97-8513. Kingston Fossil Plant (KIF) Alternative Coal Receiving Systems, Roane County, Tennessee  

  • [Federal Register Volume 62, Number 64 (Thursday, April 3, 1997)]
    [Notices]
    [Pages 15957-15960]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 97-8513]
    
    
    =======================================================================
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY
    
    
    Kingston Fossil Plant (KIF) Alternative Coal Receiving Systems, 
    Roane County, Tennessee
    
    AGENCY: Tennessee Valley Authority.
    
    ACTION: Issuance of Record of Decision.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: This notice is provided in accordance with the Council on 
    Environmental Quality's regulations (40 CFR parts 1500 to 1508) and 
    TVA's procedures implementing the National Environmental Policy Act. 
    TVA has decided to adopt the preferred alternative (Alternative C) 
    identified in its Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on 
    Kingston Fossil Plant (KIF) Alternative Coal Receiving Systems. The 
    Final EIS was made available to the public on January 15, 1997. A 
    Notice of Availability of the Final EIS was published in the Federal 
    Register on January 31, 1997. Under Alternative C, TVA would construct 
    a new rail spur from the existing CSX Rail Yard or a direct tie in to 
    the Norfolk Southern (NS) line at Walnut Hill in Harriman to the 
    existing TVA coal delivery yard at KIF. The route would involve 
    crossings of the Emory River and an embayment of Watts Bar Reservoir.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 
    Harold M. Draper, NEPA Specialist, Environmental Management, Tennessee 
    Valley Authority, 400 West Summit Hill Drive, WT 8C, Knoxville, 
    Tennessee
    
    [[Page 15958]]
    
    37902-1499; telephone (423) 632-6889 or e-mail hmdraper@tva.gov.
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The KIF receives by rail about 4 million 
    tons of medium sulfur coal per year. This coal is transported by 
    Norfolk Southern (NS) and CSX Railroads to Harriman, Tennessee. At 
    Harriman (CSX origin), the coal is transported over a short NS spur for 
    transport to NS's Emory Gap rail yard and then to TVA's Caney Creek 
    yard. TVA then moves the coal by rail from Caney Creek yard to KIF, a 
    distance of about 4 miles. While NS has directed access to Caney Creek, 
    CSX trains are charged a switching fee, now approximating $2 million 
    annually for use of the NS spur. This switching fee contributes to 
    higher fuel costs at KIF when compared to the fuel costs at other TVA 
    fossil plants. In order to enhance the competitiveness of the KIF plant 
    and to provide more economical access to lower sulfur coals, which will 
    be required to meet new air quality regulations, TVA investigated 
    alternative methods of coal delivery to the plant.
        TVA provided public notice of its intent to prepare an 
    Environmental Impact Statement on alternatives for coal delivery to KIF 
    on May 22, 1995. A public meeting on the proposal was held on June 29, 
    1995. TVA released a draft EIS on May 15, 1996, and held a public 
    meeting to receive comments on the document on June 11, 1996. After 
    considering all comments, TVA revised the EIS appropriately. The Final 
    EIS was distributed to commenting agencies and the public on January 
    15, 1997.
    
