Integrated Resource Plan, 65282-65284 [2015-27129]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
65282
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 206 / Monday, October 26, 2015 / Notices
the recreation activities on the reservoir
system.
Philip D. Propes,
Director, Enterprise Information Security and
Policy.
[FR Doc. 2015–27213 Filed 10–23–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8120–08–P
TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY
Agency Information Collection
Activities: Proposed Collection;
Comment Request
Tennessee Valley Authority.
30-day notice of submission of
information collection approval and
request for comments.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
This survey is used to locate,
for monitoring purposes, rural residents,
home gardens, and milk animals within
a five mile radius of a nuclear power
plant. The Land use survey is performed
once per year. TVA uses the Land use
survey data for their effluent annual
report to the NRC normally in April
every year. The proposed information
collection described below will be
submitted to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) at, oira_submission@
omb.eop.gov, for review, as required by
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. chapter 35, as amended). The
Tennessee Valley Authority is soliciting
public comments on this proposed
collection as provided by 5 CFR
1320.8(d)(1).
SUMMARY:
Comments should be sent to the
Agency Clearance Officer and the OMB
Office of Information & Regulatory
Affairs, Attention: Desk Officer for
Tennessee Valley Authority,
Washington, DC 20503, or email: oira_
submission@omb.eop.gov, no later than
November 25, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Requests for information,
including copies of the information
collection proposed and supporting
documentation, should be directed to
the Agency Clearance Officer: Philip D.
Propes, Tennessee Valley Authority,
1101 Market Street (SP–5S–108),
Chattanooga, Tennessee 37402–2801;
(423) 751–8593.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Type of Request: Regular request.
Reinstatement, with change, of a
previously approved collection for
which approval has expired.
Title of Information Collection: Land
Use Survey Questionnaire—Vicinity of
Nuclear Power Plants.
Frequency of Use: Annual.
Type of Affected Public: Individuals
or households, farms and business and
other for-profit.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
DATES:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:53 Oct 23, 2015
Jkt 238001
Small Businesses or Organizations
Affected: Yes.
Federal Budget Functional Category
Code: 271.
Estimated Number of Annual
Responses: 150.
Estimated Total Annual Burden
Hours: 75.0.
Estimated Average Burden Hours Per
Response: .50.
Need For and Use of Information: The
monitoring program is a mandatory
requirement of the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission set out in the technical
specifications when the plants were
licensed.
Philip D. Propes,
Director, Enterprise Information Security and
Policy.
[FR Doc. 2015–27226 Filed 10–23–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8120–01–P
TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY
Integrated Resource Plan
Tennessee Valley Authority.
Issuance of record of decision.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
This notice is provided in
accordance with the Council on
Environmental Quality’s regulations (40
CFR 1500 to 1508) and TVA’s
procedures for implementing the
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA). TVA has decided to adopt the
preferred alternative in its final
supplemental environmental impact
statement (SEIS) for the Integrated
Resource Plan (IRP). The notice of
availability (NOA) of the Final
Supplemental Environmental Impact
Statement for the Integrated Resource
Plan was published in the Federal
Register on July 17, 2015. The TVA
Board of Directors approved the IRP and
authorized staff to implement the
preferred alternative at its August 21,
2015 meeting. This alternative, the
Target Power Supply Mix, will guide
TVA’s selection of energy resource
options to meet the energy needs of the
Tennessee Valley region over the next
20 years. The energy resource options
include new nuclear, natural gas-fired
and renewable generation, increased
energy efficiency and demand
reduction, and decreased coal-fired
generation.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Charles P. Nicholson, NEPA
Compliance, Tennessee Valley
Authority, 400 West Summit Hill Drive,
WT 11D, Knoxville, Tennessee 37902–
1499; telephone 865–632–3582 or email
cpnicholson@tva.gov.
