DOE/EA-1449

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing

Technology Utilizing Spray Dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

United States Department of Energy

National Energy Technology Laboratory

August 2002
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray-dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

2

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Compliance

Cover Sheet

Proposed Action:

The proposed action is for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to provide costshared financial support to Universal Aggregates, LLC, for the design, construction,

and operation of a lightweight aggregate manufacturing plant at the Mirant-Birchwood

Power Plant Facility (Mirant-Birchwood Facility) in King George County, Virginia.

DOE would provide approximately 37% of the $19.6 million cost of the project (about

$7.2 million), with the industrial participant providing the remainder of the cost. The

project, which includes 15 months of operation and testing, would involve

transforming 115,000 tons of spray dryer ash currently generated at the MirantBirchwood Facility into 167,000 tons of lightweight aggregate for use in the

manufacture of lightweight masonry blocks or lightweight concrete. Based on the

results of the demonstration, the funding provided by DOE would be repaid by the

industrial participant if the project is successfully commercialized.

Type of Statement: Draft Environmental Assessment

Lead Agency: U.S. Department of Energy; National Energy Technology

Laboratory

DOE Contacts:

Project Information: NEPA Information:

Mark McKoy/Janice Bell Lloyd Lorenzi

NEPA Document Managers NEPA Compliance Officer

U.S. Department of Energy U.S. Department of Energy

National Energy Technology Laboratory National Energy Technology Laboratory

P.O. Box 880 P.O. Box 10940

Morgantown, WV 26507-0880 Pittsburgh, PA 15236-0940

304-285-4426; 304-285-4403 (fax) 412-386-6159; 412-386-4604 (fax)

mark.mckoy@netl.doe.gov (e-mail) lorenzi@netl.doe.gov (e-mail)

jbell@net.doe.gov (e-mail) 

Abstract:

This Environmental Assessment analyzes the environmental and human

impacts that would result from the proposed action, a cooperative agreement

between the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and Universal Aggregates, LLC,

to design, construct, and operate a lightweight aggregate manufacturing plant

at the Mirant-Birchwood Power Plant Facility (Mirant-Birchwood Facility), King

George County, Virginia. DOE seeks to provide funds to produce and test the

lightweight aggregate in support of the Power Plant Improvement Initiative, a

program encouraging industry to look at new ways for existing coal-fired

power plants to improve the way they operate. Demonstration of lightweight
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray-dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

3

aggregate technology could help coal-fired plants to avoid premature

shutdowns since it would result in a more effective, low-cost pollution control

technology.

The 238 MWnet Mirant-Birchwood Facility is a cogeneration unit located about

50 miles northeast of Richmond. It produces both power, which is sold to the

public, and process steam, which is used to heat local greenhouses. The plant

is equipped with a spray dryer to control sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions.

Universal Aggregates proposes to use the 115,000 tons per year of spray dryer

ash currently generated at the facility to produce 167,000 tons per year of

lightweight aggregate for use in lightweight masonry blocks and lightweight

concrete. The spray dryer ash produced from this unit currently undergoes

disposal at an off-site landfill.

The environmental analysis of the proposed action found that the most notable

impacts would be an increase in truck traffic and diversion of the waste stream

from the nearby landfill. The truck traffic would increase on nearby roadways,

both during the construction phase and during the operational phase.

Additionally, diversion of the waste stream from the nearby landfill, where it

currently serves as daily cover, would result in a loss of $5/ton in tipping fees

for King George County and would necessitate finding an additional source of

daily cover. No other significant adverse impacts have been identified. No

harm to threatened or endangered species or critical habitats would result.

During construction and operation of the facility, fugitive dust, noise and

surface water runoff impacts would be negligible, and there would be no

significant waste streams from the manufacturing process.

Public Participation:

DOE encourages public participation in the NEPA process. This Draft Environmental

Assessment (EA) is being released for public review and comment. The public is

invited to provide oral, written, or e-mail comments on this draft Environmental

Assessment to DOE by the close of the comment period on September 16, 2002.

Copies of the draft EA are also being distributed to cognizant Federal and state

agencies. Comments received by the close of the comment period will be considered

in preparing a final Environmental Assessment for the proposed DOE action.
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray-dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

4

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF ACRONYMS iv

SUMMARY v

1.0 BACKGROUND 1

2.0 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION 6

3.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION

AND ALTERNATIVES 7

3.1 Proposed Action 7

3.2 Alternatives 9

3.2.1 Alternative Sites 9

3.2.2 No Action Alternative 10

4.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 11

4.1 Geology and Soils 11

4.2 Hydrology 11

4.3 Cultural Resources 12

4.4 Ecological Resources 13

4.5 Threatened and Endangered Species 14

4.6 Water Resources 16

4.7 Air Quality 16

4.8 Noise 16

4.9 Hazardous Wastes 16

4.10 Land Use 18

4.11 Socioeconomic Conditions 19

 4.12 Transportation 20

5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 21

5.1 Geology and Soils 21

5.2 Hydrology 22

5.3 Cultural Resources 22

5.4 Ecological Resources 23

5.5 Threatened and Endangered Species 23

5.6 Water Resources 23

5.7 Air Quality 24

5.8 Noise 24
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray-dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

5

5.9 Hazardous Wastes 24

5.10 Land Use 25

 5.11 Socioeconomic Effects 25

5.12 Transportation 25

6.0 CONCLUSIONS 26

TABLES

1. Properties of Lightweight Aggregates from Spray-dryer Byproducts

3

2. Properties of Concrete Blocks Made From Manufactured Aggregates

3

3. Properties of Manufactured and Commercial Lightweight Aggregate 

4

Blocks and ASTM C-90 Specification

4. Properties of Blocks Made from Manufactured Aggregates 5

with Different Mix Designs

5. Threatened and Endangered Species Natural Heritage Resources of 

15

King George County, Virginia

6. Accidental Release Procedures – Mirant-Birchwood Power Facility 17

7. Average Personal Income per Sector - King George County, Virginia 19

8. Total Full and Part-Time Employment by Industry - King George

 County, Virginia 19
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray-dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

6

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A: Figures

1. Simplified Process Flow Scheme. A1

2. Project Location. A-2

3. Aerial photograph of Mirant-Birchwood Power Plant (April 10,

1996).A-3

4. Plant Layout. A4

5. Regional Environmental Constraint Map. A5

6. Project Vicinity Environmental Constraint Map. A6

7. Soils Map. A-7

8. Archaeological Sites. A8

9. Phase I ESA (Environmental Site Assessment) Map. A9

10. Aerial photograph of proposed project site; taken 1977. A10

11. Aerial photograph of proposed project site; taken 1980. A11

12. Aerial photograph of proposed project site; taken 1998. A12

13. Aerial photograph of proposed project site; taken 2000. A13

APPENDIX B: List of Agencies and Persons Contacted.

APPENDIX C: Agency Correspondence.

APPENDIX D: Results of Toxic Characteristic Leaching Procedure on

Manufactured Aggregate.

APPENDIX E: References.

APPENDIX F: Comments Received on Draft Environmental Assessment
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray-dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

7

LIST OF ACRONYMS

AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation

Officials

ADT Average Daily Traffic

ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials

CCA Clean Air Act

CCB Coal Combustion Byproducts

CCT Clean Coal Technology

CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and

Liability Act

DOE U.S. Department of Energy

ESA Environmental Site Assessment

FAA Federal Aviation Administration

GW Gigawatt

HAP Hazardous Air Pollutant

MSDS Material Safety Data Sheets

MW Megawatt

NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards

NAVSWC Naval Surface Warfare Center

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act

NWI National Wetland Inventory

PM10 Particulate Matter less than 10 microns

PSD Prevention of Significant Deterioration

psi Pounds per square inch

RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act

RPA Resource Protection Area

SDA Spray-dryer Absorption

TCLP Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedures

VDGIF Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray-dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

viii

SUMMARY

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) proposes to provide funding, through a

cooperative agreement with Universal Aggregates, LLC, to demonstrate the

manufacture of lightweight aggregate from spray-dryer ash, a byproduct of flue

gas desulfurization (FGD), at a commercial level of operation. DOE’s share of the

$19.6 million total project cost would be $7.2 million (37 percent), partially funding

the design, construction, and operation of the lightweight aggregate

manufacturing plant. The proposed facility would be located at the MirantBirchwood Power Plant Facility (Mirant-Birchwood Facility) in King George

County, Virginia, approximately 10 miles east southeast of Fredericksburg and 50

miles northeast of Richmond. The project was one of eight projects selected by

DOE under the Power Plant Improvement Initiative, a program encouraging

existing coal-fired power plants to improve the way they operate. The period of

performance is expected to last 30 months.

Once operational, the plant would convert spray-dryer ash from the MirantBirchwood Facility into lightweight aggregate, which can be used in a variety of

lightweight concrete applications, including structural concrete and masonry

blocks. The project involves transforming an estimated 115,000 tons per year of

spray-dryer ash into 167,000 tons of lightweight aggregate. The proposed

aggregate manufacturing process would offer power generators an alternative to

landfilling by converting their waste material into a highly beneficial product. The

U.S. market for construction aggregates is currently 2 billion tons annually.

A successful demonstration could also result in the construction of additional

lightweight aggregate manufacturing facilities throughout the United States.