    Alternatives Considered
    
        In order to reduce the fuel costs for KIF, direct rail delivery was 
    evaluated because it would eliminate rail line switching fees, reduce 
    operation and maintenance costs, and increase competition between the 
    rail carriers. Alternatives initially considered included construction 
    of an overland conveyor, a new barge unloading facility, and a coal 
    slurry pipeline. Also, increased truck deliveries were considered. 
    However, all of these were rejected because they were not feasible from 
    an economic or engineering standpoint. A longer 13-mile rail line from 
    Oliver Springs was also rejected on economic and other grounds. Three 
    alternatives were formulated that represented economically feasible 
    options. These were no action and two alternatives that involved 
    construction of a new rail spur.
        Under Alternative A, No Action, conditions and impacts resulting 
    from the existing coal delivery system would not change. However, this 
    route, which passes through downtown Harriman, blocks several street 
    crossings and impacts the ability of the city and county governments to 
    provide emergency services during portions of the day. There are also 
    ongoing noise impacts resulting from 30-car rail trips to the plant 
    about six times per day.
        Under Alternative B, Rail Spur Route No. 1, new rail spurs would 
    originate at the CSX Harriman Yard or near the NS line at Walnut Hill. 
    From north to south, the route would cross Bullard Branch and Quarry 
    Branch (CSX spur only), pass south of the Fiske Road community, pass 
    through the Harriman Industrial Park, cross the Emory River, and extend 
    overland about three miles to the plant. Proceeding south from the 
    Emory River, the route would cross Swan Pond Circle Road, cross an 
    unnamed stream, pass under existing transmission lines, cross Swan Pond 
    embayment on a causeway, cross Swan Pond Circle Road, cross Swan Pond 
    Road, cross Swan Pond Creek, and link up with the existing rail line.
        Implementation of Alternative B would result in a rail spur 
    approximately 4.5 miles in length. From an infrastructure standpoint, 
    trains would bypass downtown Harriman; however, in order to avoid two 
    road crossings in a short distance, Swan Pond Road and Swan Pond Circle 
    would need to be relocated near their junction, creating one crossing. 
    Bridges would need to be constructed across the Emory River and two 
    small creeks; and there would be a new causeway across Swan Pond 
    embayment. Other traffic impacts would be that one existing and two new 
    crossings would be blocked to allow trains to pass; however, because 
    the roads are less-used then the ones crossed by the current route, 
    fewer vehicles would be impacted. Under this alternative, there would 
    be 24,730 fewer vehicle crossings of the rail route per day than under 
    the No Action alternative.
        Trains following the new rail line would increase noise levels in 
    the Fiske Road community of Harriman. However, the largest potential 
    noise increase in this community over existing levels is 0.4 decibels 
    (dBA). The quieter Swan Pond Circle Road community south of the Emory 
    River would also be impacted by operation of a new rail line. Noises in 
    this community would result from crossing bridges, road crossing bells, 
    train whistles, and wheel squeal due to track curvature. In this area, 
    the largest potential noise increase would be 2.0 dBA over existing 
    levels. In order to reduce this impact, welded rail would be used 
    rather than jointed rail in the Swan Pond Circle area.
        Construction of the rail spur in Alternative B would result in the 
    loss of 7 acres of prime farmland and a 5-acre beaver-created wetland. 
    However, to the extent practicable, TVA would locate the rail spur 
    above the 750-foot contour in the Swan Pond embayment area to avoid 
    wetland involvement. With strict adherence to Best Management Practices 
    during construction of the proposed rail spur, no significant impacts 
    to water quality, floodplains, wildlife, recreation, or endangered 
    species are expected. However, because the rail construction would take 
    place in a karst geology area, there is some risk of sinkhole 
    subsidence. This would be minimized by proper geotechnical 
    investigations. Approximately 43 views from residences would be 
    affected. There would be a 31 percent reduction in locomotive emissions 
    as compared to the No Action alternative. An archaeological survey of 
    the proposed route identified four sites that were eligible or 
    potentially eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic 
    Places that could be impacted by the proposed route. TVA would continue 
    consultation with the State Historic Preservation officer prior to 
    construction to define measures to avoid or reduce adverse effects to 
    these sites. Although most of the area is sparsely populated, it 
    appears that compared to the No Action alternative, fewer minority 
    population groups would be affected; however, slightly more low income 
    individuals would be affected.
        Under Alternative C, Rail Spur Route No. 2, the route would not 
    cross Swan Pond embayment after crossing under transmission lines, but 
    would proceed south along the east side of Swan Pond, cross Swan Pond 
    Circle Road, cross the narrow embayment fronting the KIF ash stack on a 
    causeway, and run parallel with Swan Pond Road and the existing rail 
    line to the plant rail yard. Implementation of Alternative C would 
    result in construction of a rail spur 4.75 miles in length. Under this 
    alternative, there would be 28,600 fewer vehicle crossing of the rail 
    route per day than under the No Action alternative. Construction along 
    the Alternative C route would not result in loss of prime farmland and 
    would only involve minor wetland crossings. Approximately 37 
    residential views would be affected. There would be slightly higher 
    impacts on low-income individuals than Alternative B. Other impacts 
    would be similar to those of Alternative B.
    
    TVA Decision
    
        The Final EIS identified Alternative C, Rail Spur Route No. 2, as 
    the preferred alternative. The northern end
    
    [[Page 15959]]
    
