CCR Surface Impoundment Location Restrictions Demonstration. MidAmerican Energy Company, Louisa Generating Station

Similar documents
J.H. Campbell Generating Facility Pond A - Location Restriction Certification Report

ENGINEER S CERTIFICATION OF FAULT AREA DEMONSTRATION (40 CFR )

Location Restriction Demonstration

ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING

ENTERGY INDEPENDENCE PLANT EAST AND WEST RECYCLE PONDS DEMONSTRATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH EPA CCR RULE SITING CRITERIA , FAULT AREAS.

ENTERGY WHITE BLUFF PLANT RECYCLE POND A AND RECYCLE POND B DEMONSTRATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH EPA CCR RULE SITING CRITERIA 257.

Location Restrictions Certification Report NIPSCO Michigan City Generating Station Boiler Slag Pond

Big Rivers Electric Corporation Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals (CCR) from Electric Utilities Final Rule CCR Impoundment Liner Assessment Report

Geophysical Methods for Screening and Investigating Utility Waste Landfill Sites in Karst Terrain

CCR Rule Compliance: Innovative Use of Geophysics to Certify Landfill Stability and Site Groundwater Monitoring Wells

STRUCTURAL STABILITY ASSESSMENT

HISTORY OF CONSTRUCTION FOR EXISTING CCR SURFACE IMPOUNDMENT PLANT GASTON ASH POND 40 CFR (c)(1)(i) (xii)

GEOLOGY AND SOILS. This chapter summarizes geologic and geotechnical aspects of the site as they relate to the Project.

CLECO POWER LLC DOLET HILLS POWER STATION

3.0 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

HISTORY OF CONSTRUCTION FOR EXISTING CCR SURFACE IMPOUNDMENT PLANT GADSDEN ASH POND 40 CFR (c)(1)(i)-(xii)

3.0 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS G. GEOLOGY AND SOILS

Guidelines for Site-Specific Seismic Hazard Reports for Essential and Hazardous Facilities and Major and Special-Occupancy Structures in Oregon

Converse Consultants Geotechnical Engineering, Environmental & Groundwater Science, Inspection & Testing Services

Impact : Changes to Existing Topography (Less than Significant)

Setting MOUNTAIN HOUSE NEIGHBORHOODS I AND J INITIAL STUDY 5. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Issue

Date: April 2, 2014 Project No.: Prepared For: Mr. Adam Kates CLASSIC COMMUNITIES 1068 E. Meadow Circle Palo Alto, California 94303

Numerical analysis of effect of mitigation measures on seismic performance of a liquefiable tailings dam foundation

IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS E. GEOLOGY AND SOILS

9. GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND MINERALS

Slope Stability Evaluation Ground Anchor Construction Area White Point Landslide San Pedro District Los Angeles, California.

IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS E. GEOLOGY/SOILS

FRIENDS OF THE EEL RIVER

4.5 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

CCR Rule Annual Inspection Report (cont.) 2

3.18 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS E. GEOLOGY AND SOILS

4.5 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

2. Initial Summary of Preliminary Expert Opinion of Converse and Psomas Reports

3.0 SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL GEOTECHNICAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES

5.11 Geology and Soils

LOCATION RESTRICTION EVALUATION

SURFACE GEOLOGY AND LIQUEFACTION SUSCEPTIBILITY IN THE INNER RIO GRANDE VALLEY NEAR ALBUQUERQUE, NEW MEXICO

SAN FRANCISCO DISTRICT INFORMATION REQUESTED FOR VERIFICATION OF CORPS JURISDICTION

IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS E. GEOLOGY/SOILS

LOCATION RESTRICTION EVALUATION

IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS E. GEOLOGY AND SOILS

KANSAS GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Open File Report LAND SUBSIDENCE KIOWA COUNTY, KANSAS. May 2, 2007

INFLOW DESIGN FLOOD CONTROL SYSTEM PLAN 40 C.F.R. PART PLANT YATES ASH POND 2 (AP-2) GEORGIA POWER COMPANY

DUST CONTROL PLAN. Rawhide Energy Station 2700 East County Road 82 Wellington, Colorado 80549

CHAPTER GEOLOGICALLY HAZARDOUS AREAS Applicability Regulations.

