Allen Fossil Plant Ash Impoundment Closure Environmental Impact Statement
| Published date | 21 April 2020 |
| Citation | 85 FR 22234 |
| Record Number | 2020-08420 |
| Section | Notices |
| Court | Tennessee Valley Authority |
Federal Register, Volume 85 Issue 77 (Tuesday, April 21, 2020)
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 77 (Tuesday, April 21, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22234-22238]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-08420]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY
Allen Fossil Plant Ash Impoundment Closure Environmental Impact
Statement
AGENCY: Tennessee Valley Authority.
ACTION: Record of decision.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice is provided in accordance with the Council on
Environmental Quality's regulations and Tennessee Valley Authority's
(TVA's) procedures for implementing the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA). TVA has decided to adopt the Preferred Alternative
identified in the Allen Fossil Plant (ALF) Ash Impoundment Closure
Environmental Impact Statement. The Final Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) was made available to the public on March 6, 2020. A
Notice of Availability of the Final EIS was published in the Federal
Register on March 13, 2020. The Preferred Alternative is ``Closure of
the Metal Cleaning Pond, Closure-by-Removal of the East Ash Pond
Complex and the West Ash Pond; Disposal of CCR in an Offsite Landfill
Location.'' This alternative would achieve the purpose and need of the
project to support the implementation of TVA's goal to eliminate all
wet Coal Combustion Residuals (CCR) storage at its coal plants; close
CCR surface impoundments across the TVA system; comply with the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency's CCR Rule and other applicable federal
and state statutes and regulations; and enhance future economic
development in the greater Memphis area.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: W. Douglas White, Tennessee Valley
Authority, 400 West Summit Hill Drive, WT11B-K, Knoxville, Tennessee
37902; telephone (865) 638-2252, or by email [email protected]. The
Final EIS, this Record of Decision (ROD) and other project documents
are available on TVA's website https://www.tva.gov/nepa.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: TVA is a corporate agency of the United
States that provides electricity for business customers and local power
distributors serving more than 10 million people in an 80,000 square
mile area comprised of most of Tennessee and parts of Virginia,
[[Page 22235]]
North Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, and Kentucky. TVA
receives no taxpayer funding, deriving virtually all of its revenues
from sales of electricity. In addition to operation of its power
system, TVA provides flood control, navigation and land management for
the Tennessee River system and assists local power companies and state
and local governments with economic development and job creation.
ALF was constructed in the 1950s by the Memphis Light, Gas and
Water Division (MLGW). TVA purchased the plant in 1984 and operated the
plant until ALF's three coal-fired units were retired on March 31,
2018. While in operation, ALF consumed approximately 7,200 tons of coal
a day and produced approximately 5,160 million kilowatt-hours of
electricity a year. CCR produced by the collective units included
approximately 85,000 dry tons of slag and fly ash annually. Unlike
other TVA power plants, much of the land occupied by ALF is not owned
by TVA, but by third parties, including the City of Memphis, Shelby
County, and MLGW. ALF is also located in a heavily industrialized area,
which means that redevelopment is of particular interest as the land
holds significant economic potential for the non-TVA owners due to its
location within the Frank C. Pidgeon Industrial Park as well as its
access to the Port of Memphis via McKellar Lake.
TVA has prepared an EIS pursuant to NEPA to assess the
environmental impacts of the proposed closures of the East Ash Pond
Complex (including the Coal Yard Runoff Pond), the West Ash Pond and
the Metal Cleaning Pond at ALF. TVA estimates that approximately
3,500,000 yd\3\ of CCR is located within the project areas at ALF. TVA
has also evaluated the location requirements and environmental impacts
associated with the potential construction and utilization of an off-
site proposed beneficial re-use processing facility that would be used
to process CCR from ALF. TVA also considered potential impacts
associated with the transport of borrow from previously permitted sites
and the disposal of CCR at existing, off-site permitted landfills.