Gary S. Brinkworth, IRP Project
Manager, Tennessee Valley Authority,
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00088
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
1101 Market Street, MR 3K–C,
Chattanooga, Tennessee 3740s;
telephone 423–751–2193, or email
gsbrinkworth@tva.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: TVA is an
agency and instrumentality of the
United States, established by an act of
Congress in 1933, to foster the social
and economic welfare of the people of
the Tennessee Valley region and to
promote the proper use and
conservation of the region’s natural
resources. One component of this
mission is the generation, transmission,
and sale of reliable and affordable
electric energy. TVA operates the largest
public power system in the nation,
providing electricity to about 9 million
people in an 80,000-square mile area
comprised of most of Tennessee and
parts of Virginia, North Carolina,
Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, and
Kentucky. It provides wholesale power
to 155 independent power distributors
and 59 directly served large industrial
and federal customers. The TVA Act
requires the TVA power system to be
self-supporting and operating on a
nonprofit basis and directs TVA to sell
power at rates as low as are feasible.
Dependable generating capability on
the TVA power system is about 37,200
megawatts (MW). TVA generates most of
this power with 3 nuclear plants, 10
coal-fired plants, 9 combustion-turbine
plants, 6 combined cycle plants, 29
hydroelectric plants, a pumped-storage
facility, and several small renewable
facilities. These facilities generated
142.2 billion kilowatt-hours in fiscal
year 2014. The major sources for this
power were coal (40 percent), nuclear
(33 percent), natural gas (13 percent),
and hydroelectric (10 percent). Other
sources comprised less than 1 percent of
TVA generation. Total power delivered
to customers in fiscal year 2014 was 161
gigawatt-hours (GWh). A portion of this
delivered power was provided through
long-term power purchase agreements.
The recently completed IRP updates
TVA’s 2011 IRP. Consistent with
Section 113 of the Energy Policy Act of
1992, codified within the TVA Act, TVA
employed a least-cost system planning
process in developing the IRP. This
process took into account the demand
for electricity, energy resource diversity,
reliability, costs, risks, environmental
impacts, and the unique attributes of
different energy resources.
Future Demand for Energy
TVA uses state-of-the-art energy
forecasting models to predict future
demands on its system. Because of the
uncertainty in predicting future
demands, TVA developed high,
medium, and low forecasts for both
E:\FR\FM\26OCN1.SGM
26OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 206 / Monday, October 26, 2015 / Notices
peak load (in MW) and annual net
system energy (in GWh) through 2033.
Peak load is predicted to grow at
average annual rates of 1.1 percent in
the medium-growth Current Outlook
Scenario, 0.3 percent in the low-growth
forecast, and 1.3 percent in the highgrowth forecast. Net system energy is
predicted to grow at an average annual
rate of 1.0 percent in the mediumgrowth forecast, remain flat in the lowgrowth forecast, and grow at an average
annual rate of 1.1 percent in the highgrowth forecast.
Based on these load growth forecasts,
TVA’s current firm capacity (TVA
generation, energy efficiency and
demand response measures, and power
purchase agreements), and including a
15 percent planning reserve margin,
TVA would need additional energy
resources in the future. The mediumgrowth case needs are 2,500 MW of
additional capacity and 14,000 GWh of
additional energy by 2020, growing to
11,600 MW and 51,000 GWh by 2033.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Alternatives Considered
Six alternative energy resource
strategies were evaluated in the Draft
SEIS and IRP. These resource planning
strategies were identified as potential
alternative means of serving future
electrical energy demands on the TVA
system while meeting least-cost system
planning requirements. These
alternative strategies are:
Baseline Case (No Action Alternative):
The continued implementation of the
2011 IRP as modified by subsequent
decisions by the TVA Board of
Directors.
Strategy A—The Reference Plan: This
strategy is similar to the Baseline Case
but treats energy efficiency and
renewable energy resources as selectable
resources instead of defined inputs.