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT POLICY & PROCEDURE

(THIS IS ONLY A SAMPLE REPORT OR APPENDIX OFFERED TO THE USERS OF THE COMPUTER PROGRAM

GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND SEISMICITY

GOAL 7 AREAS SUBJECT TO NATURAL DISASTERS AND HAZARDS. To protect life and property from natural disasters and hazards.

4.5 GEOLOGY, SOILS AND SEISMICITY

SLOPE STABILITY EVALUATION AND ACCEPTANCE STANDARDS

SLOPE STABILITY EVALUATION AND ACCEPTANCE STANDARDS

4.9 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

CEMEX Eliot Quarry. Lake A Evaluation Report. Alameda County, California

Hydrogeological Assessment for Part of Lots 2 and 3, Concession 5, Township of Thurlow, County of Hastings 1.0 INTRODUCTION. 1.

Pierce County Department of Planning and Land Services Development Engineering Section

M E M O R A N D U M. Mr. Jonathan K. Thrasher, P.E., Mr. Ian Kinnear, P.E. (FL) PSI

DRAFT ONONDAGA LAKE CAPPING AND DREDGE AREA AND DEPTH INITIAL DESIGN SUBMITTAL H.4 SEISMIC SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSES

Mr. Michael Malone CPS Energy 145 Navarro Street San Antonio, Texas Project No

3.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

Subsurface Geology of the Kennebec River

ATTACHMENT A PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL SUMMARY

Earthquake Commission Darfield Earthquake Recovery Geotechnical Factual Report New Brighton

APPENDIX C. Supplemental Information on Aquifer Properties

Roy Pyle March 24, 2017 Chief Facilities Planner Contra Costa Community College District 500 North Court Street Martinez, CA 94533

14 Geotechnical Hazards

Kansas Underground Injection Control Program & Induced Seismicity. By: Benjamin Busboom Stinson Leonard Street

5.5 GEOLOGY/SOILS EXISTING CONDITIONS. Regulatory Setting

Costs and Benefits of Geological Mapping Contributions of Subhash Bhagwat. Illinois, Kentucky, Spain, and Nevada

Modeling Great Britain s Flood Defenses. Flood Defense in Great Britain. By Dr. Yizhong Qu

PRELIMINARY WORKING DRAFT Work in Progress

Seepage Analysis for Shurijeh Reservoir Dam Using Finite Element Method. S. Soleymani 1, A. Akhtarpur 2

design, construction, operation, and maintenance of the BAP is consistent with recognized and generally accepted good engineering standards.

Lecture 15: Subsidence

THE MINISTRY OF ENERGY AND ENERGY INDUSTRIES MINERALS DIVISION MINE DESIGN TEMPLATE OPERATOR NAME: OPERATOR ADDRESS: PHONE NUMBER: FACSIMILE:

IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS G. GEOLOGY AND SOILS

Hawke s Bay Liquefaction Hazard Report - Frequently Asked Questions

Fifield Companies. EIR Technical Transmittal January 6, 2005 MACTEC PROJECT

PROBABILISTIC LIQUEFACTION HAZARD ANALYSIS IN JAPAN

Safety Factor Assessment Report. Area 15 DTE Monroe Power Plant

CHAPTER 3. GEOLOGICAL AND SOIL RESOURCES

Coal Combustion Residuals Unit Inflow Design Flood Control System Plan

patersongroup Consulting Engineers April 20, 2010 File: PG1887-LET.01R Novatech Engineering Consultants Suite 200, 240 Michael Cowpland Drive

