ML17243A315
| ML17243A315 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Indian Point  |
| Issue date: | 08/31/2017 |
| From: | Damon-Randall K US Dept of Commerce, National Marine Fisheries Service |
| To: | Benjamin Beasley Division of License Renewal |
| Briana Grange 301-415-1042 | |
| References | |
| Download: ML17243A315 (7) | |
Text
Benjamin Beasley UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE GREATER ATLANTIC REGIONAL FISHERIES OFFICE 55 Great Republic Drive Gloucester, MA 01930-2276 AUG 3 1 2017 Chief. Environmental Review and Project Management Branch Mail Stop 0-1 lFl U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 RE: Conference Report - Proposed Indian Point Relicensing
Dear Mr. Beasley,
This letter considers effects of the ongoing operations and proposed relicensings of Units 2 and 3 of the Indian Point nuclear power plant on critical habitat being designated for the New York Bight Distinct Population Segment (DPS) of Atlantic sturgeon (82 FR 39160; August 17, 2017 1).
The actions and action area are described in our January 13, 2013 Biological Opinion and are incorporated by reference with the exception of one significant change in the terms of the proposed new licenses. On January 8, 2017, Entergy, New York State and other signatories reached an agreement that commits Entergy to permanently ceasing the operations of Indian Point Unit 2 and Indian Point Unit 3 by April 30, 2020 and 2021, respectively, with a provision that could, under special circumstances, allow for operations until April 30, 2024 (IP2) and April 30, 2025 (IP3), but no later. NRC is now considering issuing renewed operating licenses that would authorize the continued operation of IP2 and IP3 through those agreed upon dates (rather than September 2033 and December 2035 as considered in the 2013 Opinion).
Critical Habitat Proposed for the New York Bight DPS A proposed rule regarding the designation of critical habitat for the New York Bight DPS of Atlantic sturgeon published in the Federal Register on June 3, 2016 (81FR 35701). A final rule was published on August 17, 2017 and will become effective on September 18, 2017 (82 FR 39160). The action area overlaps with a portion of the critical habitat proposed for the New York Bight DPS in the Hudson River. Once critical habitat is proposed, ESA Section 7(a)(4) requires an action agency to confer with NMFS or FWS on any action that is likely to result in the destruction or adverse modification of proposed critical habitat. As described in your September 14, 2016 and March 6, 2017 letter and supplemented by a June 26, 2017 email from Briana Grange of your staff, NRC has determined that the proposed actions are not likely to adversely affect the proposed critical habitat and, thus, they are not likely to destroy or adversely modify proposed critical habitat; therefore, NRC determined that conference is not required.
Here, in order to determine whether we concur with NRC's determinations, we consider the impacts of the proposed actions on critical habitat proposed for designation for the New York Bight DPS and whether the actions are likely to result in the destruction or adverse modification 1 The effective date of the rule is September 18, 201 7.
CFR 402 JO until the effective date.
We are following the "conference" provisions outlined at 50
~*~
~~~.. I"
of proposed critical habitat. Based on the analysis we provide below, we agree with NRC's conclusion that the ongoing operations of Indian Point and the proposed relicensings (hereinafter, the "actions") are not likely to adversely affect critical habitat proposed for the New York Bight DPS and therefore, conference is not required.
On February 11, 2016, NMFS and USFWS published a revised regulatory definition of "destruction or adverse modification" (81 FR 7214 ). Destruction or adverse modification "means a direct or indirect alteration that appreciably diminishes the value of critical habitat for the conservation of a listed species. Such alterations may include, but are not limited to, those that alter the physical or biological features essential to the conservation of a species or that preclude or significantly delay development of such features." As described in the preamble to the proposed rule for the revised definition (79 FR 27060, May 12, 2014), the "destruction or adverse modification" definition focuses on how Federal actions affect the quantity and quality of the physical or biological features in the designated critical habitat for a listed species and, especially in the case of unoccupied habitat, on any impacts to the critical habitat itself.
