23.10.2014 Views

Analysis - The Institute for Southern Studies

Analysis - The Institute for Southern Studies

Analysis - The Institute for Southern Studies

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

5B. Benefit of Preventing Future CCR Impoundment Structural Failures (Avoided Cleanup Costs)<br />

In December 2008, a failure of a CCR impoundment at the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) Kingston Fossil Fuel Plant TN resulted in the<br />

environmental release of 5.4 million cubic yards of CCR. This impoundment failure event illustrated the potential environmental damage<br />

severity of structural failures involving CCR impoundments. This section of the RIA estimates future avoided impoundment failure cleanup<br />

costs as a potential benefit of the CCR proposed rule, according to the following 5-step method.<br />

Step 1. Characterize CCR Impoundment Release Data<br />

EPA began by examining the CCR impoundment survey data collected in March and April 2009 by EPA under the authority of Section 104(e)<br />

of the Comprehensive Emergency Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), from 162 individual electric utility plants and from<br />

61 electric utility corporate headquarters offices. EPA obtained its list of facilities from a 2005 Department of Energy (DOE) Survey of coal<br />

burning electric utility facilities. EPA used DOE’s 2005 Energy In<strong>for</strong>mation Agency F767 database, which provides in<strong>for</strong>mation on the<br />

disposition of coal ash from coal burning electricity producers. <strong>The</strong> database included "steam-electric plants with a generator nameplate rating<br />

of 10 or more megawatts." <strong>The</strong> term “generator,” means the actual electric generator, not the whole plant. A plant typically will have one or<br />

more generators. EPA also sent the letters to corporate offices of the electric utilities to make sure that all of their facilities were accounted <strong>for</strong><br />

due to limitations in the DOE survey. Based on in<strong>for</strong>mation received in response to the initial letter to the utility corporate headquarters<br />

offices, on April 27, 2009, EPA sent in<strong>for</strong>mation request letters to an additional 48 plants that had been identified by the corporate offices.<br />

Based EPA’s initial collation of the mail survey data, 42 CCR releases from impoundments were reported, all of which occurred within the last<br />

15 years (1995-2009), in response to Question 8 of the survey questionnaire which asked <strong>for</strong> electric power plants to report all CCR<br />

impoundment releases which occurred within the last 10 years (i.e., 1999 to 2008). Exhibit 5B-1 below presents a summary of these 42 CCR<br />

impoundments release cases. Appendix K11 provides additional in<strong>for</strong>mation about these 42 release cases.<br />

133

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!