Y. Shioi 1, Y. Hashizume 2 and H. Fukada 3

3.1.3 Geology and Soils

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INVESTIGATION HANDBOOK Second Edition

PERIODIC SAFETY FACTOR ASSESSMENT

Evaluation of Geotechnical Hazards

2.10 Geology/Soils/Seismic/Topography

10. GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION PROGRAM

4.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

Performance and Post Earthquake Assessment of CFA Pile Ground Improvement 22 February 2011 Christchurch, New Zealand Earthquake

Liquefaction induced ground damage in the Canterbury earthquakes: predictions vs. reality

4.6 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND MINERAL RESOURCES

Report of Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation for Ponds

Geotechnical Site Classification and Croatian National Annex for EC 8

USE OF GEOPHYSICAL SURVEYS FOR FILL CHARACTERIZATION AND QUANTITY ESTIMATION AT BROWNFIELD SITES A CASE HISTORY. Abstract

APPENDICES. Appendix A City Standard Details Appendix B Engineering Geology Report

Transcription:

CCR Surface Impoundment Location Restrictions Demonstration MidAmerican Energy Company, Louisa Generating Station Final October 17, 2018

CCR Surface Impoundment Location Restrictions Demonstration Prepared for MidAmerican Energy Company, Louisa Generating Station Muscatine, Iowa Final October 17, 2018 Prepared by Burns & McDonnell Engineering Company, Inc. Kansas City, Missouri COPYRIGHT 2018 BURNS & McDONNELL ENGINEERING COMPANY, INC.

(jd Kira Wylam, P.E. (liu/23129) Date: I 0 / f *7 j Kira Wylam License Number 23129 My license renewal date is December 31, 2018 Nathan Textor, P.E. (Ia #23013) Date: to /ll/[ % Nathan Textor License Number 23013 My license renewal date is December 31, 2018 Sections covered by this seal: 3.3, 3.4 and 3.5.

LGS CCR Surface Impoundment Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. 1.0 SUMMARY OF OBJECTIVES... 1-1 2.0 REVIEW OF AVAILABLE INFORMATION... 2-1 2.1 Geologic Information... 2-1 2.2 Geotechnical Investigations... 2-1 2.3 Design Drawings... 2-2 2.4 Impoundment Inspections... 2-2 2.5 Groundwater Information... 2-3 2.6 Seismic... 2-3 3.0 LOCATION RESTRICTIONS DEMONSTRATION... 3-1 3.1 Placement Above the Uppermost Aquifer... 3-1 3.2 Wetlands... 3-1 3.3 Fault Areas... 3-2 3.4 Seismic Impact Zones... 3-2 3.5 Unstable Areas... 3-2 4.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS... 4-1 APPENDIX A EXCERPT FROM CCR RULE APPENDIX B SITE PLAN MidAmerican Energy Company TOC-1 Burns & McDonnell

LGS CCR Surface Impoundment List of Abbreviations LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS Abbreviation ASCE BMcD CCR CFR EPA Impoundment LGS MEC RCRA U.S.C. USGS Term/Phrase/Name American Society of Civil Engineers Burns & McDonnell Coal Combustion Residual Code of Federal Regulations Environmental Protection Agency CCR Surface Impoundment Louisa Generating Station MidAmerican Energy Company Resource Conservation and Recovery Act United States Code United States Geological Survey MidAmerican Energy Company i Burns & McDonnell