Strategy B—Meet an Emission Target:
Resources are selected under this
strategy to create a lower emitting
carbon dioxide (CO2) profile by
reducing system-wide direct emissions
of CO2 by 50 percent (to 557 lbs/
megawatt-hour) by 2033 and by 80
percent by 2050 from 2005. The targeted
CO2 rate is measured at a system-wide
level and thus differs from the state-bystate and technology-specific baselines
in the recently issued Clean Power Plan.
Strategy C—Focus on Long-Term,
Market-Supplied Resources: Under this
strategy, TVA would minimize capital
investments in owned energy resources
by meeting most capacity needs through
power purchase agreements.
Strategy D—Maximize Energy
Efficiency: Energy efficiency would be
given priority in meeting capacity needs
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:53 Oct 23, 2015
Jkt 238001
with other resources selected to serve
the remaining need.
Strategy E—Maximize Renewables:
Renewable energy resources
(hydroelectric, biomass, wind and solar)
are emphasized by setting near-term and
long-term renewable energy targets.
The alternative strategies were
analyzed in the context of five scenarios
or future ‘‘worlds’’ that were determined
to be reasonably possible to occur. The
scenarios were TVA’s current outlook, a
stagnant economy, a growth economy, a
de-carbonized future, and a distributed
energy marketplace. Each scenario is a
set of uncertainties relevant to power
system planning that include plausible
future economic, financial, regulatory
and legislative conditions, as well as
social trends and adoption of
technological innovations. Potential 20year capacity expansion plans or
resource portfolios were developed for
each combination of alternative strategy
and scenario using a capacity planning
model. The model built each portfolio
from a range of potential energy
resource options that included TVA’s
existing energy resources and new coal,
nuclear, natural gas, hydroelectric,
wind, solar, and biomass generation,
energy storage, and energy efficiency
and demand response resources. Each
portfolio was optimized for the lowest
Present Value of Revenue Requirements
while meeting energy balance, reserve,
operational, and other requirements.
The portfolios were then evaluated
using an hourly production costing
program to determine detailed revenue
requirements and near- and long-term
system average costs. Recognizing the
uncertainty in long-range planning
studies, extensive stochastic analyses
were also conducted to identify risk
exposure within each scenario.
Additional metrics developed to rank
the portfolios included financial risk,
CO2 emissions, water consumption, coal
waste generation and changes in
regional personal income. These metrics
were used to compare the alternative
strategies and their associated
portfolios.
Strategies A–C had similar scores for
most metrics and the scores for
Strategies A and B were almost identical
and for some metrics slightly better than
Strategy C. Strategy E, with the greatest
emphasis on renewable energy
resources, scored the best on the three
environmental metrics of CO2
emissions, water consumption, and coal
waste production. Strategy D had
somewhat greater environmental
impacts than Strategy E, and Strategies
A–C had the greatest and similar
environmental impacts. To better inform
the development of the preferred
PO 00000
Frm 00089
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
65283
alternative, TVA conducted additional
sensitivity analyses that varied key
resource assumptions involving nuclear
additions, energy efficiency, renewable
resources, fundamental drivers such as
load growth and fuel pricing, and the
effect of forcing the model to consider
resource types and/or amounts that it
otherwise would not. The results of
these analyses supported the energy
resource ranges identified in the initial
portfolios.
TVA then developed a preferred
alternative, the Target Power Supply
Mix, based on guideline ranges for key
energy resources. In developing it, TVA
took into account its least-cost planning
requirement and customer priorities of
power cost and reliability, as well as
other comments it received during the
public comment on the Draft IRP and
SEIS. The Target Power Supply Mix
establishes ranges, in MW, for coal plant
retirements and additions of nuclear,
hydroelectric, demand response, energy
efficiency, solar, wind, and natural gas
capacity. The recommended ranges are
based on Strategies A–C and the Current
Outlook Scenario, expressed over the
20-year planning period with more
specific direction over the first 10-year
period. The Target Power Supply Mix
also includes broader ranges resulting
from the sensitivity analyses. Shifts in
resource additions within the ranges
would be based on changes in the load
forecast, the price of natural gas and
other commodities, the price and
performance of energy efficiency and
renewable resources, and impacts from
regulatory policy or breakthrough
technologies.