Specifically, the Services will generally conclude that a Federal action is likely to "destroy or adversely modify" designated critical habitat if the action results in an alteration of the quantity or quality of the essential physical or biological features of designated critical habitat, or that precludes or significantly delays the capacity of that habitat to develop those features over time, and if the effect of the alteration is to appreciably diminish the value of critical habitat for the conservation of the species.
The critical habitat designation for the New York Bight DPS is for habitats that support successful Atlantic sturgeon reproduction and recruitment. The critical habitat for the New York Bight DPS does not include any unoccupied habitat. In order to determine if the actions may affect critical habitat, we consider whether it would impact the habitat in a way that would affect its ability to support reproduction and recruitment. Specifically, we consider the effects of the actions on the physical features of the critical habitat. The essential features identified in the final rule are:
- 1) Hard bottom substrate (e.g. rock, cobble, gravel, limestone, boulder, etc.) in low salinity waters (i.e.. 0.0 to 0.5 parts per thousand (ppt) range) for settlement of fertilized eggs, refuge, growth, and development of early life stages;
- 2) Aquatic habitat with a gradual downstream salinity gradient of 0.5 up to as high as 30 ppt and soft substrate (e.g.. sand, mud) between the river mouth and spawning sites for juvenile foraging and physiological development:
- 3) Water of appropriate depth and absent physical barriers to passage (e.g.. locks, dams, thermal plumes, turbidity, sound, reservoirs, gear, etc.) between the river mouth and spawning sites necessary to support:
(i)
Unimpeded movement of adults to and from spawning sites; (ii)
Seasonal and physiologically dependent movement of juvenile Atlantic sturgeon to appropriate salinity zones within the river estuary; and (iii) Staging, resting, or holding of subadults or spawning condition adults.
Water depths in main river channels must also be deep enough (e.g.. at least 1.2 m) to ensure continuous flow in the main channel at all times when any sturgeon life stage would be in the river.
2
- 4)
Water, between the river mouth and spawning sites, especially in the bottom meter of the water column, with the temperature, salinity, and oxygen values that, combined, support:
(i) Spawning; (ii) Annual and interannual adult, subadult, larval, and juvenile survival; and (iii) Larval, juvenile, and subadult growth, development, and recruitment (e.g., 13 °C to 26 °C for spawning habitat and no more than 30 °C for juvenile rearing habitat, and 6 milligrams per liter (mg/L) dissolved oxygen (DO) or greater for juvenile rearing habitat).
Effects to the Hudson River critical habitat unit Because this is a forward-looking analysis, we are considering effects of operations of IP2 and IP3 that are ongoing and will continue over the term of the proposed new licenses including the period allowed only under special circumstances (i.e., through April 30, 2024 for IP2 and April 30, 2025 for IP3).
We are not considering any effects of decommissioning of the Indian Point facility here because information on the decommissioning and license termination and its effects are not yet known. It is our understanding that the decommissioning and license termination process will involve new federal actions by the NRC and that NRC will request the appropriate section 7 consultation at the appropriate time.
Feature One: Hard bottom habitat with salinity less than 0.5 ppt The first feature (hard bottom habitat with salinity less than 0.5 ppt) is not present in the action area. The action area is within the oligohaline portion of the Hudson River (0.5 - 3.0 ppt salinity)
(CHGEC 1999). Because this feature is not present in the area that will be affected by continued operation of IP2 and IP3, these activities will have no effect on this feature. In order for this feature to be present in the action area, there would need to be a significant shift in the tidal influence in the Hudson River such that the salt wedge did not extend as far upstream. There is no information to suggest such an extreme change could occur in the period when IP2 and IP3 will continue to operate (2017-2025, at the latest). Climate change scenarios predicted for the U.S. east coast suggest that one consequence would be greater upstream reach of salt water intrusion. Therefore, it is extremely unlikely that the first feature, which is dependent on low salinity, would be present in the action area, and the actions will not preclude or significantly delay the development of this feature in the action area Feature Two: Transitional salinity z.one with soft substrate The action area is within the transitional salinity zone and contains areas of soft substrate. In considering effects to feature two, we consider whether the actions will have any effect on areas of soft substrate within transitional salinity zones; therefore, we consider effects to soft substrate and salinity. The intake and discharge of water at Indian Point has no effect on the substrate or salinity in the action area. Facility operations will not preclude or significantly delay the development of soft bottom habitat in the transitional salinity zone because they will not impact salinity or the substrate along the river bottom in any way.