LGS CCR Surface Impoundment Summary of Objectives 1.0 SUMMARY OF OBJECTIVES On April 17, 2015, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued the final version of the federal Coal Combustion Residual Rule (CCR Rule) to regulate the disposal of coal combustion residual (CCR) materials generated at coal-fired units. The rule is administered as part of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA, 42 United States Code [U.S.C.] 6901 et seq.), using the Subtitle D approach. MidAmerican Energy Company (MEC) is subject to the CCR Rule. Per the requirements of 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 257.60 through 257.64, a location restrictions demonstration for all Active CCR Impoundments is required. A qualified professional engineer must determine that the results of the assessments meets the requirements of 257.60 through 257.64. On behalf of MEC, Burns & McDonnell (BMcD) has completed the Location Restrictions Demonstration of the Louisa Generating Station CCR Surface Impoundment which is currently undergoing closure. An excerpt from the CCR Rule describing the requirements that are addressed in this report are included in Appendix A. This report contains a description of the information available to support the location restrictions demonstration and the assessment of each of the required location restriction demonstrations. Based on this assessment, the CCR Surface Impoundment does not meet the requirements of the location restrictions demonstration. MidAmerican Energy Company 1-1 Burns & McDonnell

LGS CCR Surface Impoundment Review of Available Information 2.0 REVIEW OF AVAILABLE INFORMATION Louisa Generating Station (LGS) is a coal-fired power plant located near Muscatine, Iowa that is owned and operated by MEC. The LGS CCR Surface Impoundment (Impoundment) is a surface impoundment previously utilized to impound water and sluiced CCR as part of the plant ash handling system. All CCR and non-ccr wastewater flows were discontinued to the Impoundment after November 13, 2017, and is currently undergoing closure. The following subsections provide information associated with the Impoundment including geologic/geotechnical information, design drawings, inspections, groundwater information and seismic information. This information was reviewed to provide an understanding of the characteristics if the Impoundment that are related to the location restrictions. Its application to the requirements of the CCR Rule are discussed further in Section 3.0. A general site plan of the area is included in Appendix B. 2.1 Geologic Information Based on a review of the Iowa Geological Survey s Map of the Surface Deposits of Louisa County, Iowa, (1900), the site is underlain by the alluvium from the Mississippi River. Borings indicate the alluvium is sand with varying amounts of silt. Bedrock was encountered between elevations of 401.5 feet and 405.0 feet. No karst activity has been noted in these counties per the Iowa Geological Survey s Geologic Hazards webpage (https://www.iihr.uiowa.edu/igs/geologic-hazards/). No underground mines are mapped in this area per the Iowa Geological Survey s Iowa Coal Mines online map. 2.2 Geotechnical Investigations Multiple geotechnical investigations have been performed at the Impoundment site. In 2010, an investigation was performed by Terracon to support a slope stability evaluation of the Impoundment. This investigation included drilling a total of five (5) borings to characterize the embankment and subsurface conditions. The borings were drilled to a depth of 40 feet below grade. In 2016, an investigation was performed by Braun Intertec to support evaluations related to Structural Stability and Safety Factor Assessments required by the CCR Rule. This investigation included drilling a total of 33 borings to characterize the embankment, CCR and underlying materials of the Impoundment. The borings were drilled between depths of 20.0 and 161.5 feet below grade. MidAmerican Energy Company 2-1 Burns & McDonnell

LGS CCR Surface Impoundment Review of Available Information In 2018, an investigation was performed by Terracon to determine conditions in the interior of the Impoundment including depth of CCR and clay liner. This investigation included drilling a total of 12 borings to characterize the Impoundment interior subsurface conditions. The borings were drilled between depths of 19 and 38 feet below grade. Embankments are comprised of cohesionless soils. Underlying the embankments are fine to coarse sands with varying amount of silts and some intermittent clay layers. Sands increase in density with depth. CCR was encountered at an elevation of 538.5 feet and above during the 2018 Terracon investigation. A sandy clay liner was encountered below the CCR. 2.3 Design Drawings Design drawings for the Impoundment were prepared by Black and Veatch in 1981. The drawings indicate the base of the Impoundment was to be excavated to an approximate elevation of 542 feet. Specifications note that any unsuitable materials will be removed from the subgrade before scarifying and recompaction of the subgrade is to occur. No construction quality assurance information is available for the Impoundment. 2.4 Impoundment Inspections As part of the CCR Rule, inspections are required for the following: On a 7-day basis, a qualified individual inspects for any appearances of actual or potential structural weakness and other conditions that could disrupt the operation of the Impoundment. On an annual basis, a qualified and certified engineer in the state of Iowa ensures that design, construction, operation, and maintenance of the Impoundment is consistent with recognized and generally accepted good engineering practices. Weekly inspections performed by MEC during 2018 were reviewed by BMcD. No appearances of actual or potential structural weaknesses were observed by MEC during these inspections. The 2017 annual inspection was performed by HGM Associates, Inc. on October 4, 2017, and documented in a report dated January 12, 2018. Based upon BMcD s review, no appearances of actual or potential structural weaknesses were observed by HGM Associates, Inc. at the time of their inspection. MidAmerican Energy Company 2-2 Burns & McDonnell