Public Involvement
TVA published a notice of intent to
prepare the IRP SEIS in the Federal
Register on October 31, 2013. TVA then
actively engaged the public through
public scoping and public briefings
during the development of the IRP and
SEIS. TVA also established an IRP
Working Group to more actively engage
stakeholders. Group members included
representatives of local power
companies (distributors of TVA power),
state agencies, direct-served customers,
academia, and energy and
environmental non-governmental
organizations. Members of the group
met frequently with IRP staff to review
and provide input during the
development of the plan.
The Notice of Availability of the Draft
IRP and SEIS was published in the
Federal Register by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency
(USEPA) on March 13, 2015. TVA
accepted comments on the draft plan
and SEIS until April 27, 2015. During
E:\FR\FM\26OCN1.SGM
26OCN1
65284
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 206 / Monday, October 26, 2015 / Notices
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
the comment period, TVA held seven
public meetings to describe the project
and accept comments. TVA received
about 200 comments signed by more
than 2,400 individuals. After
considering and responding to all
substantive comments, further
evaluating the alternative strategies, and
developing the Target Power Supply
Mix, TVA issued the Final IRP and
SEIS. The NOA for the Final IRP and
SEIS was published in the Federal
Register on July 17, 2015.
Environmentally Preferred Alternative
All of the alternative strategies, as
well as the Target Power Supply Mix,
have several common features that affect
their anticipated environmental
impacts. The only new baseload
generation added is the extended power
uprate of three nuclear units, a
component of all alternative strategies.
All result in decreases in coal-fired
generation and increases in the reliance
on energy efficiency and renewable
resources. All also add varying amounts
of new natural gas-fueled generation to
meet peak loads. Emissions of air
pollutants and CO2, and generation of
coal waste would decrease significantly
under all alternative strategies,
including the Target Power Supply Mix.
Water-related impacts would also
decrease, although by smaller
proportions. The major differences in
the alternative strategies that affect their
environmental impacts are in the
expansion of energy efficiency and
natural gas and renewable resources.
Strategies A–C and the Target Power
Supply Mix have similar environmental
impacts and their impacts to most
environmental resources are greater
than those of Strategies D and E.
Because of its greater reliance on
generation by fossil fuels, Strategy D has
somewhat greater impacts to most
environmental resources than Strategy
E. Strategy E has the greatest reliance on
renewable energy resources, which,
particularly for utility-scale solar
generation, have large land
requirements. Strategy E would
therefore directly affect the largest land
area, almost twice that of the other
alternative strategies and the Target
Power Supply Mix. Relative to other
types of generation, impacts of solar
facilities on land resources are low.
Overall, Strategy E is considered the
environmentally preferred alternative.
Decision
On August 21, 2015, the TVA Board
of Directors approved the preferred
alternative, the Target Power Supply
Mix. The Board also directed staff to
monitor future developments to help
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:53 Oct 23, 2015
Jkt 238001
determine when deviations from the
recommended resource ranges should
be made and to initiate an update to the
IRP no later than 2020 and earlier if
future developments make this
appropriate.
Mitigation Measures
The reduction of environmental
impacts was an important goal in TVA’s
integrated resource planning process
and all of the alternatives assessed by
TVA do that. Because this is a
programmatic review, measures to
reduce potential environmental impacts
on a site-specific level were not
identified. As TVA deploys specific
energy resources, it will review and take
measures to reduce their potential
environmental impacts as appropriate.