There are 21 spray-dryer facilities currently operating within the United States

that produce an adequate amount of spray-dryer ash to economically justify

installation of lightweight aggregate manufacturing facilities. As additional

scrubbing of coal-fired power plant flue gas is required, FGD technologies will

become the technology of choice for power plants with a capacity of less than

300 MW.

The proposed project site consists of less than 5 acres of land and is located

within the property lines of the Mirant-Birchwood Facility. The proposed site was

previously disturbed during construction of the power plant. No significant

impacts to human health and safety or the environment would be anticipated

from construction and operation of the proposed facility.

The proposed facility would utilize all of the spray-dryer ash produced by the

Mirant-Birchwood Facility. This ash is currently used by the King George County
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray-dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

ix

Landfill as daily cover material. Therefore, it would be necessary for the landfill

to secure other cover material, thus potentially resulting in additional areas being

disturbed for soil/sand borrow activities. King George County currently receives

$5 per ton from tipping fees for landfilling of the spray-dryer ash. This income to

the county would be lost. Nevertheless, the King George County Planning

Commission approved a special exemption and modification of the proffer

statement from the Mirant-Birchwood Facility to enable Universal Aggregates

LLC, to design, construct, and operate the lightweight manufactured aggregate

facility.

The proposed project would create nine manufacturing jobs, as well as additional

employment in the local trucking industry for delivery of aggregates to customers

and reagents to the facility. Additional environmental benefits from

implementation of this technology include a reduction of landfilling of FGD waste

and a reduction in the impacts associated with mining materials used to produce

expanded clay/shale-based lightweight aggregate.
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray-dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

10

1.0 BACKGROUND

Currently in the United States, flue gas desulfurization (FGD) technologies

are used in many coal-fired power plants, producing more than 20 million

tons per year (dry weight) of FGD waste. And, as the requirements of the

Clean Air Act (CAA) Amendments of 1990 continue to be phased in, the

amount of FGD waste is expected to increase substantially. Presently, the

vast majority of these wastes are disposed of in landfills at significant cost

to utilities and ultimately to consumers.

As amended, the CAA requires installation of FGD systems to be placed on

most coal-burning power plants to reduce sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions.

However, less than 20 percent of these wastes are currently utilized or

recycled, while regulatory pressures on power generators are increasing.

The technology proposed for demonstration at the Mirant-Birchwood

Facility would convert the spray-dryer ash produced at the plant into highquality construction aggregate. The process has two primary advantages

for power plants: reduced waste management costs and reduced

environmental liability.

Most spray-dryer ash is disposed of in landfills. The current practice is to

adequately wet the spray-dryer ash to allow for optimum compaction for

landfilling and to control dust levels during transport. The damp spraydryer ash is buried in the landfill where the material gradually hardens into

a solidified mass. If a monofill landfill is used, there is a potential to

reclaim the materials for low-cost road and structural fills. However, such

a landfill would probably be the final repository for this waste due to the

low value of such fill material, potential environmental concerns, and the

cost of transportation. The cost of landfill disposal for FGD wastes varies

greatly by location. Operating and maintenance costs for a landfill are $2-

$4/ton of as-disposed material. Capital costs, including landfill

preparation, are typically between $8-$17/ton depending upon the cost of

land, construction requirements (i.e., lined versus unlined), geology, and

environmental monitoring. For a power plant, being able to avoid disposal

costs can greatly reduce power generation costs.

Over the past 10 years, various processes have been developed to utilize

FGD wastes. In fact, pray-dryer absorption (SDA) systems, which remove

SO2 from flue gases, have been of particular concern to DOE because these

systems can generate large volumes of solid waste. SDA systems inject an

“atomized” slurry containing hydrated lime, Ca(OH)2, into the flue gas

stream. The lime reacts with and removes SO2 from the flue gas. Because

of the high temperature of the flue gas at the injection site (270°F to 350°F),

moisture quickly evaporates from the slurry, leaving a dry powder

comprised of fly ash and calcium sulfite (CaSO3), plus lesser amounts of
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray-dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

11

calcium sulfate (CaSO4), calcium carbonate (CaCO3), and unreacted lime.

Since this is such a high volume byproduct stream, production of a

saleable byproduct could significantly reduce power generation costs,

minimize landfilling, and make use of an existing waste material. As an

example, the consumption of construction aggregates in the United States

currently exceeds 2 billion tons per year. By manufacturing low-density,

high-strength gravel material, power plants could actually help the

construction industry meet its need for aggregate. And, if coal-fired power

plants in metropolitan areas are to meet applicable environmental

regulations, particularly in terms of SO2 control, operators need to consider

FGD scrubbing, fuel switching, and possibly early retirement of the plant.

Use of an SDA system is an option for small generators (<300 MW units) to

consider if wastes management costs are acceptable. In addition,

production and sale of manufactured aggregates can make this option

viable in tightly congested metropolitan areas where landfill costs are high.

With over 17 GW of electrical generating capacity located within U.S.

metropolitan areas, many plants are running out of area to dispose of FGD

waste. In addition, President Bush recently announced plans to require

additional SO2 and oxides of nitrogen (NOx) controls on existing power

plants. These additional controls may also require additional landfill area

that may not be available. Such land disposal issues can then delay

compliance schedules, cause coal-fired plants to switch to natural gas, or

force premature closures. If "metropolitan" plants switch fuel or are forced

into premature closure, greatly reduced generating capacity and decreased

reliability of the power grid would result.

Power producers continuing to use coal need to find ways to reduce or

eliminate costs associated with waste disposal. Successful demonstration

of a lightweight aggregate manufacturing facility could be the answer.

There are 21 spray-dryer facilities currently operating within the United

States that produce an adequate amount of spray-dryer ash to

economically justify installation of additional lightweight aggregate

manufacturing facilities. And, as additional scrubbing of flue gas becomes

necessary, FGD will become the technology of choice for power plants with

a capacity of less than 300 MW.

The byproducts of various FGD processes (spray-dryer absorption,

fluidized-bed combustion, and lime and limestone wet-FGD) have the

potential to be utilized for manufactured construction aggregates as

substitutes for crushed stone, sand, gravel, and conventional lightweight

aggregates (expanded shale/clay). Products from pilot demonstrations of

the proposed technology have been determined to meet the quality

requirements and industry standards as determined by the American
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray-dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

12

Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) and the American Association of

State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO).

As an example, manufactured aggregates have already been produced

using the spray-dryer ash from several facilities. In late 1995 and early

1996, bench-scale equipment was used to produce two test batches (1,200

lbs and 1,700 lbs) of lightweight manufactured aggregates. In late 1999 and

late 2000, 44 tons and 25 tons, respectively, of lightweight manufactured

aggregates were produced in a continuous 500 lb/hr pilot plant using

spray-dryer ash, the latter of which was from the Mirant-Birchwood Facility.

Properties of the crushed, cured aggregates from bench-scale testing are

presented in Table 1, while Table 2 shows properties of concrete blocks

produced using the manufactured aggregates.

Table 1 - Properties of Lightweight Aggregates from Spray-dryer Byproducts

SDA

Aggregat

e

Batch 1

(1995)

SDA

Aggregat

e

Batch 2

(1996)

SDA

Aggregat

e (Pilot

Plant

Source)

MirantBirchwoo

d

SDA

Aggregat

e

Lightweight

Aggregate

Specifications

ASTM C-331

Grain Size (Sieve #) No. 8 Nos. 8/9 Nos. 8/9 Nos. 8/9 No. 8 (Coarse)

Nos. 8/9

(Combined)

Dry Unit Wt. lb./ft.3 52.6

-----

-----

55.4

-----

55.8

-----

51.6

55 (max), No. 8

65 (max), Nos.

8/9

Clay Lumps, Wt.% 1.6 1.5 1.1 1.7 2.0 (max)

Staining Material Negative Negative Negative Negative Negative

Crush Strength, lb. 90 120 210 187 No

Specification

Table 2- Properties of Concrete Blocks Made From Manufactured Aggregates

ASTM C-90
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray-dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

13

Batch 1

Blocks

Batch 2

Blocks

Batch 3

Blocks

 Lt. Wt.

Concrete

Block Spec.

Dry Unit Wt., lb./ft.3 99.9 100.9 103.0 105 (max)

Water Absorption Wt.

% 16.9 16.8 16.9 18 (max)

Net Compressive

Strength, psi 2,953 1,930 2,359 1,900 (min)

Each block met the ASTM specification for lightweight concrete masonry

units including the unit weight, water absorption, and compressive

strength. The results demonstrate that light-weight manufactured

aggregates produced using spray-dryer ash could economically be used by

commercial block manufactures to replace conventional lightweight

aggregates in block mixes.

 A third set of tests were initiated in June 2001, when 2.8 tons of cured,

extruded products were produced in semi-continuous production runs

using bench-scale equipment and materials from the Mirant-Birchwood

Facility. Extrusion was used for agglomeration of the uncured product.

After curing, the extruded products were crushed and screened for

aggregate production. The crushed aggregate was used for concrete block

production at a plant in Maryland. Table 3 compares the properties of the

blocks produced using the manufactured lightweight aggregate with those

produced using conventional lightweight aggregate and with the ASTM C90 standard for load-bearing concrete masonry units. The components in

both block types are lightweight aggregate, sand, limestone, and cement.