With a long-standing commitment to safe and reliable operations and
to environmental stewardship, TVA began, in 2009, to convert from wet
to dry management of CCR. On April 17, 2015, the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) published the Final Disposal of Coal Combustion
Residuals from Electric Utilities rule (CCR Rule) in the Federal
Register (80 FR 21302). The CCR Rule establishes national criteria and
schedules for the management and closure of CCR facilities.
In June of 2016, TVA issued a Final Programmatic Environmental
Impact Statement (PEIS) that analyzed methods for closing impoundments
that hold CCR materials at TVA fossil plants and identified specific
screening and evaluation factors to help frame its evaluation of
closures at additional facilities. The purpose of the PEIS was to
support TVA's goal to eliminate all wet CCR storage at its coal plants
by closing CCR surface impoundments across TVA's system and to assist
TVA in complying with the EPA's CCR Rule.
The proposed action at ALF tiers from the PEIS. The purpose,
therefore, is to eliminate all wet CCR storage at ALF; close its CCR
surface impoundments; comply with the EPA's CCR Rule and other
applicable federal and state statutes and regulations; and help make
the property available by its non-TVA owners for future economic
development projects in the greater Memphis area.
Alternatives Considered
TVA considered three alternatives in the Draft EIS and Final EIS.
These alternatives are:
Alternative A--No Action Alternative. Under the No Action
Alternative, TVA would not close the East Ash Pond Complex (which
includes the Coal Yard Runoff Pond) or the Metal Cleaning Pond. The
West Ash Pond would remain in its current closed state. No closure
activities (i.e., no excavation or transport activities) would occur.
However, the No Action Alternative is inconsistent with TVA's plans to
convert all of its wet CCR systems to dry systems and is inconsistent
with the general intent of EPA's CCR Rule. In addition, under the No
Action Alternative, the ALF closure area land would not be made
available to its owners for future economic development projects in the
greater Memphis area. Consequently, this alternative would not satisfy
the project purpose and need and, therefore, is not considered viable
or reasonable. It does, however, provide a benchmark for comparing the
environmental impacts associated with implementation of Alternatives B
and C.
Alternative B--Closure of the Metal Cleaning Pond, Closure-by-
Removal of the East Ash Pond Complex and the West Ash Pond; Disposal of
CCR in an Offsite Landfill Location. Under Alternative B, the primary
actions include the closure of the East Ash Pond Complex, the West Ash
Pond and the Metal Cleaning Pond via Closure-by-Removal. Closure-by-
Removal involves excavation and relocation of the CCR from the ash
impoundments in accordance with federal and state requirements. TVA
would stabilize residual ponded areas and then remove CCR material,
underlying impacted soil, and support structures within the impoundment
footprint.
Closure of the surface impoundments at ALF would entail the
addition of borrow material to achieve proposed finished grades and
provide a suitable medium to support restoration of the former
impoundments with approved, non-invasive seed mixes designed to quickly
establish desirable vegetation. Closure-by-Removal of the surface
impoundments is expected to require approximately 3 million yd\3\ of
suitable borrow material. No specific borrow site(s) has been
identified at this time and ultimate site selection will be determined
by the contractor. As part of the contracting process to obtain borrow,
TVA will require that any borrow material be obtained from a previously
developed and/or permitted borrow site. Accordingly, potential impacts
associated with the transport of borrow material to ALF are based upon
the ``bounding'' or worst case characteristics of this action that were
developed in consideration of the use of a range of identified
candidate sites in the vicinity of ALF.
Offsite transport of CCR is another component action to be
undertaken in conjunction with this alternative. CCR removed from the
ash impoundments would be transported offsite to an existing permitted
landfill. Because the selection of a particular receiving landfill is
dependent upon TVA's NEPA decision, contract arrangements and other
factors, identification of a specific receiving landfill is premature.
Actual landfill selection will be determined during the project
implementation phase. Under this alternative, TVA will consider only
previously developed and/or permitted landfills having sufficient
excess capacity and the ability to construct dedicated cells to
accommodate a monofill for CCR from a single generator. TVA would not
own or operate the landfill to which CCR from ALF is transported.