TVA’s siting process for generation and
transmission facilities, as well as
processes for modifying these facilities,
are designed to avoid and/or minimize
potential adverse environmental
impacts. Potential impacts will also be
reduced through pollution prevention
measures and environmental controls
such as air pollution control systems,
wastewater treatment systems, and
thermal generating plant cooling
systems. Other potentially adverse
unavoidable impacts will be mitigated
by measures such as compensatory
wetlands mitigation, payments to in-lieu
stream mitigation programs and related
conservation initiatives, enhanced
management of other properties,
documentation and recovery of cultural
resources, and infrastructure
improvement assistance to local
communities.
approximately 9.1 acres of airport land
from aeronautical use to nonaeronautical use and to authorize the
sale of this airport property.
As described in the 2011 approved
Airport Layout Plan, the 9.1 acres of
airport land are composed of Tract C
Lots LL 2 and LL 3, and Tract D Lot LL
1C. Precently these properties are
occupied as follows: LL 2 Mat-Su
Borough Nutrition Center, LL 3 Baseball
Fields, and LL 1C City Water Well.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before November 25, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Send comments on this
document to Mike Edelmann, Aviation
Planner, Federal Aviation
Administration, Alaskan Region
Airports Division, 222 W. 7th Avenue,
#14, Anchorage, AK 99513–7587. In
addition, one copy of any comments
submitted to the FAA must be mailed or
delivered to: City of Palmer Alaska POC
Jeffrey Combs Airport Superintendent
(907) 761–1334 JJCOMBS@palmerak.org
231 West Evergreen, Palmer AK 99645.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Michael Edelmann, Federal Aviation
Administration, Alaskan Region
Airports Division, 222 W. 7th Avenue,
#14, Anchorage, AK 99513–7587,
telephone 907–271–5026, email
mike.edelmann@faa.gov or Jeffrey
Combs Airport Superintendent (907)
761–1334, JJCOMBS@palmerak.org, 231
West Evergreen, Palmer AK 99645.
Issued in Anchorage, Alaska, on October
20, 2015.
Byron Huffman,
Division Manager, FAA, Alaskan Region.
[FR Doc. 2015–27185 Filed 10–23–15; 8:45 am]
Dated: October 16, 2015.
Van M. Wardlaw,
Executive Vice President and Chief External
Relations Officer.
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
[FR Doc. 2015–27129 Filed 10–23–15; 8:45 am]
Federal Aviation Administration
BILLING CODE 8120–08–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
Public Notice for Waiver of
Aeronautical Land-Use Assurance;
Airport Property at Palmer Municipal
Airport, Palmer, Alaska
Federal Aviation
Administration, Department of
Transportation.
ACTION: Notice of intent of waiver with
repect to land.
AGENCY:
Notice is hereby given per 49
U.S.C. 47107(h)(1)(A) that the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) is
considering a proposal to change
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00090
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Agency Information Collection
Activities: Requests for Comments;
Clearance of Renewed Approval of
Information Collection: Aviation
Medical Examiner Program
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice and request for
comments.
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA
invites public comments about our
intention to request the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB)
approval to renew an information
collection. The Federal Register Notice
with a 60-day comment period soliciting
comments on the following collection of
information was published on August
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\26OCN1.SGM
26OCN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 206 (Monday, October 26, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65282-65284]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-27129]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY
Integrated Resource Plan
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 1500 to 1508) and TVA's
procedures for implementing the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA). TVA has decided to adopt the preferred alternative in its final
supplemental environmental impact statement (SEIS) for the Integrated
Resource Plan (IRP). The notice of availability (NOA) of the Final
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the Integrated Resource
Plan was published in the Federal Register on July 17, 2015. The TVA
Board of Directors approved the IRP and authorized staff to implement
the preferred alternative at its August 21, 2015 meeting. This
alternative, the Target Power Supply Mix, will guide TVA's selection of
energy resource options to meet the energy needs of the Tennessee
Valley region over the next 20 years. The energy resource options
include new nuclear, natural gas-fired and renewable generation,
increased energy efficiency and demand reduction, and decreased coal-
fired generation.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charles P. Nicholson, NEPA Compliance,
Tennessee Valley Authority, 400 West Summit Hill Drive, WT 11D,
Knoxville, Tennessee 37902-1499; telephone 865-632-3582 or email
cpnicholson@tva.gov.