The amount of lightweight aggregate used in production of the concrete

block is less than the amount of conventional lightweight aggregate used

in production of concrete block (26.7 percent vs. 28.3 percent, by weight of

block aggregate components).

Table 3 - Properties of Manufactured and Commercial

Lightweight Aggregate Blocks and ASTM C-90 Specification

Manufactured

Lightweight

Aggregate Block

Commercial

Lightweight

Aggregate Block

ASTM C-90

Concrete

Masonry Units

Specifications*

Dry Unit Weight, lb./ft.3 117.9 121.3 125

Water Absorption, lb./ft.3 12.1 10.2 15.0
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray-dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

14

Compressive Strength,

psi

3,140 3,630 1,900

Dry Shrinkage, % 0.036 0.031 0.065

*Medium-weight block.

As shown in Table 3, block produced from the new lightweight aggregate

met the ASTM specification for medium-weight concrete masonry units,

which is the predominant type used in construction within the potential

market area. The market area for manufactured aggregate produced from

the Mirant-Birchwood Facility SDA byproduct would be Maryland and

Virginia.

In August 2001, 27 tons of cured, extruded products were produced for

three different mix designs using the Mirant-Birchwood Facility SDA

byproduct in the continuous 500 lb/hr pilot plant. The cured extruded

products were crushed and screened for aggregate production. Each mix

of the aggregate was able to meet the ASTM C331 lightweight aggregate

specification. The water absorption of crushed aggregates (28 – 32

percent, dry weight basis) produced by extrusion is substantially lower

than had been produced previously (typically 40 percent absorption, dry

weight basis) in pilot plant operation with disk pelletization. Table 4 lists

the properties of blocks made from aggregates using three different mix

designs (M-1, M-2, and M-3). The same amounts of block components

(manufactured lightweight aggregate, sand, limestone, and cement) were

used during block manufacturing to facilitate comparison. Also included in

Table 4 are the properties of block made with less lightweight aggregate

(Refer to column labeled M-4).
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray-dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

15

Table 4 - Properties of Blocks Made from Manufactured

Aggregates with Different Mix Designs

M-1 M-2 M-3 M-4

Dry Unit Weight, lb./ft.3 106.6 109.6 113.6 111.1

Water Absorption, lb./ft.3 16.5 14.7 12.1 14.2

Compressive Strength,

psi

2,360 2,410 2,530 2,350

Dry Shrinkage, % 0.038 0.037 0.034 0.037

With one exception, the properties of blocks produced using manufactured

aggregates with different mix designs met the ASTM specification for

medium-weight concrete masonry units (Table 4). The one exception was

for water absorption in the M-1 mix design. These results indicate that

blocks made from manufactured aggregates having various mix designs

can meet the ASTM concrete block specification. A commercial extruder

with better compaction capacity may reduce aggregate water absorption in

the M-1 mix design to meet the block specification.

The above results indicate that manufactured aggregates made from

Mirant-Birchwood spray-dryer ash can be used as lightweight aggregates,

replacing conventional lightweight aggregates for medium-weight block

production within the target market area. The amount of manufactured

lightweight aggregate required in the block production is less than the

amount required when using conventional lightweight aggregate.

Based on economic analyses, the minimum economically viable dry

scrubber ash processing rate for a manufactured aggregate plant is

100,000 tons per year. The Mirant-Birchwood Facility currently produces

115,000 tons per year of spray-dryer ash, and based on the process

economics, the Mirant-Birchwood Facility is of acceptable size for a

commercial demonstration.

The proposed facility would convert the 115,000 tons per year SDA ash into

about 167,000 tons per year of lightweight aggregate. Based on a

marketing survey of the Baltimore-Richmond I-95 corridor, the current

demand for lightweight aggregates in the Virginia-Maryland area is

estimated at 350,000 tons per year, with the selling price exceeding the

estimated production costs. The lightweight aggregates would be sold to

commercial block manufacturers to produce lightweight concrete blocks.
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray-dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

16

2.0 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION

The U.S. Department of Energy developed the Power Plant Improvement Initiative (PPII)

to provide industry with an opportunity to look at new ways for improving operations of

the nation’s 450 existing coal-fired power plants. The PPII encouraged proposals to

develop new technologies that could either increase the amount of power currently being

generated or that could help plants to avoid premature shutdowns by installing more

effective or lower-cost pollution control technologies.

The latter approach – installing more effective or lower cost pollution controls - is of

interest to power generators since there is uncertainty about future methods for disposal

of CCBs. In some cases, concern about the disposal of CCBs has delayed commitments

to construct new facilities, perhaps resulting in power shortages and decreasing the

reliability of the electrical grid. The cost of waste disposal continues to grow as

increasingly stringent landfill regulations become effective.

While pilot-plant and bench-scale testing has demonstrated the technical

feasibility of the lightweight aggregate production process, industry

acceptance requires the demonstration of commercial feasibility which

includes these key objectives:

• Demonstrate that the commercial-scale capital and fixed and variable

operating costs are within range of the estimated values.

• Demonstrate that the planned process can produce ASTM

specification lightweight aggregates 24 hours per day in commercial

operation.

• Demonstrate that the manufactured lightweight aggregates can be

used to produce ASTM specification, commercial construction

products.

• Demonstrate market acceptance.

The proposed project, "Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate

Processing Technology Utilizing Spray-dryer Ash," was one of eight selected from

among 24 proposals submitted following a solicitation under the Power Plant

Improvement Initiative. DOE reviewers chose this project as one that would best further

the objectives of the initiative.
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray-dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

17

3.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES

3.1 Proposed Action

The proposed action is for cost-shared financial support by DOE, through a

cooperative agreement with Universal Aggregates, LLC, for the design,

construction, and operation of a lightweight aggregate manufacturing plant

at the Mirant-Birchwood Facility in King George County, Virginia. DOE

would provide approximately 37 percent ($7.2 million) of the $19.6 million

cost of the project over a 30-month period. The first 15 months of the

project would involve primarily design and construction activities, followed

by 15 months of testing and operation. The proposed facility would

transform the 115,000 tons per year of spray-dryer ash currently generated

by the Mirant-Birchwood Facility into 167,000 tons per year of lightweight

aggregate for use in the manufacture of lightweight masonry blocks or

lightweight concrete.

The process tailors aggregate properties to specific applications, such as

aggregates for manufacture of lightweight concrete blocks, structural

lightweight concrete, or aggregates for use in asphalt road paving. The

process consists of mixing, extrusion, and moderate-temperature curing. It

takes advantage of the cementitious properties of the extruded products

for strength development. Optimizing the water addition and time during

the mixing step and identifying the proper conditions for curing are

important factors for the production of aggregates with high strength and

other desirable properties for use in construction. A proprietary curing

method was conceived to optimize aggregate strength development.

Steam injection during curing, which often caused operational problems in

other processes, is eliminated. The process (developed by Universal

Aggregates, LLC) represents an advance in the state of the art, and as a

result has been granted two U.S. patents (others are in preparation).

In simplest terms, the process feeds spray-dryer ash, water, and other

components into a mixer where the materials are blended together (Refer

to Figure 1). The mixing produces a uniformly blended, loose, moist, and

granular material that feeds directly to an extruder. The extruder is

equipped an auger that subjects the material to further mixing and then

forces the material through a die (metal plate with one or more drilled or

specially shaped holes). At the extruder outlet a cutting device is used to

limit the length of the extruded pellets to manageable sizes.

"Green" pellets from the extruder are wet and soft, and must be transferred

to a curing vessel for hardening. The curing vessel is a specially designed

retention bin that provides for flow of solids without channeling or hangup. The pellets cure/harden as they slowly move down through the vessel.
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray-dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

18

After curing, the hardened pellets (manufactured aggregate) are screened

to remove fines and are either stockpiled or sent to crushing operations.

Universal Aggregates has been able to demonstrate conversion of SDA

solids into manufactured aggregates in bench-scale batch, semicontinuous operations and continuous fully integrated pilot production

runs. Batch tests produced 70 lb aggregate batches, while semicontinuous operations produced 200 to 300 lb batches. Fully integrated,

continuous pilot-plant production runs (450 to 650 lb/hr of green

aggregates) were conducted on a 24-hour basis, producing large quantities

of cured aggregates for full-scale testing by concrete masonry block

manufacturers.

 Scale-up of most of the manufactured aggregate process equipment, i.e.,

belt and screw conveyors, bucket elevators, crushers, and screens would

not be a concern. The operation of these components is adaptable and

simple, and successful performance has been demonstrated in other solids

handling processes. However, there is a need to demonstrate the scale-up

of key equipment; the solids mixer that precedes the extruder, the extruder,

and the curing vessel. The mixer/extruder equipment combination is used

at clay brick plants. Additionally, the ease of extrusion is a function of the

mix plasticity which is dependent upon water added, particle shear, mixing

intensity, and duration.

The proposed site for the manufactured aggregate plant is on the property

of the 238 MWnet, Mirant-Birchwood Facility. Figure 2 shows the proposed

site location, and Figure 3 shows an aerial view of the Mirant-Birchwood

Facility and proposed project site. The Mirant-Birchwood Facility, located

in King George County, Virginia approximately 10 miles east southeast of

Fredericksburg, is a cogeneration unit producing both power which is sold

to the public, and process steam which is used to heat local greenhouses.