Therefore, TVA has conducted a bounding analysis of potential
environmental effects associated with transport of CCR to an offsite
landfill by either truck or rail. Transport of CCR by barge was also
considered by TVA. ALF has a barge unloading facility available for use
and with minor modification and repairs, the existing reclamation
hoppers and associated conveyors from the coal yard to the transfer
station could be re-configured for use. However, additional
[[Page 22236]]
infrastructure would also need to be constructed to support loading of
CCR onto a barge. While such modifications could be accomplished, no
suitable landfill was identified by TVA that is equipped to receive CCR
from barges. Consequently, the transport of CCR by barge as a mode of
transportation was eliminated from further consideration.
Alternative C--Closure of the Metal Cleaning Pond, Closure-by-
Removal of the East Ash Pond Complex and West Ash Pond; Disposal of CCR
in a Beneficial Re-Use Process & Offsite Landfill Location. Under
Alternative C, TVA would close the surface impoundments in the same
manner as Alternative B. However, instead of transporting all excavated
CCR material to an offsite landfill, most CCR (ranging from
approximately 75 to 95 percent) would be transported to a beneficial
re-use facility (constructed and operated by others) to be processed
for use in concrete and other building materials. Borrow material
suitable for use as backfill within the ALF impoundments would also be
required under this alternative similar to that described for
Alternative B.
No specific provider of the beneficiation services or the specific
site at which a beneficial re-use processing facility would be
constructed has been developed at this time. However, because it is
expected that the feasibility of such a facility is dependent upon the
presence of available CCR at ALF, this facility is also evaluated as a
component action in the EIS. Because no specific provider or site for
the potential beneficial re-use processing facility has been
identified, impacts of this option to process CCR from ALF are based on
a bounding analysis of the characteristics of a representative
beneficial re-use processing facility.
Environmentally Preferred Alternative
Alternative A--No Action would result in the lowest level of
environmental impacts as the impacts associated with closure of the
impoundments and disposal of CCR under Alternatives B and C would be
avoided. However, Alternative A--No Action, does not meet the purpose
and need for the project. The scope of Alternatives B and C is formed
by the purpose and need of the proposed action. Under both of these
alternatives, CCR would be removed from the impoundments and borrow
material suitable for use as backfill would be transported onsite to
support site restoration. Removal of CCR from the impoundments would
result in predominantly minor impacts to the natural environment
(surface water, floodplains, vegetation, wildlife, aquatic ecology and
wetlands), that would be temporary and localized. Consultation with
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) under Section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act (ESA) determined that project activities may
affect, but are not likely to adversely affect, the interior least
tern, Indiana bat, and northern long-eared bat. Closure of the
impoundments by removal eliminates both CCR and water within the
impoundments, thereby resulting in a long-term beneficial impact to
groundwater. No federal post-closure care measures are required as the
impoundments would be closed under the Closure-by-Removal option. State
requirements for post-closure care would be implemented as needed.
Remedial investigations and actions at ALF, including the Environmental
Investigation Plan (EIP) that is being undertaken in accordance with an
administrative order issued by the Tennessee Department of Environment
and Conservation (TDEC) in 2015, and the current Interim Response
Actions (IRAs) for groundwater that are part of a remedial
investigation (RI) directed by TDEC that began in 2017, will continue.
Any future long-term remedy would continue to be implemented and
groundwater quality would be restored where contamination from arsenic
or other constituents is present. There would be only minor short-term
impacts to the natural environment associated with procurement and
transport of borrow and transport of CCR to an offsite landfill.