LGS CCR Surface Impoundment Review of Available Information If future inspections find the appearance of actual or potential structural weakness caused by unstable conditions, generally accepted good engineering practices should be incorporated, at that time, to mitigate the unstable condition. 2.5 Groundwater Information Uppermost groundwater elevation data from the CCR Impoundment monitoring well network presented in the 2017 Annual Groundwater Monitoring and Corrective Action Report prepared by Terracon Consultants, Inc. and dated January 30, 2018, were reviewed. 2.6 Seismic Data on the United States Geological Survey (USGS) website were reviewed to understand seismic characteristics of the site including peak ground acceleration and proximity of nearby faults. Utilizing the USGS 2014 Unified Hazard Tool v4.1.1, the peak ground acceleration for an earthquake with a probability of occurrence of 2 percent in 50 years was determined to be 0.041 g at this site. This acceleration is associated with a Site Class B/C which corresponds to a weak rock. Based on investigations performed at the site, the site is characterized as a Site Class D. Since Site Class D material is weaker than Site Class B/C, it will cause amplification of the seismic acceleration. Per approaches put forward in American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) 7-10, the amplification factor for a Site Class D is 1.6. Utilizing this factor, the peak ground acceleration for this site for the design earthquake is 0.066 g. Utilizing the USGS U.S. Quaternary Faults and Folds Database mapping application, there are no Quaternary age faults in the vicinity of the Impoundment. It should be noted that the Quaternary period covers the last 2.6 million years and includes the Holocene epoch (the last 11,700 years). Therefore, the information from USGS mapping application covers the time range for active faults as required by the CCR Rule. The USGS Unified Hazard Tool can be found at https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/interactive/ and the USGS U.S. Quaternary Faults and Folds Database mapping application can be found at https://usgs.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=db287853794f4555b8e93e42290e9716. MidAmerican Energy Company 2-3 Burns & McDonnell

LGS CCR Surface Impoundment 3.0 LOCATION RESTRICTIONS DEMONSTRATION Pursuant to 40 CFR 257.60 to 257.64, an existing CCR Surface Impoundment must meet requirements associated with the five location restrictions: Placement above the uppermost aquifer, Wetlands, Fault Areas, Seismic impact zones, and Unstable areas. Discussions on each of these requirements will be made below with determinations made based on review of the previously discussed information. 3.1 Placement Above the Uppermost Aquifer Per 40 CFR 257.60, existing CCR surface impoundments must be constructed with a base that is located no less than 1.52 meters (five feet) above the upper limit of the uppermost aquifer, or must demonstrate that there will not be an intermittent, recurring or sustained hydraulic connection between any portion of the base of the CCR unit and the uppermost aquifer due to normal fluctuations in ground elevations (including the seasonal high water table). The uppermost groundwater elevations measured during nine (9) monitoring events conducted from December 2015 through October 2017 were above 533.5 feet above mean sea level and are within five (5) feet of the minimum elevation (538.5 feet) where CCR was encountered within the Impoundment during the 2018 Terracon geotechnical investigation. Therefore, the Impoundment does not meet the separation requirements of 257.60(a). 3.2 Wetlands For regulatory purposes, a wetland is defined as those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water 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 (40 CFR 232.2). Per 40 CFR 257.61, existing surface impoundments must not be located in wetlands as defined in 232.2 of this chapter. 40 CFR 232.2 states that waste treatment systems, including treatment ponds or lagoons designed to meet the requirements of the Clean Water Act are not Waters of the United States. The Impoundment is MidAmerican Energy Company 3-1 Burns & McDonnell