It is equipped with a lime spray-dryer for SO2 control and produces about

115,000 tons of ash annually.

The proposed aggregate plant would be located north of the boiler house

on a tract of less than 5 acres and would utilize approximately 3 acres of

land. An elevated pipe bridge, over railroad tracks, would be installed to

allow pneumatic transfer of SDA solids from the existing SDA silo to the

aggregate plant. A new truck scale for weighing incoming shipments and

outgoing product shipments would be located on the south side near the

aggregate plant entrance. Construction of the main plant would require

approximately 0.75 acres, including area for personnel parking; a 48' x 72'

two-story building which would house most of the process equipment

including day bins, weigh feeders, solids mixer, and extruder; a single

trailer for the control room, lab, and locker room; a 24' x 35', two-story
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray-dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

19

building for crushing and screening operations; outside storage silos for

admixtures; and the curing vessel. Approximately 2 acres would be

required on the east side of the plant for radial stacker storage of crushed

products. A plan view of the Birchwood Manufactured Aggregate Plant is

shown in Figure 4.

Universal Aggregates anticipates that the lightweight aggregate

manufacturing plant would continue to operate beyond the demonstration

period due to its economic viability. Proponents for the aggregate plant

have agreed to host visits of potential new customers for both the

manufactured aggregate process and the lightweight aggregate product.

Such long-term site access would assist in the commercialization of the

process.

3.2 Alternatives

3.2.1 Alternative Sites

The purpose of the Power Plant Improvement Initiative is to pursue the development of

technologies that could either increase the amount of power currently being generated or

that could help power plants avoid premature shutdowns by installing more effective or

lower-cost pollution control technologies. As a result, the proposed action is for DOE to

provide cost-shared financial support through a cooperative agreement with Universal

Aggregates, LLC. As a cost-shared effort, the project is actually owned and controlled

by a sponsor, other than the federal government, and therefore, the scope of alternatives

is necessarily more restricted. The agency must focus on alternative ways to accomplish

its purpose, reflecting both the application before it and the functions the agency plays in

the decision process. It is appropriate in such cases for DOE to give substantial

consideration to the applicant’s needs when establishing a project’s reasonable

alternatives.

Potential project sites are limited to locations having existing spray dryers

and those with spray dryers under construction. There are currently 21

spray dryers of adequate size operating in the United States, while 5 spraydryer installations are under construction or in the planning stage.

Marketing studies indicate that the selling price of lightweight aggregate is

sufficient to justify a commercial plant at each location. However, the cost

of the reagents and transportation distance to lightweight aggregate

markets makes some of the facilities economically unattractive.
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray-dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

20

The location for the proposed project was selected by the industrial partner

(Universal Aggregates, LLC), solely using the industrial partner's

resources, prior to the submission of the proposal to DOE. In cases where

a private party petitions the federal government for grants or permit

approvals based on a specified proposed action at a specified location, and

the private party submits for government review significant quantities of

information on the proposed action at a specific proposed location, the

federal government is limited in its consideration of alternatives to (1) the

proposed action at the proposed location and (2) the "No Action"

alternative. The action currently under NEPA review is whether to accept or

reject a specific proposal by a private party. The private party's proposal

must be either accepted or rejected in whole, not in part. Therefore,

because alternative sites were not proposed by the petitioner, alternative

sites for the proposed project location are not considered in this EA.

The proposed action would result in the generation of information that

would permit decisions by the private sector regarding the long-term

feasibility of manufacturing aggregates from spray-dryer ash. Because of

the perceived environmental and economic benefits of this process, a

successful demonstration may result in decision to construct similar

facilities at other locations. However, at this time no other similar projects

are known to be in planning or design phases. For prospective future

manufactured aggregate plants, environmental impacts and

societal/economic impacts that are location dependent cannot be

addressed at this time. Most of the possible adverse impacts would be

location dependent. Most of the beneficial impacts cited for this project,

such as promoting SOx scrubbing at power plants, would apply to similar

projects at other sites.

3.2.2 No Action Alternative

The "No Action" alternative is that DOE would not provide funding for the

commercial-scale demonstration of manufacture of lightweight aggregate

from spray-dryer ash. Under the No Action alternative, the King George

Landfill would be expected to continue to use the spray-dryer ash from the

Mirant-Birchwood Facility as daily cover, and tipping fees would continue

to be paid to the county for disposal costs.

The main environmental impacts of the No Action alternative are:

• more waste materials would be sent to landfills;

• more raw materials would likely be mined to meet the demand for

conventional lightweight aggregates;
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray-dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

21

• power plants would be less likely to install FGD systems to remove

SOx pollution;

• more fuel would be used to haul lightweight aggregates from the few

existing supply locations to the sites of demand; and,

• higher energy-consumption would occur in conventional lightweight

manufacturing processes.

The main societal/economic impacts of the No Action alternative are:

• potentially higher costs of electricity in the future, with the costs

being related to landfill tipping fees;

• potentially higher costs of lightweight concrete and concrete

masonry block;

• potentially higher costs of construction with standard concrete and

concrete masonry, when lightweight concrete could have been used;

• potentially fewer jobs and potentially less tax revenue from personal

income, corporate income, property, sales, etc.; and,

• continued importation of lightweight aggregates from other

countries.

Given the impacts of the No Action alternative, it is likely that the private

sector would eventually proceed with construction of commercial-scale

manufactured aggregated plants; however, more time would be required to

raise the capital. In the short-term, the private sector may remain reluctant

to provide the capital and test the proposed technologies.
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray-dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

22

4.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

The proposed project site would be located on a parcel of less than 5 acres

within the confines of the Mirant-Birchwood Power Plant property located

in western King George County, Virginia. The proposed site is located near

State Route 665, north of the State Route 3 intersection and approximately

one mile north of the Rappahannock River. The proposed plant would be

constructed in the north-central part of the power plant tract. A portion of

land north of the railroad consists of woodland. A regional environmental

constraint map is provided as Figure 5, while Figure 6 shows the

environmental constraints in the immediate vicinity of the proposed site.

4.1 Geology and Soils

The project site is located in the Coastal Plain Physiographic Province.

The surface elevation throughout the site is approximately 100 feet above

mean sea level. Geologically, the area is underlain by lower Tertiary- to

Quaternary-age deposits. Higher elevations contain riverine terrace and

bay deposits of sand, silt, and clay of the lower to middle Pleistocene-age

Shirley Formation and Charles City Formation.

Soils at the proposed site have been previously disturbed during

construction of the Mirant-Birchwood Facility and then reseeded with

various grass species. The soils are deep; well drained to moderately welldrained with heavy clay loam, sandy loam, clay loam, or clay subsoil. The

soil survey map, Figure 7, identifies the following soil series at the MirantBirchwood Facility: Roanoke silt loam, Altavista fine sandy loam, Wickham

sandy loam, Turbeville loam, Galestown-Sassafras complex, Caroline

Sassafras complex, Wahee silt loam, and Augusta loam. These soils are

found on Coastal Plain uplands or stream terraces. The predominant soils

identified in the immediate construction area are Turbeville loam (TuA,

TuB) and Altavista fine sandy loam (AfB). A review of aerial photographs

indicates the soils in the immediate proposed construction area were

disturbed during construction of the power plant. Roanoke silt loam (Ro) is

located in undisturbed areas to the north of the proposed project site.

4.2 Hydrology

Based on the topography of the area, groundwater and surface water flow

to the south-southeast towards the Rappahannock River. The immediate

project area surface water runoff flows toward the woodland area to the

north.
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray-dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

23

Shallow groundwater occurs at a depth of 15 to 25 feet, discharging to two

tributaries of the Rappahannock River. One tributary parallels the western

power plant site boundary and one tributary flows approximately southeast

and then southwest direction parallel to the eastern site boundary. These

tributaries flow into Birchwood Run, a small second-order perennial stream

located generally to the south and east of the project site. Birchwood Run

enters the Rappahannock River 3.2 miles from the project site. (Refer to

Figure 2).

Stormwater runoff is a function of the soil conditions, topography,

vegetative cover, and precipitation. The proposed site is primarily a

grassed field covering previously disturbed soils. Approximately 90

percent of the Mirant-Birchwood Facility property is grassland and the

remainder of the property is wooded buffer. Forested areas typically

generate little runoff of stormwater. The primary source of existing

stormwater runoff is the railroad drainage. Railroad drainage trenches

carry water runoff to an unnamed tributary of Birchwood Run. Although

much of the site has vegetation, some bare soil is found and subject to

removal from stormwater runoff. However, no major stormwater problems

have been identified on the site. No evidence of significant erosion (i.e.,

gullies, etc.) has been observed on-site.

4.3 Cultural Resources

A Cultural Resource Survey was completed in May 1991 prior to the

construction of the Mirant-Birchwood Facility. The survey included the

parcel for the proposed project. The study, conducted by staff of the

William and Mary Center for Archaeological Research in accordance with

an agreement with Westinghouse Environmental and Geotechnical

Services, Inc. (Westinghouse) of Richmond, Virginia, was intended to

provide specific information concerning the nature and distribution of

potential archaeological resources within the project area. Background

research of existing archaeological sites within a 5-mile radius of the

project area was conducted along with an evaluation of extant

documentary and cartographic sources pertinent to the project area, and a

field survey of the 41-acre construction area and 1.6-mile pipeline corridor

that included a systematic surface inspection and a subsurface shovel

testing in areas covered in vegetation.