Impacts to the human environment (air quality, climate change,
visual resources, land use, socioeconomics, and public and worker
safety) would be primarily related to closure activities and would be
minor and short-term. Although the proposed closure of the impoundments
under either alternative would have a minor impact on the regional
transportation system, there could be moderate localized impacts to low
volume roadways used jointly by trucks transporting CCR and borrow,
sensitive noise receptors along the transport routes, and users of
recreational facilities located adjacent to low volume roadway
segments. In addition, there could be moderate to large impacts
associated with borrow and CCR transport by truck, disproportionate to
environmental justice populations. These impacts would be minimized
with implementation of a traffic management plan that is designed to
address congestion and avoidance of borrow sites accessed by low volume
roadways serving residential areas. There would be no effect to solid
and hazardous waste, although CCR previously managed in the
impoundments at ALF would be disposed in an existing, permitted
landfill. There would be no effect to cultural resources with adherence
to the mitigation measures defined below.
Reasonably foreseeable future projects that are planned to occur on
ALF include the deconstruction and demolition activities of the plant.
Such actions could contribute to cumulative impacts on the local
transportation network if these activities are concurrent with the
proposed ash impoundment closure project. The number of trucks
associated with the transport of debris from ALF deconstruction, added
to the number of trucks required to remove CCR from impoundments at ALF
and transport of borrow material for restoration activities could
result in a very large number of trucks and other vehicles entering and
exiting the facility on a daily basis. TVA would mitigate congestion in
the vicinity of ALF with a traffic management plan. Possibilities
include staging of trucks, temporary signals, spacing logistics, or
timing truck traffic to occur during lighter traffic hours (such as not
in the morning or afternoon commute hours). With implementation of
these mitigation measures, cumulative impacts to transportation would
be moderate and would only occur during the construction phases of
these activities.
Impacts associated with Alternative C would be the same as for
Alternative B, except most of the CCR removed from the impoundments
would be transported to a beneficial re-use facility to be processed
for use in concrete and other building materials. Therefore,
implementation of this alternative would involve minor impacts
associated with the construction and operation of the facility. In
addition, this alternative would have a long-term moderate beneficial
impact to solid waste as the majority of CCR would be beneficially re-
used as compared to disposal in a landfill.
Decision
TVA has decided to implement the preferred alternative identified
in the Final EIS: Alternative B--Closure of the Metal Cleaning Pond,
Closure-by-Removal of the East Ash Pond Complex and the West Ash Pond;
Disposal of CCR in an Offsite Landfill Location. This alternative would
achieve the purpose and need of the project. Alternative C would also
meet the purpose and need of the project and
[[Page 22237]]
would have similar impacts as Alternative B. However, construction of a
new facility (by others) to process CCR from ALF would extend the
duration of closure which would delay the future economic development
of the site. This would result in greater direct and cumulative impacts
associated with air emissions, noise emissions, impacts to
transportation system, impacts to environmental justice communities,
safety risks and disruptions to the public associated with the extended
time frame for closure.
Public Involvement
On November 30, 2018, a Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare an EIS to
address the closure of the impoundments at ALF was published in the
Federal Register. In addition to the NOI in the Federal Register, TVA
published information about the review on TVA's project website,
notified the media, and sent notices to numerous individuals,
organizations, local and regional stakeholders, governments and
interested parties.
A public information session was held on January 17, 2019, at the
Mitchell Community Center in Memphis, TN, to provide additional
information related to the proposed actions to the public. TVA's
efforts to notify local residents of the January 2019 public
information meeting included issuing an additional media advisory and
notifying the 35 people who had attended a previous meeting related to
activities underway at ALF. TVA also sent letters to all residents
within a 5-mile radius of the plant and contacted three neighborhood
associations surrounding the plant to inform them of the meeting. In
addition, TVA distributed 540 flyers throughout the Memphis Public
Library System. A total of 77 people attended the public meeting.
Attendees included members of the general public, media
representatives, and other special interest groups.
Public comments on the scope of the EIS were collected from
November 30, 2018 through January 31, 2019, and at the public
information session. TVA received 63 comment submissions from members
of the pubic and federal agencies. Comments received that requested TVA
extend the scoping period and hold a public meeting were addressed by
TVA during the public scoping period. Comments received on the proposed
alternatives generally expressed support for the complete removal of
CCR and remediation of the site. Other commenters stressed the need to
ensure the safe transport and disposal of CCR. Comments also included
requests that the EIS include analysis of impacts to the following
resources: Groundwater, surface water, the surrounding community,
onsite workers, wildlife that frequent the impoundments and recreators
who enjoy observing the wildlife that frequent the impoundments.