    of this rail spur route includes options to link to both the CSX yard 
    and the NS rail line. Of the two action alternatives, Alternative C 
    avoids the most wetland and prime farmland impacts. It also involves 
    fewer intersections, fewer vehicles affected at railroad crossings, 
    fewer terrestrial ecology impacts, and fewer aesthetic impacts on 
    neighboring residents. In comparison to the No Action alternative, a 
    new rail delivery option would reduce the fuel costs of KIF through 
    increased competition between rail carriers for coal deliveries, 
    reduced operation and maintenance costs for TVA, and the elimination of 
    switching fees currently associated with CSX deliveries. All of these 
    benefits would help to provide TVA's customers with electricity at the 
    lowest possible rate.
        In choosing its preferred alternative, TVA carefully considered and 
    addressed all comments submitted on the Draft EIS. In addition, TVA has 
    considered comments received from the Environmental Protection Agency 
    on the Final EIS comment responses. These additional considerations are 
    discussed below, along with the comment response number from the FEIS:
         Comment No. 3. EPA believes that environmental 
    considerations associated with alternatives that were not considered in 
    detail due to economic reasons, including the coal slurry pipeline 
    alternative and the overland flexible pipe conveyor alternative, should 
    be discussed in the EIS along with economic and feasibility 
    considerations. Because the coal slurry pipeline alternative and 
    overland flexible pipe conveyor alternative would follow the same 
    routes as the other alternatives, TVA believes that many of the 
    environmental impacts would be the same; however, had they been 
    economical, there may have been some noise and air quality benefits of 
    these alternatives. In addition, EPA believes TVA should have been more 
    definitive in its statement of whether the Walnut Hill spur would have 
    been constructed as part of Alternative C. The analysis of 
    environmental impacts for each alternative considered both the route 
    that would originate at the CSX yard as well as the Walnut Hill 
    variation. As it turned out, the impacts for the route that would 
    originate at the CSX yard are higher than impacts for the Walnut Hill 
    variation for all areas except Environmental Justice. Accordingly, the 
    Environmental Justice analysis identifies the impact of the Walnut Hill 
    spur.
         Comment No. 15. EPA expresses concerns about the potential 
    for derailment at a critical Swan Pond Circle Road intersection that 
    might isolate residents east of Alternative C from emergency vehicles. 
    The length of a unit coal train, including locomotives, is 
    approximately 6700 feet. One of the earlier preliminary railroad 
    alignment studies measured near that distance between the north and 
    south intersections of Swan Pond Road. TVA will design the final 
    centerline alignment such that the distance between crossings is 
    greater than 7000 feet. With this commitment the scenario no longer 
    exists where both crossings could be simultaneously blocked.
         Comment No. 21. EPA requests that an independent entity 
    review spill plans to determine if the plans have been tested 
    previously in the field and whether they are effective. Federal and 
    state regulations require the development of Spill Prevention Control 
    and Countermeasures (SPCC) Plans. These plans have to be kept at the 
    site and made available to state and EPA inspectors upon request. The 
    KIF SPCC Plan covers preventive measures required for TVA contractors 
    and associated temporary tanks on TVA properties. The plan also 
    provides for emergency response measures that have been successfully 
    employed in the past. TVA SPCC Plans have been supplied to EPA Region 
    IV along with spill incident reports, and no shortcomings have been 
    identified. TVA has trained response personnel at the site as well as 
    an emergency strike force located in strategic positions across the 
    valley that can respond within an hour's notice. The SPCC Plan has been 
    certified by a Professional Engineer and has been tested previously in 
    the field.
         Comment Nos. 24 and 25. EPA expresses concern that the 
    proposed earthen fill causeway across Swan Pond embayment would 
    restrict water circulation and result in water quality problems in the 
    embayment. EPA requests that a bridge over the embayment be considered. 
    The earthen fill causeway proposed for crossing the Watts Bar Embayment 
    area for Alternate C should allow good circulation and fish passage. 
    Both navigational clearance considerations and drainage considerations 
    influence the size of the culvert through the causeway. TVA shallow 
    draft bridge clearance standards for the culvert in this causeway will 
    be adequate in accommodating small recreational vessels. As stated in 
    the FEIS, the standards require a minimum elevation of 6 feet 
    vertically above normal maximum pool Elevation 741 and a horizontal 
    clearance of a minimum 8 feet. Drainage considerations and sizing 
    indicate the necessity for a large culvert. Preliminary culvert sizing 
    indicates a concrete double barrel box culvert of size 13'  x  36' as a 
    minimum. This size box culvert is in effect a small bridge. The wind, 
    rain, and inflows in the Watts Bar Embayment area should adequately 
    flush the waters through the larger culvert and, thus, allow a good 
    circulation in the embayment. In addition, the costs associated with 
    bridging are substantial, and a bridge would not be the most economical 
    decision.
         Comment No. 31. EPA states that the frequency and 
    magnitude of train whistles near residential areas should be discussed. 
    TVA has estimated the impacts at the closest residence in a ``worst-
    case'' scenario in the FEIS. Typically, there would be two train trips 
    per day during daylight hours past a given point, with the train 
    whistles lasting several seconds.
         Comments No. 42-44. EPA requests that Environmental 
    Justice mitigation be provided for low-income populations affected by 
    the Walnut Hill spur. All mitigation commitments to reduce noise and to 
    ensure safety of the rail would apply throughout the route of the 
    proposed rail line. TVA does not feel that special mitigation at this 
    site is necessary for the following reasons. Under Alternative C (with 
    Walnut Hill spur), virtually all of the minority population is located 
    in Census Tract 308, Block Group 3. This block group also has a poverty 
    rate of 30.1 percent, much higher than the 21 percent in the rest of 
    the impact area. However, most of the residents of this block group are 
    far enough removed from the rail site that the impacts range from 
    minimal to essentially nonexistent. Within this block group, the rail 
    will run through a largely unpopulated area between Fiske Road and the 
    Emory River. The population of the block group is on the other side of 
    Fiske Road extending toward the north for some distance. This 
    consideration essentially eliminates impacts to minority populations 
    and reduces the low-income population to a share not much higher than 
    the county and state rates. If the proposed Walnut Hill spur is not 
    built, all the coal would go the CSX Harriman Yard. The additional area 
    impacted in transporting coal to the CSX Harriman Yard is about 10.6 
    percent minority, with a poverty rate of 26.9 percent. The overall 
    impact area for the new rail line combined with the area between Walnut 
    Hill and the CSX Harriman Yard has a 6.5 percent minority population, 
    well below the state average of 17 percent but well above the county 
    average of 3.8 percent. The poverty rate is well above both the state 
    and county rates. However, the
    