The field investigation of the proposed project area was intended to detect

natural and cultural evidence, which would indicate the presence of

archaeological sites. Natural and cultural indicators included land form

features, soil anomalies, patterns of vegetation, lithic resources, and

concentrations of artifacts.
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray-dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

24

Site locations 5, 17, and 18, were located in the vicinity of the proposed

aggregate plant (Refer to Figure 8). A review of aerial photographs

documented the fact that previous disturbances had occurred to project

area soils.

In addition, Sites 44KG100 and 44KG103 are located within the proposed

footprint of the aggregate facility. These sites were characterized as lowto-moderate-density prehistoric lithic scatters. Diagnostic hafted bifaces

recovered from these sites indicated association with the Middle to Late

Archaic Periods (ca. 5000 to 1000 B.C.). It was concluded they represent

the remains of ephemeral resource procurement camps. The cultural

deposits at Sites 44KG100 and 44KG103 were limited to a depth of

approximately 26 centimeters. Since the sites have been impacted by

agricultural plowing and site grading from the power plant preparation, the

Phase I archaeological investigation determined these sites were

effectively studied and their research potential was deemed insignificant.

No further archaeological study was recommended. These sites, as well as

the other nearby archaeological sites were by definition, not eligible for

further archaeological study.

4.4 Ecological Resources

Grassland and woodland vegetation plant communities are present within

and adjacent to the project site. Various planted grass species and broom

sedge dominate the soils disturbed from site grading for the MirantBirchwood Facility. Approximately 90 percent of the project site is open

field with previously disturbed soils.

Areas to the northeast are mature mixed pine/hardwood forest that will

remain undisturbed by construction and operation of the proposed facility.

The dominant deciduous species are sweet gum and various species of

oak. The co-dominant pines, located primarily in the northern portion of

the site, are loblolly pine and scrub or Virginia pine. Other species noted

include American beech, American holly, red-cedar, common greenbrier,

and Japanese honeysuckle. Along the stream drainages to the north are

stands of river birch, red maple, and silver maple.

In general, the surrounding forested areas are typical of most temperate

deciduous forests. The canopy is mostly closed, the understory is thick,

and a large amount of dead vegetation is present on the forest floor. This

diversity of structural features (i.e., live and dead vegetation, water bodies,

and non-vegetated substrates) results in heterogeneous wildlife habitats.

Forest/open field edge, or ecotone, habitat also exists along the north edge

of the project site. A portion of the project site field is mowed or

periodically cut, which helps maintain edge habitat. Dominant species of
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray-dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

25

the woodland fringe habitat include blackberry, multiflora rose, thistles,

broom sedge, and sumac.

Birchwood Run, a perennial stream, and its tributaries straddle the power

plant property. One such tributary is located approximately 1,000 feet

northeast of the proposed project site.

Due to the rural, agricultural setting of King George County, wildlife is

abundant. The mixed pine/hardwood forest provides high-quality habitat

for reptiles and mammals, as well as numerous species of birds. In

addition, a number of shallow and ephemeral ponds exist near the site of

the proposed project that supports a variety of amphibians. The principal

game species in the area are white-tailed deer, eastern cottontail rabbit,

gray squirrel, ruffed grouse, wild turkey, and quail. Fur bearers in the area

likely include raccoon, beaver, and eastern gray fox. Typical bird species

include the cardinal, purple finch, swallow, wood thrush, warblers,

American crow, and pileated woodpecker. In addition, birds such as

osprey, heron, and kingfisher are found in the area. Migratory species

such as the mourning dove, woodcock, and various waterfowl frequent the

area. A number of raptors such as owls and red-tailed hawks are also

found in the area.

Birchwood Run may support fish populations. However, no fish collection

records for this stream are on file with the Virginia Department of Game

and Inland Fisheries (VDGIF). No fish were observed in the unnamed

tributary of Birchwood Run located off-site to the northeast.

4.5 Threatened and Endangered Species

According to the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, and

the Virginia Division of Natural Heritage, no records of rare, threatened, or

endangered species or natural communities exist on or adjacent to the

proposed site. However, the VDGIF reports two "species of special status,"

the bald eagle and the eastern tiger salamander, as possibly occurring near

the project site. In addition, the pygmy shrew, a federal candidate species,

is known to occur along the Rappahannock River in King George County.

The presence of potential habitat for these three species was investigated

during a site reconnaissance survey conducted on January 29, 2002.

The bald eagle, a federal endangered species, is known to nest along the

Potomac River and Rappahannock River, within a few miles of the

proposed site. However, field observations have reported neither bald

eagle rearing nor nesting habitat on the site or within its vicinity. Bald

eagles have not been reported on or adjacent to the project site, but
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray-dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

26

occasional visits to the site or roosting by eagles could occur in wooded

areas to the north.

The eastern tiger salamander, a state endangered species, requires habitat

with a suitable substrate for burrowing (especially sand), ephemeral pools

that are preferably exposed, and suitable medium for egg attachment

(grasses and stumps). Although the actual occurrence of tiger

salamanders cannot be dismissed entirely, field observations indicate no

high-quality habitat is present on or near the proposed project site. The

ephemeral ponds on the property to the north are covered by a closed tree

canopy and contain silt, which makes a poor environment for this species.

The pygmy shrew, a federal candidate species, has been collected in King

George County along the Rappahannock River. The pygmy shrew occurs

over a wide range of habitat types, from dry to moist woodlands to old field

and edge habitats. The preferred cover types include dense vines and/or

dead plant material, such as leaf mold or rotting logs. Field observations

suggest that such habitat does exist north of the project site, but not within

the area proposed to be developed. The pygmy shrew is not currently

listed or proposed for listing as a federal or state threatened or endangered

species, and therefore, is not protected by state or federal endangered

species legislation.

Table 5 shows the threatened and endangered species and state and

federal rank, as well as "five habitat communities" which are endangered

and worthy of protection. The project site is not associated with these

plant community types.

Table 5 - Threatened and Endangered Species

Natural Heritage Resources of King George County, Virginia

Type Species Name Common Name Globa

l Rank

State

Rank

Birds Haliaeetus

leucocephalus

Bald Eagle G4 S2

Communities N/A Brackish Marsh -- --

Communities N/A Salt Scrub -- --

Communities N/A Coastal Plain Bottomland

Hardwoods

-- --

Communities N/A Coastal Plain Depression

Pond

-- --
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray-dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

27

Communities N/A Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest -- --

Invertebrates Agelenopsis kastoni Funnel-Web Spider G4 S2

Non-Vascular

Plants

Sphagnum trinitense Trinidad Peatmoss G4 S2

Vascular Plants Bolboschoenus

fluviatilis

River Bulrush G5 S1

Ranking Denotions:

State Rankings:

S1-Extremely rare, usually 5 or fewer populations or occurrences in the state; or may

be a few remaining individuals; often especially vulnerable to extirpation.

S2-Very rare; usually between 5 and 20 populations or occurrences; or with many

individuals in fewer occurrences; often susceptible to becoming extirpated.

S3-Rare to uncommon; usually between 20 and 100 populations or occurrences; may

have fewer occurrences, but with a large number of individuals in some

populations; may be susceptible to large-scale disturbances.

S4-Common; usually >100 populations or occurrences, but may be fewer with many

large populations; may be restricted to only a portion of the state; usually

not susceptible to immediate threats.

S5-Very common; demonstrably secure under present conditions.

Global Rankings:

Global Ranks are similar, but refer to a species' rarity throughout its total range.

Global ranks are denoted with a "G" followed by a number. The global and

state ranks combined (e.g. G2/S1) give an instant grasp of a species'

known rarity.

4.6 Water Resources

The Rappahannock River, located approximately 1 mile south of the site, is

identified as a Riverine, Tidal, Open-Water, Permanent tidal wetland on the

National Wetland Inventory (NWI) map. However, no wetlands are located

on the proposed project site. Birchwood Run, a tributary to the

Rappahannock River is situated to the south and east of the site. Water
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray-dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

28

drainage from the site would flow into Birchwood Run via low-order

tributaries of Birchwood Run that can have intermittent flow during the

year. The surface water drainage on site is within a Resource Protection

Area (RPA) designated by King George County. The Mirant-Birchwood

Facility property, including the proposed project site, is not in the

floodplain of any streams.

4.7 Air Quality

The proposed site is adjacent to the Mirant-Birchwood Facility in an area

designated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency as "Better Than

National Standards" or "Cannot Be Classified" for sulfur dioxide (SO2),

nitrogen dioxide (NO2), carbon monoxide (CO), ozone, and particulate

matter less than 10 microns (PM10). Air quality in the area is good, as

reflected in the background concentrations for criteria pollutants. Ambient

levels for criteria pollutants are below National Ambient Air Quality

Standards (NAAQS). The nearest Prevention of Significant Deterioration

(PSD) Class I area is the Shenandoah National Park, located about 60 miles

west and northwest of the proposed site. The nearest non-attainment area

is Stafford County, the border of which is located about 3,000 feet westsouthwest of the project site. Prevailing winds are generally out of the

northwest and southwest.