Gary S. Brinkworth, IRP Project Manager, Tennessee Valley
Authority, 1101 Market Street, MR 3K-C, Chattanooga, Tennessee 3740s;
telephone 423-751-2193, or email gsbrinkworth@tva.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: TVA is an agency and instrumentality of the
United States, established by an act of Congress in 1933, to foster the
social and economic welfare of the people of the Tennessee Valley
region and to promote the proper use and conservation of the region's
natural resources. One component of this mission is the generation,
transmission, and sale of reliable and affordable electric energy. TVA
operates the largest public power system in the nation, providing
electricity to about 9 million people in an 80,000-square mile area
comprised of most of Tennessee and parts of Virginia, North Carolina,
Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, and Kentucky. It provides wholesale
power to 155 independent power distributors and 59 directly served
large industrial and federal customers. The TVA Act requires the TVA
power system to be self-supporting and operating on a nonprofit basis
and directs TVA to sell power at rates as low as are feasible.
Dependable generating capability on the TVA power system is about
37,200 megawatts (MW). TVA generates most of this power with 3 nuclear
plants, 10 coal-fired plants, 9 combustion-turbine plants, 6 combined
cycle plants, 29 hydroelectric plants, a pumped-storage facility, and
several small renewable facilities. These facilities generated 142.2
billion kilowatt-hours in fiscal year 2014. The major sources for this
power were coal (40 percent), nuclear (33 percent), natural gas (13
percent), and hydroelectric (10 percent). Other sources comprised less
than 1 percent of TVA generation. Total power delivered to customers in
fiscal year 2014 was 161 gigawatt-hours (GWh). A portion of this
delivered power was provided through long-term power purchase
agreements.
The recently completed IRP updates TVA's 2011 IRP. Consistent with
Section 113 of the Energy Policy Act of 1992, codified within the TVA
Act, TVA employed a least-cost system planning process in developing
the IRP. This process took into account the demand for electricity,
energy resource diversity, reliability, costs, risks, environmental
impacts, and the unique attributes of different energy resources.
Future Demand for Energy
TVA uses state-of-the-art energy forecasting models to predict
future demands on its system. Because of the uncertainty in predicting
future demands, TVA developed high, medium, and low forecasts for both
[[Page 65283]]
peak load (in MW) and annual net system energy (in GWh) through 2033.
Peak load is predicted to grow at average annual rates of 1.1 percent
in the medium-growth Current Outlook Scenario, 0.3 percent in the low-
growth forecast, and 1.3 percent in the high-growth forecast. Net
system energy is predicted to grow at an average annual rate of 1.0
percent in the medium-growth forecast, remain flat in the low-growth
forecast, and grow at an average annual rate of 1.1 percent in the
high-growth forecast.
Based on these load growth forecasts, TVA's current firm capacity
(TVA generation, energy efficiency and demand response measures, and
power purchase agreements), and including a 15 percent planning reserve
margin, TVA would need additional energy resources in the future. The
medium-growth case needs are 2,500 MW of additional capacity and 14,000
GWh of additional energy by 2020, growing to 11,600 MW and 51,000 GWh
by 2033.
Alternatives Considered
Six alternative energy resource strategies were evaluated in the
Draft SEIS and IRP. These resource planning strategies were identified
as potential alternative means of serving future electrical energy
demands on the TVA system while meeting least-cost system planning
requirements. These alternative strategies are:
Baseline Case (No Action Alternative): The continued implementation
of the 2011 IRP as modified by subsequent decisions by the TVA Board of
Directors.
Strategy A--The Reference Plan: This strategy is similar to the
Baseline Case but treats energy efficiency and renewable energy
resources as selectable resources instead of defined inputs.