3
The continued operation of IP2 and IP3 limits access to soft bottom areas within the action area.
This occurs through the discharge of heated effluent, which at times, is hot enough to be avoided by Atlantic sturgeon (greater than 28C; see Section 7.2 of the 2013 Opinion). However, because the thermal plume is largely at the surface, bottom temperatures above 28C are limited to a small area extending about 250 feet from the shore (Swanson et al. 2011 a, Figure 1-10 as described fully in Section 7.2.1.1 of our January 2013 Opinion) and even there, are elevated to above 28°C only rarely (approximately 2.24% of the time or a total period adding up to less than 30 days over the approximately 1,300 days that IP2 or IP3 will be operating). Therefore, while there will be times when Atlantic sturgeon will not be able to access some portions of the action area that contain feature 2, these instances will be limited spatially and temporally. In considering the effects of these impacts, we consider the effect on the value of the habitat for the conservation of the species. In the case of this feature, we consider the effects that these habitat alterations have on juvenile foraging and physiological development and how any effects may impact the value of the habitat for reproduction and recruitment. The amount of soft substrate that will be inaccessible is small in size and will only be inaccessible for small periods of time. We also considered what impact the thermal plume would have on the prey species (benthic invertebrates) that occur within the soft substrate. As noted in the 2013 Opinion, no analysis specific to effects of the thermal plume on the macroinvertebrate community has been conducted. However, given what is known about the plume (i.e., that it is largely a surface plume and has limited effects on water temperatures at or near the bottom) and the areas where Atlantic sturgeon forage items are found (i.e., on the bottom), any effects of the thermal plume are likely to be limited. If the thermal plume is affecting benthic invertebrates, the most likely effect would be to limit their distribution to areas where bottom water temperatures are not affected by the thermal plume. Given that those bottom areas affected by the thermal plume are small and effects are intermittent and temporary, impacts to the benthic community are expected to be insignificant.
Given the very small area of soft substrate that Atlantic sturgeon will not be able to access and that this loss of access will be intermittent and temporary, as well as that any effects to the benthic invertebrates that Atlantic sturgeon feed on will be insignificant, any effects to juvenile foraging, and resultant physiological development will be so small that they can not be meaningfully measured, detected or evaluated. As such, these effects are insignificant and would not result in any adverse effects to reproduction or recruitment.
Feature Three: Water absent physical barriers to passage between the river mouth and spawning sites The actions will affect the habitat in a way that impacts the movements of spawning adults or juveniles; this is because the actions will result in habitat alterations (i.e., increased temperature associated with the discharge plume) that make parts of the action area inaccessible. As explained in Section 7.2.1 of our 2013 Biological Opinion, we anticipate that areas with temperatures greater than 28°C will be avoided by Atlantic sturgeon. As explained in the Opinion, between June and September, a surface area of up to 75 acres, and bottom area extending about 250 feet from the shore may have temperatures above 28°C that would be avoided by sturgeon. In the Opinion we also explain that the thermal plume is largely limited to the surface and that water temperature at the bottom of the river, where Atlantic sturgeon are most likely to occur, will be elevated to above 28°C only rarely (approximately 2.24% of the 4
time). We expect that waters with temperatures greater than 28°C will be avoided by sturgeon.
However, because there is not expected to be any time when water temperatures are elevated above 28°C across the surface waters of the entire width of the river and the area near the bottom (where sturgeon are most likely to be moving) that experiences water temperatures greater than 28°C is limited to an area extending only 250 feet from shore (the river in this area is over 4,500 feet wide) there will always be a large zone of passage and the thermal plume will not be a barrier to sturgeon moving between the river mouth and spawning sites. Therefore, it is extremely unlikely that these habitat alterations would impact the ability of any adult Atlantic sturgeon to move through the area to reach the upstream spawning grounds or impact the foraging or physiological development of any juvenile Atlantic sturgeon in a way that impacts its recruitment to the population. Therefore, because it is extremely unlikely to affect the value of the habitat to the conservation of the species, effects to this feature are discountable.