4.8 Noise

Principal background noise sources in the region around the proposed project site include

vehicular traffic on County Routes 605, 665, and State Route 3; rail traffic; and the

Mirant-Birchwood Facility. The proposed project site is open area with no obstructive or

reflective surfaces and is bordered to the north by a wooded buffer that is designated as a

Resource Protection Area by King George County.

No sensitive noise receptors are located in the vicinity of the project site.

Employees of the Mirant-Birchwood Facility wear hearing protection when

and where necessary on the property.

4.9 Hazardous Wastes

An Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) was conducted to determine if

materials regulated under the Comprehensive Environmental Response,

Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), the Resource Conservation and

Recovery Act (RCRA), and other environmental laws and regulations were

potentially located on the project site. The ESA consisted of a site

walkover and a database search. The Mirant-Birchwood Facility has

registered underground and above-ground storage tanks that are equipped

with vapor-detection devices. No leaks have been reported. No additional
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray-dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

29

underground or above-ground storage tanks are planned for the proposed

project site. There had been previous report of a waste spill at the King

George County Landfill, but no migration off the landfill property was

recorded. In addition, there was a reported leaking underground storage

tank on a property located at 365 Kings Highway. This property is 3/4 mile

from the proposed project site but there is no opportunity for

contamination migration to the project site, since the tank is no longer in

service. Figure 9 shows the locations of all sites within 11/4 miles of the

project site.

The "accidental release" procedures that have been employed at the

Mirant-Birchwood Facility since its origin are shown below in Table 6.

Table 6. Accidental Release Procedures –Mirant-Birchwood Facility

Potential Accidental

Release Point

Potential cause Preventative Measures/

Cleanup Procedures

Receiving station for bulk

liquid admixtures

Off-loading tank delivery,

hose leak or breakage, or

valve leak.

Proper storage

containment - stainless

steel tank.

Concrete "dike" at offload station to contain

potential spill or leak.

Regular inspection of

transfer line and valve -

replace/repair as

required.

Maintain sorbent spill kit

onsite for cleanup.

Enforcement of safety

procedures and industrial

hygiene practices.

Follow recommended

Material Safety Data

Sheets (MSDS) clean up

and precautionary

measures.

Reclaim spilled material,

if possible.

Receiving station for dry,

bulk reagent powders

Off-loading tank delivery

(pneumatic) hose leak or

Proper silo storage

containment and transfer
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray-dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

30

Table 6. Accidental Release Procedures –Mirant-Birchwood Facility

Potential Accidental

Release Point

Potential cause Preventative Measures/

Cleanup Procedures

breakage, or valve leak equipment.

Regular inspection of

transfer lines and valves -

replace/repair as

required.

Vacuum clean up and

reclaim spill, if possible.

Enforcement of safety

procedures and industrial

hygiene practices.

Follow recommended

MSDS clean up and

precautionary measures

Continuous pneumatic

transfer of spray-dryer

ash - pipeline from

generating station

storage silo to the

process facility.

Source of base raw feed

product (spray-dryer ash)

into process plant

(aggregate manufacture).

Regular inspection

procedure for detection

of leaks and breakage -

repair/replace as

required.

Spill: clean up wet with

water and reclaim, if

possible.

Vacuum clean up and

reclaim.

Enforcement of safety

procedures and industrial

hygiene practices.

Aggregate process

facility baghouse.

Leak from bag blockage

or bag breakage.

Regular inspection and

maintenance procedure -

replace

bags/components, as

required.

Train operators for visual

stack observation.
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray-dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

31

4.10 Land Use

An historical review of past land use was conducted using a sequence of

aerial maps dating from 1977 through 2000. Figure 10 shows how the

property at the Mirant-Birchwood Facility appeared as a farm in 1977.

Figure 11 shows little change as of 1980 when the property was still used

as farmland. Figure 12 shows the development of the Mirant-Birchwood

Facility as it appeared in 1998, indicating that the area of the proposed

project was disturbed. Figure 13, taken in 2000, shows the plant as it now

appears.

The Mirant-Birchwood Facility lies in a rural area, consisting of open land

with little topographic relief. With the exception of the power plant and the

adjacent King George County Landfill, land use in the vicinity of the site is

predominately agricultural, residential and green space. The rail line that

bisects the Mirant-Birchwood Facility property services Solite, Inc., the

King George County Landfill, and the Mirant-Birchwood Facility, carrying

an estimated one to two trains per week. Land surrounding the site is

heavily wooded. Homes border the property approximately 4,000 feet to

the northeast on County Road 605; 4,000 feet to the southwest; and to the

southeast off State Highway 3. Homes to the northeast and northwest of

the site are at an elevation approximately 50 feet above the site. The area

approximately 300 feet southeast of the site is less densely wooded and

generally slopes down from the power plant toward the Rappahannock

River. There are no intervening hills between the site and the homes

located southeast and southwest of the site. Land use of the proposed

project site is currently open field.

4.11 Socioeconomic Conditions

King George County was formed from Richmond County in 1720 and

renamed in honor of King George I. The county is part of the rapidly

growing Fredericksburg Region, and is located in the northern area of what

is known as Virginia's urban crescent, bounded on the north by the

Potomac River and on the south by the Rappahannock River. The

population of King George County is 16,803, having a median age of 35.1

years (Census 2000). The population of the county was 10,543 in 1980 and

13,572 in 1990.

Overall average personal income per sector for King George County in

1990 was $32,905, and then $46,580 in 2000, a 31 percent increase. During

the same period, personal income in manufacturing increased 32 percent,

in the government sector 42 percent, and in the service sector 33 percent

(Refer to Table 7). Total full and part-time employment by industry has

increased 4,540 from 1990-2000 (34 percent). During this same period the
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray-dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

32

number of manufacturing jobs decreased by 18 percent, while the number

of government positions and service industry jobs increased 12 percent

and 56 percent, respectively (Refer to Table 8).

Table 7. Average Personal Income per Sector - King George County, Virginia

1990 2000 $ Change % Change

Overall

average

$32,905 $46,580 $13,675 31%

Manufacturin

g

$22,086 $32,589 $10,503 32%

Government $43,652 $73,414 $30,762 42%

Service $23,927 $35,912 $11,985 33%

Primary employment sectors in King George County are federal civilian

government, service, trade, and manufacturing. The major employer in the

county is the Naval Surface Warfare Center (NAVSWC), which provides

employment for over 3,400 civilian personnel. In addition to the base

operations of NAVSWC, the Naval Space Surveillance Center, Naval Space

Command, and the Aegis Training Center have assisted in attracting over

70 high-technology software engineering firms to the county. As of

September 1998, the total civilian labor force within the county stood at

8,457, with an unemployment rate of 2 percent.

Table 8. Total Full and Part-Time Employment by Industry, King George County,

Virginia

1990 2000 # Change % Change

Non-farm 8,875 13,415 4540 34%

Manufacturin

g

349 297 -52 -18%

Government 4,799 5,442 643 12%

Service 1,912 4,323 2411 56%

In general, manufacturing jobs in the county are declining, as represented

by 52 positions lost from 1990-2000. But the average personal income that

is provided by this type of job has increased 32 percent over the past

decade. The highest non-farm industry increase was in the government

sector with a 42 percent increase, followed by the service sector with a 33

percent increase. Despite the increase in personal income in

manufacturing, this type of job falls below the county average personal

income per sector.

The total labor force within a 30-minute commute zone of King George

County is estimated to be about 67,000, and over 1,496,000 within a 60-

minute commute zone. Several state and local programs are available to

assist business expansion within the region.
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray-dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

33

Local economic activity, as measured in terms of retail sales, grew from

$42 million in 1992 to $47 million in 1996. Median family income was

$38,210 in 1990, an increase of 85 percent from 1980, representing a 6

percent increase in real dollars. Assessed value of taxable real estate for

1998 was $836 million.

4.12 Transportation

Roadways

The proposed project site is located near County Route 665; County Route

605 and State Highway 3 pass within one mile of the site. A railroad line

owned and operated by RF&P traverses north of the proposed project site

and the existing power plant. The Mirant-Birchwood Facility owns a singletrack rail line, which traverses the southern margin of the site of the

proposed facility, to supply coal to the plant. The rail line extends

eastward to the site of the Solite quarry and carries about two trains per

week.

The principal roadways may be more fully described as follows:

County Route 665 is a rural local road that bisects the Mirant-Birchwood

Facility and is the principal access for the facility to Highway 3. Route 665

connects State Highway 3 with 605 and runs in a northeasterly direction.

The surface is paved north of Highway 3. This road serves a number of

residences located at the intersection of Routes 605 and 665. A left-turn

lane exists for eastbound traffic on Highway 3 turning onto Route 665.

State Highway 3 is a state primary road. It is designated as a Minor

Arterial. It connects the northern neck and middle peninsulas with

northwestern Virginia. According to the King George Comprehensive Plan

(1990), Highway 3 is operating at a desirable level of service. Through the

project area, Highway 3 is a divided 4-lane highway with 2 to 6-foot gravel

shoulders.

