Draft Environmental Impact Statement Red Hills Power Project

640 Pages·1998·46.3 MB·English

by  Tennessee Valley Authority

Tennessee Valley Authority
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Red Hills Power Project
February 1998

PROPOSED PURCHASE OF ELECTRICITY GENERATED
BY THE RED HILLS POWER PROJECT
Responsible Federal Agency: Tennessee Valley Authority (TV A)
Cooperating Federal Agency: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE)
Abstract: TVA proposes to purchase 440 megawatts (MW) of electrical energy from the Red Hills
Power Project (RHPP). This energy would be provided from a proposed 440-MW (approximate
capacity) lignite-fueled generation facility (Red Hills Generation Facility) and a proposed surface lignite
mine (Red Hills Lignite Mine) located near the Town of Ackerman in Choctaw County, Mississippi.
Choctaw Generation, Inc., proposes to build the generation facility and Mississippi Lignite Mining
Company proposes to operate the lignite mine.
TVA and the COE cooperated in preparing this Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The purpose of
this EIS is to evaluate the environmental impacts of the proposed TVA purchase of electricity generated
by the Red Hills Power Project (RHPP) and the COE permitting of wetlands and waters of the U.S. for
the project.
The RHPP would consist of a surface lignite mine and a lignite-fueled generation facility near the Town
of Ackerman in Choctaw County, Mississippi. Associated project components include water supply and
disposal systems, a natural gas supply pipeline, and transmission line connections. Choctaw County and
the state of Mississippi also propose to develop the Red Hills EcoPlex industrial park adjacent to the
proposed generation facility. Although the EcoPlex is not part of the actions under consideration by
TVA and the COE, potential cumulative impacts resulting from development of the EcoPlex are
assessed.
Comments on this Draft EIS and requests for For further information you may also
further information should be directed to: contact:
Charles L. Bach Charles P. Nicholson
Project Manager Specialist, NEPA
Tennessee Valley Authority Tennessee Valley Authority
P.O. Box 1010, CTR ID 400 W. Summit Hill Drive, WT 8C
Muscle Shoals, AL 35662-1010 Knoxville, TN 37902-1499
Telephone: (205) 386-3783 Telephone: (423) 632-3582
email: [email protected] email: [email protected]
Date and Place of Public Meeting: March 12, 1998, at Ackerman High School
Date by which comments must be received: March 30, 1998
Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2012 with funding from
LYRASIS IVIembers and Sloan Foundation
http://archive.org/details/draftenvironmentOOtenn
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LISTOFnCURES x
LIST OF TABLES xiii
ACRONYNMS AND ABBREVIATIONS xxi
UNITS OF MEASURE xxvi
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1
L PURPOSE AND NEED 1-1
1.1 Purpose 1-1
1.2 The TVA Power System 1-1
1.3 Need for Power 1-3
1.3.1 The Energy Vision 2020 Planning Process 1-5
1.3.2 The RHPP Proposal 1-6
1.4 Decisions to be Made 1-7
1.5 Description of the Applicant 1-7
1.6 The EIS Process 1-8
1.7 The Scoping Process 1-9
1.8 Issues to be Addressed in Detail 1-10
1.9 Issues Determined to be Out of Scope 1-12
1.10 Permitting Requirements 1-12
1.11 EIS Overview 1-15
2. ALTERNATIVES l-V
2.1 No Action 2-1)
2.2 Proposed Actions and Alternative Components 2-1
2.2.1 Generation Facility 2-2
2.2.2 Red Hills Lignite Mine 2-16 )
2.2.3 Transmission Lines 2-28
2.2.4 Namral Gas Pipeline 2-32
2.2.5 Limestone Sources 2-34
2.3 Comparison of Alternatives 2-34)
2.4 The Preferred Alternative 2-51^'
RHPP DEIS I February 1998
TABLE OF CONTENTS
2.5 The Red Hills EcoPlex Industrial Park 2-51
2.6 National Geodetic Survey 2-54
3. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 3-1
3.1 Introduction 3-1
3.2 Air Resources 3-1
3.2.1 Climatology and Meteorology 3-1
3.2.2 Ambient Air Quality 3-5
3.2.3 Existing Emission Sources 3-8
3.2.4 Understanding Global Climate Change 3-9
3.2.5 New Regulations 3-10
3.3 Geology 3-11
3.3.1 Physiographic Setting 3-11
C 3 .3.2 Stratigraphy 3-11
/^3.3.3 Overburden Geochemistry 3-17
3.3.4 Mineral Resources 3-18
3.3.5 Seismology 3-18
3.4 Soils 3-26
3.4.1 Soil Classification and Description 3-26
3.4.2 Soil Capability and Productivity 3-31
3.4.3 Prime Farmland Soils 3-32
3.4.4 Soils and Prime Farmland in Utility Corridors 3-33
3.5 Groundwater Resources 3-34
3.5.1 Groundwater Hydrology 3-34
3.5.2 Groundwater Quality 3-39
3.5.3 Groundwater Use 3-40
/ 1 3 .6 Surface Water Resources 3-43
3.6.1 Watershed Characteristics 3-43
3.7 Aquatic Ecology 3-49