Comments were received requesting the EIS provide more detail regarding
the beneficiation process and its potential environmental impacts and
that the EIS consider the cumulative impact of future economic
development of the ALF site. TVA also received comments requesting the
analysis of the operation of the Allen Combined Cycle Plant be included
in the scope of the project. TVA considered these comments in the
preparation of the Final EIS.
TVA released the Draft EIS for public review on October 4, 2019. A
Notice of Availability (NOA) for the Draft EIS was published in the
Federal Register on October 11, 2019. Publication of the NOA in the
Federal Register opened the 45-day comment period, which ended on
November 25, 2019. To solicit public input, the availability of the
Draft EIS was announced in regional and local newspapers serving the
Memphis area and on TVA's social media accounts. The availability of
the Draft EIS was also announced in newspapers serving the communities
in surrounding states where landfills capable of receiving CCR from ALF
were identified in the Draft EIS. A news release was issued to the
media and posted on TVA's website. The Draft EIS was posted on TVA's
website, and hard copies were made available by request. Two public
information sessions were held during the review period to allow the
public the opportunity to learn more about the project. The first
session was held on October 8, 2019, at the Mitchell Community Center
in Memphis, TN. A second session was held on October 30, 2019, at the
Benjamin L. Hooks Public Library in Memphis, TN. Public comments were
accepted between October 4, 2019 and November 25, 2019, and at both
public information sessions. TVA also conducted additional outreach
activities through attendance at local community group events and
meetings to provide information regarding activities at ALF.
TVA accepted comments submitted through mail, email, a comment form
on TVA's public website, and at the public meetings. TVA received 28
comment submissions from members of the public, organizations and state
and federal agencies. Comment submissions were carefully reviewed and
compiled into 69 specific comments which received responses. Most of
the comments received were related to the results of the landfill
screening analysis which concluded that, among others, the Taylor
County Landfill and the Arrowhead Landfill met the requirements to be
considered in the bounding analysis for transportation of CCR to an
offsite landfill for disposal. Other comments received were related to
groundwater impacts and the ongoing investigations at ALF, sufficiency
of the bounding analyses, consideration of impacts to communities
requiring environmental justice considerations and the consideration of
cumulative impacts. TVA provided responses to these comments, made
appropriate minor revisions to the Draft EIS and issued this Final EIS.
TVA received an additional 54 comments after closure of the comment
period, one of which was signed by 30 members of the public. These
comments all expressed opposition to use of the Taylor County Landfill
in Georgia for disposal of CCR from ALF. As these comments were
sufficiently addressed by TVA in response to comments received while
the comment period was open, TVA has not provided individual responses
to these comments. However, the comments are retained as part of the
project's Administrative Record.
The NOA for the Final EIS was published in the Federal Register on
March 13, 2020. TVA received three comments during the mandatory 30-day
waiting period after the Final EIS was released. One comment questioned
the data and analysis regarding the health and safety of rail transport
versus truck transport which TVA obtained from previous studies
conducted by other entities and presented in the Draft and Final EIS.
TVA has determined that no additional analysis is required. A second
comment was from an advocacy group that expressed opposition to
disposal of CCR from ALF at the Arrowhead Landfill. This concern was
addressed in TVA's response to comments in the Final EIS. A third
comment was received from a regulatory agency, noting their comments
had been adequately resolved in the Final EIS.