Strategy B--Meet an Emission Target: Resources are selected under
this strategy to create a lower emitting carbon dioxide
(CO2) profile by reducing system-wide direct emissions of
CO2 by 50 percent (to 557 lbs/megawatt-hour) by 2033 and by
80 percent by 2050 from 2005. The targeted CO2 rate is
measured at a system-wide level and thus differs from the state-by-
state and technology-specific baselines in the recently issued Clean
Power Plan.
Strategy C--Focus on Long-Term, Market-Supplied Resources: Under
this strategy, TVA would minimize capital investments in owned energy
resources by meeting most capacity needs through power purchase
agreements.
Strategy D--Maximize Energy Efficiency: Energy efficiency would be
given priority in meeting capacity needs with other resources selected
to serve the remaining need.
Strategy E--Maximize Renewables: Renewable energy resources
(hydroelectric, biomass, wind and solar) are emphasized by setting
near-term and long-term renewable energy targets.
The alternative strategies were analyzed in the context of five
scenarios or future ``worlds'' that were determined to be reasonably
possible to occur. The scenarios were TVA's current outlook, a stagnant
economy, a growth economy, a de-carbonized future, and a distributed
energy marketplace. Each scenario is a set of uncertainties relevant to
power system planning that include plausible future economic,
financial, regulatory and legislative conditions, as well as social
trends and adoption of technological innovations. Potential 20-year
capacity expansion plans or resource portfolios were developed for each
combination of alternative strategy and scenario using a capacity
planning model. The model built each portfolio from a range of
potential energy resource options that included TVA's existing energy
resources and new coal, nuclear, natural gas, hydroelectric, wind,
solar, and biomass generation, energy storage, and energy efficiency
and demand response resources. Each portfolio was optimized for the
lowest Present Value of Revenue Requirements while meeting energy
balance, reserve, operational, and other requirements. The portfolios
were then evaluated using an hourly production costing program to
determine detailed revenue requirements and near- and long-term system
average costs. Recognizing the uncertainty in long-range planning
studies, extensive stochastic analyses were also conducted to identify
risk exposure within each scenario. Additional metrics developed to
rank the portfolios included financial risk, CO2 emissions,
water consumption, coal waste generation and changes in regional
personal income. These metrics were used to compare the alternative
strategies and their associated portfolios.
Strategies A-C had similar scores for most metrics and the scores
for Strategies A and B were almost identical and for some metrics
slightly better than Strategy C. Strategy E, with the greatest emphasis
on renewable energy resources, scored the best on the three
environmental metrics of CO2 emissions, water consumption,
and coal waste production. Strategy D had somewhat greater
environmental impacts than Strategy E, and Strategies A-C had the
greatest and similar environmental impacts. To better inform the
development of the preferred alternative, TVA conducted additional
sensitivity analyses that varied key resource assumptions involving
nuclear additions, energy efficiency, renewable resources, fundamental
drivers such as load growth and fuel pricing, and the effect of forcing
the model to consider resource types and/or amounts that it otherwise
would not. The results of these analyses supported the energy resource
ranges identified in the initial portfolios.
TVA then developed a preferred alternative, the Target Power Supply
Mix, based on guideline ranges for key energy resources. In developing
it, TVA took into account its least-cost planning requirement and
customer priorities of power cost and reliability, as well as other
comments it received during the public comment on the Draft IRP and
SEIS. The Target Power Supply Mix establishes ranges, in MW, for coal
plant retirements and additions of nuclear, hydroelectric, demand
response, energy efficiency, solar, wind, and natural gas capacity. The
recommended ranges are based on Strategies A-C and the Current Outlook
Scenario, expressed over the 20-year planning period with more specific
direction over the first 10-year period. The Target Power Supply Mix
also includes broader ranges resulting from the sensitivity analyses.
Shifts in resource additions within the ranges would be based on
changes in the load forecast, the price of natural gas and other
commodities, the price and performance of energy efficiency and
renewable resources, and impacts from regulatory policy or breakthrough
technologies.