Peak hour turning movements at the principal intersections near the site

and average daily traffic counts along the principal roads were conducted

for the original Mirant-Birchwood Facility traffic study. The turning

movements projected in that study were far below typical intersection

capacities. By observation, these principal roads and intersections are still

below capacity.

King George County is located in a competitive trucking market with more

than 20 major lines authorized for interstate shipping. Delivery services
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray-dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

34

such as: Airborne, Emery, Federal Express, Purolator, and United Parcel

Service serve regional airports and provide worldwide shipping.

Interstate 95, located 18 miles to the west, provides a 6-lane north-south

transportation route from northern Maine to southern Florida. North-south

travel in the county is supplemented by U.S. Route 301. East-west links are

provided by Virginia Primary Route 3 and Route 218. Other primary local

roads include Routes 205 and 206. The county has convenient

connections to Interstate 66 in northern Virginia, Interstate 81 in the

Shenandoah Valley, and Interstate 64 to the Port of Hampton Roads.

Air Service

Richmond International Airport, located within one-hour drive from King

George County, provides commercial air, freight, and charter services.

Three additional major airports, Dulles International Airport (northern

Virginia), Ronald Reagan National Airport (Washington, D.C.), and

Baltimore-Washington International Airport are located within a 90-minute

drive. Shannon Airport, a general aviation facility (15 miles west of the

proposed project site) provides charter, corporate, and commuter services

and facilities. Shannon has a 3,000-foot paved runway and FAA approved

lighting. In 2001, the nearby Stafford Regional Airport became operational

and expanded the county's corporate, commuter, and air-freight service.

The new facility serves as a reliever airport for Dulles International and

Ronald Reagan National.

Waterways

Navigation channels include a 12-foot navigable channel in the

Rappahannock River and a 24-foot channel accessible from King George

County. Deep-water river ports are located in Alexandria on the Potomac

River, and Richmond and Hopewell on the James River. Worldwide export

markets are served by the Port of Hampton Roads, the largest natural

harbor in the world and the nation's leading export harbor. Excellent

seaport facilities are also available in Baltimore, which is within 90 minutes

of King George County.

5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

5.1 Geology and Soils

No direct impacts on regional geology and geological resources are

expected as a result of the proposed project due to the small size of the

site (less than 5 acres), and because aggregate stockpiling would be
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray-dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

35

limited, and no major earthwork or piling would be required. In addition, no

pre-existing geological conditions have the potential to adversely impact

construction or operation of the facility. Soil at the proposed project site

was disturbed during construction of the Mirant-Birchwood Facility and

therefore no major impact on soils would be expected from project

construction.

However, spray-dryer ash from the Mirant-Birchwood Facility is currently

used as a daily cover for the King George County Landfill to control

disease vectors (birds, rodents, insects, etc.), fires, odor, and blowing litter.

Daily cover for landfills may be soil, clay, sand, geo-textiles, chemical

foams, tire chips (tires that have been shredded into small pieces), and

bark and wood chips. A daily cover is approximately 6" thick, unless it is

made of man-made textiles. Because the proposed project would utilize all

of the spray-dryer ash, the landfill operation would need to find an

alternative daily cover. Potential indirect impacts to soils from the

proposed project are that additional lands could be disturbed to obtain soil

materials as an alternative to the daily cover of spray-dryer ash. Although

alternatives are being considered by the King George Landfill, a specific

alternative has not been selected.

Additionally, lightweight aggregate is customarily produced from the

thermal expansion of clay or shale, which is obtained by mining (removing

overburden by conventional earth-moving methods). An expected

outcome from successful demonstration of the proposed project is that

additional lightweight aggregate manufacturing facilities utilizing coalcombustion waste products could be constructed throughout the United

States. Impacts to soils and geology resulting from mining clay and shale

would be reduced. However, this reduction may be offset by an increase in

mining of soils for landfill cover.

5.2 Hydrology

The proposed project site is approximately 1,000 feet from a stream which has a riparian

buffer zone (Resource Protection Area) established by King George County. The

proposed project plans call for the avoidance of any significant intrusion into the

Resource Protection Area.

Therefore, the proposed project would not directly impact any surface waters. A well

would be drilled to supply potable water for the proposed facility; however, the quantity

of water withdrawn would be minor.

A Stormwater Management Plan, as required by King George County,

would be prepared and would include plans for detention facilities to

control runoff. Therefore, no significant impacts would be expected from

runoff at the site.
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray-dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

36

5.3 Cultural Resources

Based on the findings of the archaeological investigation conducted prior

to the construction of the Mirant-Birchwood Facility, no historic properties

would be affected by the proposed project. The two sites that may be

impacted by the proposed project, Sites 44KG100 and 44KG103, required

no further archeological investigation due to their compromised integrity.

There are no potentially impacted sites that could be further developed for

the benefit of the public. A letter from Virginia’s Department of Historic

Resources concurring with these findings can be found in Appendix C.

5.4 Ecological Resources

The proposed project site is vegetated by various grasses and other

herbaceous species and is of low ecological value. The grasses were

planted for erosion control and have limited food or cover potential for

wildlife. The area is periodically mowed. Successional colonization of the

project site by forests would not be permitted by the Mirant-Birchwood

Facility during the life of the power plant. Woodland areas and designated

Resource Protection Areas would be avoided by the proposed project. No

significant impacts to ecological resources would be anticipated.

5.5 Threatened and Endangered Species

Ephemeral ponds on the property to the north are covered by a closed tree

canopy and contain silt, which serves as poor habitat for state-endangered

eastern tiger salamander. Furthermore, the proposed project would not

disturb this area.

Field observations suggest that habitat for the federal candidate species,

the pygmy shrew, does exist north of the project site but not within the

area proposed to be developed. However, if the species is listed prior to

completion of the project, an on-site survey may be necessary to verify

lack of presence or suitable habitat. Finally, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service determined that the project is not likely to adversely affect any

federally listed or proposed species or their designated critical habitat (See

Appendix C).

5.6 Water Resources

Best Management Practices for erosion and sedimentation control and

stormwater management would be employed during construction of the

proposed project. An Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan would be

developed and submitted to the King George County Conservation District
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray-dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

37

for review and approval. The proposed project would not affect any

wetlands. The nearest streams, tributaries of Birchwood Run, are

protected by a riparian buffer and are approximately 1000 feet from the

project site. Therefore, no impacts to water resources would be anticipated

from the proposed project.

The proposed project site is not in the floodplain, and therefore no impacts

to floodplains would occur.

5.7 Air Quality

King George County, Virginia, is presently in attainment for all six criteria

pollutants as defined by the Clean Air Act (CAA) of 1977. In an attainment

area, an important air permitting consideration is to determine whether the

facility will be subject to Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD)

regulations. The Commonwealth of Virginia has been delegated full

authority to implement PSD regulations within the Commonwealth.

PSD regulations apply to major source categories that emit or have the

potential to emit more than 100 tons per year of any pollutant subject to

regulation under the CAA, or any major source which has the potential to

emit 250 tons per year of any pollutant subject to regulations under the Act.

However, the proposed plant would result in emissions below 100 tons per

year, and is therefore not subject to PSD regulations.

A facility is considered a major source of air pollutant emissions if it emits

100 tons or more per year of any criteria pollutant, or 10 tons per year of

any Hazardous Air Pollutant (HAP), or 25 tons per year of any combination

of HAPs. The lightweight aggregate manufacturing facility is expected to

emit only one criteria pollutant, PM10, and no HAPs. Because emissions of

PM10 would be expected to be less than 100 tons per year, the facility would

not be considered a major source. However, it is expected that the facility

would be subject to Virginia Department of Environmental Quality

construction and operating permit regulations for stationary emission

sources.

No significant impact on air quality would be expected from the proposed

project.

5.8 Noise
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray-dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

38

No noise-sensitive receptors are located in the vicinity of the project site.

The project would cause a negligible increase in noise levels over the

current condition; therefore noise impacts would be minor.

5.9 Hazardous Wastes

Although encounters are not anticipated, should site preparation work or

construction work uncover hazardous or residual wastes, the wastes

would be stockpiled, tested, transported, and disposed of in accordance

with federal, state, and local regulations.

In addition, lightweight aggregate produced from spray-dryer ash has been

subjected to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Toxic

Characteristic Leaching Procedures (TCLP) which is used to determine if a

waste is hazardous under RCRA. The procedures are designed to simulate

landfill disposal conditions where the used product would be co-mingled

with other municipal waste. The lightweight manufactured aggregate was

found non-hazardous (Refer to Appendix D). Further, the aggregate

produced under the proposed project would not be stockpiled in large

quantities. No hazardous waste impacts are expected.

5.10 Land Use

The proposed project site is zoned for industrial use and should not

conflict with surrounding land use.

5.11 Socioeconomic Effects

The manufacturing sector represents only about 2 percent of the total

employment in King George County, but the proposed aggregate

manufacturing facility would create nine jobs in this sector of the economy

which currently is underrepresented. And, because transport of

aggregates and reagents would involve an overall increase in hauling than

currently required for the disposal (landfilling) of the spray-dryer ash,

additional employment in the trucking industry would be necessary.

Furthermore, successful demonstration of the technology would be

expected to lead to additional lightweight aggregate manufacturing

facilities utilizing FGD byproducts throughout the United States. A

secondary economic impact would be the loss of revenue currently

realized by King George County from landfilling the spray-dryer ash. This

would be offset somewhat by the fact that the proposed facility would

increase the county tax base.