3.7.1 Benthic Communities 3-50
3.7.2 Fish Communities 3-54
RHPP DEIS II February 1998
TABLE OF CONTENTS
3.8 Wetlands 3-57 ^
3.8.1 Description of Wetlands in Project Area 3-58
3.8.2 Description of Wetlands on the Proposed Generation Facility Site 3-61
3.8.3 Description of Wetlands on the Proposed Mine Site 3-64
3.8.4 Description of Wetlands in Utility Line Corridors 3-64
3.9 Roodplains 3-65
3.10 Terrestrial Ecology 3-67
3.10.1 Vegetation 3-67
3.10.2 Wildlife 3-73
3.11 Threatened or Endangered Species 3-76
3.11.1 Plants 3-76
3.11.2 Terrestrial Animals 3-78
3.11.3 Aquatic Animals 3-79)
3.12 Land Use 3-81
3.12.1 Agricultural and Forestry Production in Choctaw County 3-82
3.12.2 Industrial, Commercial, and Residential Land Use 3-83
3.12.3 Land Use/Land Cover - S tudy Area 3-83
3.12.4 Land Use/Land Cover - U tility Corridors 3-86
3.12.5 Forestry 3-88
3.13 Cultural and Historical Resources 3-90
3.14 Socioeconomics 3-93
3.14.1 Population 3-93
3.14.2 Employment and Income 3-95
3.14.3 Housing 3-96
3.14.4 Local Government Revenues 3-96
3.14.5 Community Services 3-98
3.14.6 Land Values 3-104
3.15 Environmental Justice 3-105
3.16 Transportation Facilities 3-107
3.16.1 Railroads 3-107
RHPP DEIS "" February 1998
TABLE OF CONTENTS
3.16.2 Airports 3-107
3.16.3 Roadways 3-107
3.17 Public Health 3-112
3.17.1 Catastrophic Release of Toxic and Flammable Regulated Substances 3-112
3.17.2 Air Pollutants 3-113
3.17.3 Radiological Impact 3-113
Q 3 .18 Hazardous and Solid Waste 3-1 14
3.19 Noise 3-116
3.19.1 Noise Background 3-116
3.19.2 Noise Metric 3-116
3.19.3 Current Population and Residential Environment 3-117
3.19.4 Current Noise Environment 3-119
3.20 Recreation 3-121
3.20.1 Existing Recreation Facilities and Opportunities 3-121
X^ 3.20.2 The Natchez Trace Parkway 3-123
3.21 Visual Resources 3-123
3.21.1 General 3-123
3.21.2 Natchez Trace Parkway 3-127
3.21.3 Mine Site 3-136
3.21.4 Generation Facility 3-136
3.21.5 Transmission Line and Natural Gas Pipeline 3-137
3.21.6 EcoPlex Site 3-138
4. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 4-1
(_ 4 .1 Introduction 4-1
4.2 Air Resources 4-1
' 4 .2.1 Action Alternative (Project as Proposed) 4-2
4.2.2 No Action Alternative 4-13
4.2.3 New Regulations 4-14
4.3 Geology 4-15
4.3.1 Action Alternative (Project as Proposed) 4-15
RHPP DEIS IV February 1998
TABLE OF CONTENTS
4.3.2 No Action Alternative 4-17
4.4 Soils 4-17
4.4.1 Action Alternative (Project as Proposed) 4-17
4.4.2 No Action Alternative 4-23
4.5 Groundwater Resources 4-24
4.5.1 Action Alternative (Project as Proposed) 4-24
4.5.2 No Action Alternative 4-3J-;
4.6 Surface Water Resources 4-35
4.6.1 Action Alternative ( P roject as Proposed) 4-35/
4.6.2 No Action Alternative 4-481
4.7 Aquatic Ecology 4-49
4.7.1 Action Alternative (Project as Proposed) 4-49
4.7.2 No Action Alternative 4-54
4.8 Wetlands 4-5?
c
4.8.1 Action Alternative (Project as Proposed) 4-55 ^
c
4.8.2 No Action Alternative 4-59 ^
4.9 Floodplains 4-59 ^
4.9.1 Action Alternative (Project as Proposed) 4-59 <
c
4.9.2 No Action Alternative 4-62 r
4.10 Terrestrial Ecology 4-62
4.10.1 Action Alternative (Project as Proposed) 4-62
4.10.2 No Action Alternative 4-67
4.1 1 Threatened or Endangered Species 4-68
4.11.1 Action Alternative (Project as Proposed) 4-68
4.11.2NO Action Alternative 4-70
4.12 Land Use 4-70
4.12.1 Action Alternative (Project as Proposed) 4-70
4.12.2NO Action Alternative 4-77
4.13 Cultural and Historic Resources 4-78
4.13.1 Action Alternative (Project as Proposed) 4-78
RHPP DEIS V February 1998
TABLE OF CONTENTS
4.13.2NO Action Alternative 4-79
4.14 Socioeconomics 4-80
4.14.1 Action Alternative (Project as Proposed) 4-80
4.14.2NO Action Alternative 4-89
4.15 Environmental Justice 4-89
4.15.1 Action Alternative (Project as Proposed) 4-89
4.15.2NO Action Alternative 4-91
4.16 Transportation Facilities 4-91
4.16.1 Action Alternative (Project as Proposed) 4-91
4.16.2 No Action Alternative 4-95
4.17 Public Health 4-95
4.17.1 Action Alternative (Project as Proposed) 4-96
4.17.2NO Action Alternative 4-102
4.18 Hazardous and Solid Waste 4-103
4.18.1 Action Alternative (Project as Proposed) 4-103
4.18.2NO Action Alternative 4-114
4.19 Noise 4-115
4.19.1 Action Alternative (Project as Proposed) 4-115
4.19.2NO Action Alternative 4-131
4.20 Recreation 4-132
4.20.1 Action Alternative (Project as Proposed) 4-132
4.20.2 No Action Alternative 4-133
4.21 Visual Resources 4-134
4.21.1 Action Alternative (Project as Proposed) 4-134
4.21.2NO Action Alternative 4-152
4.22 Cumulative Impacts 4-152
4.22.1 Introduction 4-152
4.22.2 Air Resources 4-152
(^.22.3 Geology 4-159
4.22.4 Soils 4-159
RHPPDEIS VI February 1998