LGS CCR Surface Impoundment a part of a wastewater treatment system with an NPDES permit. As such, and per 40 CRF 232.2, there are no jurisdiction wetlands within the Impoundment. Therefore, the Impoundment meets the wetlands requirements of 257.61(a). 3.3 Fault Areas Per 40 CFR 257.62, existing CCR surface impoundments must not be located within 60 meters (200 feet) of the outermost damage zone of a fault that has had displacement in the Holocene time. Based on available information provided by USGS, there are no faults within 60 meters (200 feet) of the Impoundment that have been active within the Holocene epoch. Therefore, the Impoundment meets the requirements of 257.62(a). 3.4 Seismic Impact Zones Per 40 CFR 257.63, existing CCR surface impoundments must not be located in seismic impact zones. A seismic impact zone is defined by the CCR Rule as an area having a 2% or greater probability that the maximum expected horizontal acceleration is 0.10 g in 50 years. Based on available information provided by USGS and ASCE methodology, the peak ground acceleration for a seismic event with a 2% probability of occurring in 50 years is 0.066 g at this site. Therefore, the Impoundment meets the requirements of 257.63(a). 3.5 Unstable Areas Per 40 CFR 257.64, existing CCR surface impoundments must not be located in an unstable area unless the owner or operator demonstrates that recognized and generally accepted good engineering practices have been incorporated into design to ensure that the integrity of the structural components of the CCR unit will not be disrupted. The following factors must be considered as part of the unstable area determination: On-site or local soil conditions that may results in significant differential settling, On-site or local geologic or geomorphologic features, and On-site or local human-made features or events (both surface and subsurface). Based on a review of available subsurface information, the materials beneath the Impoundment are not susceptible to large scale differential settling, including settlement caused by placed CCR and fill or from liquefaction during a design seismic event. Inspections do not indicate any indications of detrimental settlement features such as cracking of the embankment. There are also no noted geologic features prone to settlement, such as karst, and no man-made features, such as mines, indicated near the site. Therefore, the Impoundment meets the requirements discussed in 257.64(a). MidAmerican Energy Company 3-2 Burns & McDonnell

LGS CCR Surface Impoundment Report Limitations 4.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS This report is based on the information reviewed and described herein. A review of available design documents, geotechnical investigations, groundwater data and inspection reports was performed as part of this demonstration to aid in the understanding of previous work performed. This review is not an assurance of the work performed by others as indicated in the documents reviewed including design, construction, testing, operation, and inspection of the Impoundment. MidAmerican Energy Company 4-1 Burns & McDonnell

APPENDIX A EXCERPT FROM CCR RULE

APPENDIX B SITE PLAN

OUTFALL 002 BOTTOM ASH POND 2018 BURNS & M cdonnell ENGINEERING COM PANY, INC. COPYRIGHT date designed OCT. 9, 2018 K. WYLAM MIDAMERICAN ENERGY COMPANY LOUISA LOCATION RESTRICTIONS SITE PLAN 0 400' 800' SCALE IN FEET project contract SK - MISSISSIPPI RIVER 86505 003 N Z:\Clients\ENR\MidAmEnr\86505_MECLouisaCCRPr\Design\Civil\Dwgs\Sketches\CCR Compliance Report\86505SK003_LR.dgn

Burns & McDonnell World Headquarters 9400 Ward Parkway Kansas City, MO 64114 O 816-333-9400 F 816-333-3690 www.burnsmcd.com