In terms of environmental justice considerations, because the proposed

project would be constructed on the property of the Mirant-Birchwood
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray-dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

39

Facility and is not expected to have significant adverse effects to human

health or the environment, the project would not disproportionately impact

minority or low-income populations.

5.12 Transportation

The proposed facility would be expected to generate only a negligible

increase in traffic over current levels. The plant would produce 167,000

tons of aggregate per year. At 18 tons per load, this would result in 9,278

truckloads of processed aggregate exported from the site per year or

approximately 20 to 30 trips per day. The vast majority of truck trips would

use Route 665 and Highway 3, to I-95 near Fredericksburg. Loaded trucks

would turn right from Route 665 to Highway 3. An estimated 75 percent of

the trips would travel north toward Washington and Baltimore, while the

remaining 25 percent of the trips would travel south toward Richmond and

Norfolk. Empty delivery trucks that need to return to the facility would

return on the same route. These trips would replace a similar number of

existing trips between the power plant and the King George Landfill.

However, traffic from the power plant to the landfill requires use of about 1

mile of Route 665.

With the plant employing 9 additional workers, this would result in 18

additional auto trips per day (9 in each direction). There would also be 360

tractor-trailer loads of reagent delivered to the site per year, an average of 1

or 2 trips in, and 1 or 2 trips out per day. During the 8-month construction

period, approximately 800 truck trips would be necessary to deliver

construction material to the site.

The majority of truck trips during construction as well as during normal

operation would occur throughout the workday rather than during peak

periods. The loading operation of the trucks will meter the flow of trucks to

the highway system.

The traffic impact study revealed that the project would have no impact on

existing highway capacities and no mitigation should be required.

6.0 CONCLUSIONS

No significant impacts to human health and safety or the environment are

anticipated from the construction and operation of the proposed

lightweight aggregate manufacturing facility. The proposed plant would be

constructed on a previously disturbed site and no impacts to geology or

soils would occur. Cultural resource investigations have been conducted

and additional investigation was not warranted; therefore no further action

pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act is
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray-dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

40

required. No impacts are expected to ecological resources, water

resources, or floodplains. Construction and operation of the proposed

project would not be expected to impact any Federal or State listed

threatened or endangered species. Although truck traffic would increase,

roadways would be sufficient to handle the increased capacity, and

therefore, transportation impacts would be minimal. Minor increases in

noise and particulate matter (PM10) would be expected.

The proposed facility would utilize all of the spray-dryer ash produced by

the Mirant-Birchwood Facility which is being used by the King George

County Landfill as daily cover. Therefore, with project implementation, the

landfill would have to secure other material for cover and could result in

additional areas being disturbed for soil/sand borrow. Alternatives for

cover do exist in the landfill industry that may be more environmentally

sound, however. Furthermore, King George County would not receive the

$5 per ton tipping fees that are currently being collected for disposal of the

spray-dryer ash in the landfill, but the proposed facility would provide

additional employment in the manufacturing sector and an increased tax

base for the county. The King George Planning Commission has

supported implementation of the proposed project in that they approved a

special exemption and modification of the proffer statement from MirantBirchwood Facility to enable Universal Aggregates LLC, to design,

construct and operate the lightweight manufactured aggregate facility.

Successful demonstration of the technology could result in additional

lightweight aggregate manufacturing facilities throughout the United

States. Additional environmental benefits from widespread implementation

of this technology could be a reduction of landfilling of FGD waste

products as well as a reduction in the impacts from mining associated with

conventionally-produced, expanded clay/shale-based, lightweight

aggregates.
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray Dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

APPENDIX A

Figures
A-1

Figure 1. Simplified Process Flow Scheme
A-2

Figure 2. Project Location
A-3

 Figure 3. Aerial photograph of Mirant-Birchwood Power Plant taken April 10, 1996.
A-4

Figure 4. Plant layout.
A-5

Figure 5. Regional Environmental Constraint Map
A-6

 

Figure 6. Project Vicinity Environmental Constraint Map
A-7

Figure 7. Soils Map
A-8

Figure 8. Archaeological Sites
A-9

Figure 9. Phase I ESA (Environmental Site Assessment) Map
A-10

Figure 10. Aerial photograph of proposed project site taken 1977.
A-11

Figure 11. Aerial photograph of proposed project site taken 1980. 
A-12

Figure 12. Aerial photograph of proposed project site taken 1998.
A-13

Figure 13. Aerial photograph of proposed project site taken 2000.
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray Dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

APPENDIX B

List of Agencies and Persons Contacted
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray Dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

LIST OF AGENCIES AND PERSONS CONTACTED

Commonwealth of Virginia, Department of Historic Resources, 2801 Kensington Avenue, 

Richmond, Virginia 23221

King George Landfill, Mr. Howard Burns

U.S. Department of Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ecological Services, 6669 Short 

Lane, Gloucester, VA 23061.

Virginia Economic Development Partnership (VDEP) Research Division, P.O. Box 798, 901 

East Byrd Street, Richmond, Virginia, 23218-0798 
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray Dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

APPENDIX C

Agency Correspondence
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray Dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray Dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray Dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray Dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray Dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

APPENDIX D

Results of

Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure

 on Manufactured Aggregate
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray Dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray Dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

APPENDIX E

References
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray Dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

REFERENCES

1. Guidelines for Preparation of the Environmental Information Volume (EIV), U. S. Department 

of Energy Publications and Presentations.

2. Wu, M.M.; McCoy, D.C.; Fener, M. L.; Scandrol, R.O.; Winschel, R.A.; Withum, J.A.; 

Statnick, R.M., "Production of Manufactured Aggregates from Flue Gas Desulfurization ByProducts," presented at the 1999 International Ash Symposium, Lexington, Kentucky, October 

1999. 

3. Wu, M.M.; Winschel, R.A.; Hasenfus, G.J., "Production of Manufacturing Aggregates from 

Coal Combustion By-Products," presented at the Thirteen International Symposium on 

Management and Use of Coal Combustion By-Products of the American Coal Ash Association, 

Orlando, Florida, January 1999.

4. Wu, M.M.; Winschel, R.A.; Wasson, G.E., "Composition Effects on the Durability of 

Aggregates Made from Coal Combustion Wastes," presented at the 1995 International Ash 

Utilization Symposium, Lexington, Kentucky, October 1995.

5. Winschel, R.A.; Wu, M.M., "Use of Aggregate Produced from Coal Fired Fluidized Bed 

Combustion Residue as a Component in Bituminous Concrete," presented at the Ninth 

International Coal Conference on Coal Science, Essen, Germany, September 1997.

6. Wu, M.M.; Winschel, R.A.; Wasson, G.E.; Yuran, P.J., "Properties of Synthetic Aggregates 

Made from Fluidized Bed Combustion (FBC) and Dry FGD By-Products," presented at the 

Eleventh International Symposium on Coal Ash Use and Management, Orlando, Florida, January 

1995. 

7. National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), 40 CFR Parts 1500-1508, and DOE 

Regulations for Implementation of NEPA (10 CFR Part 1021).

8. U.S. Geological Survey Topographic Map, 7.5 Minute Quadrangle, Passapatanzy, Virginia, 

published 1966, photo revised 1979, photo inspected 1982.

9. U.S. Geological Survey Topographic Map, 7.5 Minute Quadrangle, Rappahannock Academy, 

Virginia, published 1969, photo revised 1984.

10. National Wetland Inventory (NWI) Map, 7.5 Minute Quadrangle, Passapatanzy, Virginia, 

published April 1972.

11. NWI Map, 7.5 Minute Quadrangle, Rappahannock Academy, published March 1977.
Commercial Demonstration of the Manufactured Aggregate Processing Technology

Utilizing Spray Dryer Ash, King George County, Virginia

DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

12. U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service (SCS), Soil Survey of Stafford 

and King George Counties, Virginia, issued February 1974.

13. Resource Protection Area (RPA) Map, King George County, Virginia, unpublished.

14. Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) Aerial Photographs dated October 20, 1967 

and October 21, 1981. 

15. Phase I Cultural Resource Survey for the Proposed SEI -Mirant-Birchwood Power Facility, 

King George County, Virginia, Westinghouse Environmental and Geotechnical Services, Inc., 

1991. 

16. Offsite Routine Wetlands Determination SEI Authorization No. 6709-E-004-005, 

Westinghouse Environmental and Geotechnical Services, Inc., 1991.

17. Prior Use Survey, SEI-Birchwood, Inc., SEI Authorization No. 6709-E-004, Westinghouse 

Environmental and Geotechnical Services, Inc., 1991.

18. Subtask 5.1 Threatened and Endangered Species Review, SEI - Birchwood, Inc., SEI 

Authorization No. 6709-E-004-006 (REV.1), Westinghouse Environmental and Geotechnical 

Services, Inc., 1991.

19. Phase I Environmental Assessment, SEI-Birchwood Power Facility Parcel A, King George 

County, Virginia, Rust Environmental, 1993.

20. Fly Ash and Coal Conversion By-Products; Characterization, Utilization, and Disposal III, 

Materials Research Society Symposia Processing, ISSN 0272-9172; Vol. 86, 1987, Page 274.