7-29Rev. 0World Nuclear Association, 2012. Supply of Uranium-August 2012, Website: http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf75.html, Date accessed: December 28, 2012.}}