Public Involvement
TVA published a notice of intent to prepare the IRP SEIS in the
Federal Register on October 31, 2013. TVA then actively engaged the
public through public scoping and public briefings during the
development of the IRP and SEIS. TVA also established an IRP Working
Group to more actively engage stakeholders. Group members included
representatives of local power companies (distributors of TVA power),
state agencies, direct-served customers, academia, and energy and
environmental non-governmental organizations. Members of the group met
frequently with IRP staff to review and provide input during the
development of the plan.
The Notice of Availability of the Draft IRP and SEIS was published
in the Federal Register by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(USEPA) on March 13, 2015. TVA accepted comments on the draft plan and
SEIS until April 27, 2015. During
[[Page 65284]]
the comment period, TVA held seven public meetings to describe the
project and accept comments. TVA received about 200 comments signed by
more than 2,400 individuals. After considering and responding to all
substantive comments, further evaluating the alternative strategies,
and developing the Target Power Supply Mix, TVA issued the Final IRP
and SEIS. The NOA for the Final IRP and SEIS was published in the
Federal Register on July 17, 2015.
Environmentally Preferred Alternative
All of the alternative strategies, as well as the Target Power
Supply Mix, have several common features that affect their anticipated
environmental impacts. The only new baseload generation added is the
extended power uprate of three nuclear units, a component of all
alternative strategies. All result in decreases in coal-fired
generation and increases in the reliance on energy efficiency and
renewable resources. All also add varying amounts of new natural gas-
fueled generation to meet peak loads. Emissions of air pollutants and
CO2, and generation of coal waste would decrease
significantly under all alternative strategies, including the Target
Power Supply Mix. Water-related impacts would also decrease, although
by smaller proportions. The major differences in the alternative
strategies that affect their environmental impacts are in the expansion
of energy efficiency and natural gas and renewable resources.
Strategies A-C and the Target Power Supply Mix have similar
environmental impacts and their impacts to most environmental resources
are greater than those of Strategies D and E. Because of its greater
reliance on generation by fossil fuels, Strategy D has somewhat greater
impacts to most environmental resources than Strategy E. Strategy E has
the greatest reliance on renewable energy resources, which,
particularly for utility-scale solar generation, have large land
requirements. Strategy E would therefore directly affect the largest
land area, almost twice that of the other alternative strategies and
the Target Power Supply Mix. Relative to other types of generation,
impacts of solar facilities on land resources are low. Overall,
Strategy E is considered the environmentally preferred alternative.
Decision
On August 21, 2015, the TVA Board of Directors approved the
preferred alternative, the Target Power Supply Mix. The Board also
directed staff to monitor future developments to help determine when
deviations from the recommended resource ranges should be made and to
initiate an update to the IRP no later than 2020 and earlier if future
developments make this appropriate.
Mitigation Measures
The reduction of environmental impacts was an important goal in
TVA's integrated resource planning process and all of the alternatives
assessed by TVA do that. Because this is a programmatic review,
measures to reduce potential environmental impacts on a site-specific
level were not identified. As TVA deploys specific energy resources, it
will review and take measures to reduce their potential environmental
impacts as appropriate. TVA's siting process for generation and
transmission facilities, as well as processes for modifying these
facilities, are designed to avoid and/or minimize potential adverse
environmental impacts. Potential impacts will also be reduced through
pollution prevention measures and environmental controls such as air
pollution control systems, wastewater treatment systems, and thermal
generating plant cooling systems. Other potentially adverse unavoidable
impacts will be mitigated by measures such as compensatory wetlands
mitigation, payments to in-lieu stream mitigation programs and related
conservation initiatives, enhanced management of other properties,
documentation and recovery of cultural resources, and infrastructure
improvement assistance to local communities.
Dated: October 16, 2015.
Van M. Wardlaw,
Executive Vice President and Chief External Relations Officer.
[FR Doc. 2015-27129 Filed 10-23-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8120-08-P