Mitigation Measures
TVA will use appropriate best management practices (BMPs) during
all phases of closure of the ash impoundments. Mitigation measures and
actions taken to reduce adverse impacts associated with the proposed
action, include:
TVA would mitigate traffic impacts by developing a traffic
management plan that considers alternate access locations to/from ALF
(i.e., Plant Road vs. Riverport Road to the west), staging
[[Page 22238]]
and management of truck ingress/egress, borrow site selection to
optimize use of borrow sites that do not require truck use of common
roadway segments, potential alternate routing during local rail
operations on Rivergate Road, and installation of temporary signals at
key intersections.
To avoid potential for indirect impacts to the interior
least tern, TVA would implement specific conservation measures
identified as per consultation with USFWS under Section 7 of the ESA.
Should the osprey nest located north of the East Ash Pond
Complex on a mooring cell structure in McKellar Lake be active during
ash impoundment closure, activities would be minimized within a 660-
foot diameter buffer around the nest during the osprey nesting season.
These avoidance measures would result in no adverse impacts to these
birds.
TVA may elect to remove the osprey nest during the non-
nesting season in conjunction with other on-going site decommissioning
activities unrelated to ash impoundment closure. As such, TVA would
ensure nest removal would follow guidance from the U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Wildlife
Services Program.
TVA will require that CCR be disposed of in a previously
developed and/or permitted site having sufficient permitted capacity.
Borrow would be obtained from one or more previously
developed and/or permitted commercial borrow site(s) within 30 miles of
ALF. No specific site has been identified at this time and ultimate
site selection would be determined by the contractor. However, TVA
would perform all necessary due diligence and consultation as required
under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA)
related to any offsite work.
TVA will continue to collect groundwater samples from
existing monitoring wells and review the analytical results as a part
of the 2015 TDEC administrative order process, the EPA's CCR Rule, and
other regulatory requirements. TVA is also implementing the IRAs and
corrective measures to control and begin treating impacted groundwater
identified in some shallow aquifer monitoring wells around the East Ash
Pond Complex.
A TDEC Section 401 Water Quality Certification/TDEC
Aquatic Resource Alteration Permit and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 404
permit would be required for disturbance to wetlands and stream
features, and the terms and conditions of these permits would include
mitigation for unavoidable adverse impacts, as appropriate.
A National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction
Activities or an Individual Construction Storm Water permit may be
required for the proposed project, and a Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP) would be required to detail sediment and
erosion control BMPs.
Several actions associated with the proposed closures were
addressed in TVA's programmatic consultation with the USFWS on routine
actions and federally-listed bats in accordance with ESA Section
7(a)(2) which was completed in April 2018. For those activities with
potential to affect Indiana bats and northern long-eared bat, TVA
committed to implementing specific conservation measures. These
activities and associated conservation measures would be implemented as
part of the proposed project.
To minimize adverse impacts on natural and beneficial
floodplain values, BMPs would be used during construction activities.
In addition, TVA would obtain documentation from permitted landfill(s)
receiving ash that the ash would be disposed in an area outside the
100-year floodplain.
BMPs employed to minimize impacts include:
Fugitive dust emissions from site preparation and
construction would be controlled by wet suppression, installation of a
truck washing station and other BMPs, as appropriate. In addition, the
Clean Air Act Title V operating permit incorporates fugitive dust
management conditions.
Erosion and sedimentation control BMPs (e.g., silt fences)
would ensure that surface waters are protected from construction
impacts.
Consistent with E.O. 13112 as amended by E.O. 13751,
disturbed areas would be revegetated with native or non-native, non-
invasive plant species to avoid the introduction or spread of invasive
species.
BMPs as described in the project-specific SWPPP and the
Tennessee Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook-4th Edition, 2012 would
be used during construction activities to minimize impacts and restore
areas disturbed during construction.
TVA may decide to contract with outside vendors for
construction and/or transportation services under Alternative B. It is
TVA policy that all contractors have in place a site-specific health
and safety plan prior to operation on TVA properties.
Dated: April 14, 2020.
Robert M. Deacy, Sr.,
Senior Vice President, Generation Construction, Projects & Services,
Tennessee Valley Authority.
[FR Doc. 2020-08420 Filed 4-20-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8120-08-P