    [[Page 15960]]
    
    route through the additional area to the CSX Harriman Yard would be on 
    existing rail, not new rail, and would add routine transient traffic to 
    an existing facility. EPA also requests data on how many of the 
    affected people are low-income minorities. With the proposed Walnut 
    Hill spur, the project impact area has approximately 53 persons (2.3 
    percent of the total population) who are both minority and low-income. 
    Without the Walnut Hill spur (the coal goes to the CSX Harriman Yard), 
    the impact area would have approximately 109 persons (2.8 percent of 
    the total population) who are low-income minorities. TVA does not 
    believe that these impacts are disproportionately high.
        After carefully considering EPA comments, TVA has decided to 
    implement Alternative C as identified in its Final EIS.
    
    Environmentally Preferable Alternative
    
        Because Alternative A, No Action, would result in no change in 
    existing conditions, it could be characterized as the environmentally 
    preferable alternative. However, Alternative A does not accomplish the 
    goal of reducing fuel costs. Further, none of the action alternatives 
    would be environmentally destructive and none would likely result in 
    significant environmental impacts. Of the action alternatives, 
    Alternative C is environmentally preferable due to fewer impacts to 
    wetlands and prime farmlands.
    
    Environmental Consequences and Commitments
    
        In choosing Alternative C, all practical means to avoid or minimize 
    environmental harm have been adopted. These measures are listed below:
         To minimize noise impacts in the rural Swan Pond Circle 
    community, the radius of track curvature would be kept as high as 
    possible to minimize wheel-squeal. Noise will also be reduced by the 
    use of welded rail in the Swan Pond community area. Also, all 
    construction equipment will be equipped with noise attenuating devices, 
    such as mufflers and insulated engine housings.
         On-site open burning will not be conducted when an air 
    stagnation advisory or a special dispersion statement issued by the 
    National Weather Service is in effect for the area. Where necessary, a 
    water wagon will be used to control dust associated with construction 
    activities.
         Should a potentially adverse water pollution incident 
    occur in association with construction, state regulators and upstream 
    and downstream water supply operators will be notified. During 
    construction, Best Management Practices for silt control will be 
    utilized, including straw dikes, filter fabric, and where necessary, 
    retention basins.
         Sinkhole subsidence or collapse will be avoided by 
    appropriate planning and design based on sound geotechnical 
    investigations. Proper spill prevention procedures will be put in place 
    to prevent contamination of groundwater from fuels, oils, and solvents 
    during construction.
         Appropriate hydraulic analyses will be performed to ensure 
    that the project is consistent with local floodplain regulations.
         Direct impacts to riparian zone forests at the Emory River 
    bridge crossing will be minimized by crossing the river at a 90-degree 
    angle.
         Wetlands will be avoided in the Swan Pond embayment by 
    keeping all construction for the rail spur above the 750-foot elevation 
    except at stream crossings.
         Phase II and III archaeological surveys will be conducted 
    during the Spring of 1997 to determine the significance of the four 
    archaeological sites in the corridor, and to allow any needed data 
    recovery from the sites.
         TVA will design the final centerline alignment such that 
    the distance between road crossings is greater than 7000 feet.
    
        Dated: March 10, 1997.
    Gregory M. Vincent,
    Vice President, Fuel Supply and Engineering Fossil and Hydro Power.
    [FR Doc. 97-8513 Filed 4-2-97; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 8120-01-M
    
    
    

Document Information

Published:
04/03/1997
Department:
Tennessee Valley Authority
Entry Type:
Notice
Action:
Issuance of Record of Decision.
Document Number:
97-8513
Pages:
15957-15960 (4 pages)
PDF File:
97-8513.pdf