Feature Four: Water with the temperature, salinity, and oxygen values that, combined, provide for dissolved oxygen values that support success/ ul reproduction and recruitment and are within the temperature range that supports the habitat function Feature four addresses the temperature, salinity and dissolved oxygen needs for Atlantic sturgeon spawning and recruitment. These water quality conditions are interactive and both temperature and salinity influence the dissolved oxygen saturation for a particular area. The operations of Indian Point directly affect water temperature; there are no effects to salinity. Spawning does not occur in the action area. Here, we consider the impact of the actions on the feature's ability to support the successful reproduction and recruitment of Atlantic sturgeon.
Section 7.2.1 of our 2013 Biological Opinion describes the discharge from IP2 and IP3 and considers effects of the discharge of heated effluent. Water temperature and dissolved oxygen levels are related, with warmer water generally holding less dissolved oxygen. As explained in the Section 7.2. l.4 of the 2013 Opinion, the best available information indicates that the thermal plume is not contributing to reductions in dissolved oxygen levels. As explained above, the thermal plume results in water temperatures at some times and in some parts of the action area that are high enough that they would be avoided by Atlantic sturgeon (greater than 28°C (82.4°F)) regardless of the associated salinity or dissolved oxygen levels. However, as explained above, the areas with these high water temperatures are largely limited to the surface where Atlantic sturgeon would not be exposed and the area near the bottom that experiences water temperatures greater than 28°C is limited spatially (extending no more than 250 feet from the shoreline) and temporally (these temperatures are experienced only 2.24% of the time). The continued operation ofIP2 and IP3 will result in portions of the action area to have temperatures that are high enough that they would not support Atlantic sturgeon of any life stage. However, because those areas are small, Atlantic sturgeon will be able to avoid them without any detectable effect on the physiology of any individuals or any future effect on growth, reproduction, or general health.
Given that Atlantic sturgeon are known to actively seek out cooler waters when temperatures rise to 28°C (82.4°F), any Atlantic sturgeon encountering bottom waters with temperatures above 28°C (82.4°F) area are likely to avoid it. Reactions to this elevated temperature are expected to be limited to swimming away from the plume by swimming around it. Given the extremely small percentage of the estuary that would have temperatures elevated above 28°C (82.4°F) and 5
the limited spatial and temporal extent of any elevations of bottom water temperatures above 28°C (82.4°F), it is extremely unlikely that these minor changes in behavior will preclude any Atlantic sturgeon from completing any essential behaviors such as resting, foraging or migrating or that the fitness of any individuals will be affected. Additionally, there is not expected to be any increase in energy expenditure that has any detectable effect on the physiology of any individuals or any future effect on growth, reproduction, or general health. Therefore, it is extremely unlikely that these habitat alterations would impact the ability of any adult Atlantic sturgeon to move through the area to reach the upstream spawning grounds or impact the foraging or physiological development of any juvenile Atlantic sturgeon in a way that impacts its recruitment to the population. Therefore, because it is extremely unlikely to affect the value of the habitat to the conservation of the species, effects to this feature are discountable.
Conclusion The continued operation of Indian Point 2 and 3 will result in habitat alterations that may affect features 2, 3 and 4 in the Hudson River. However, we have determined that any effects on the value of the habitat to the conservation of the species, that is its ability to support reproduction and recruitment of the New York Bight DPS of Atlantic sturgeon, are either extremely unlikely to occur or would be so small that they could not be meaningfully measured, detected, or evaluated. Therefore, effects to the proposed critical habitat for the New York Bight DPS are insignificant or discountable. In sum, the effects of the action are not likely to adversely affect critical habitat proposed for the New York Bight DPS of Atlantic sturgeon.
This concludes the conference on effects to proposed critical habitat. As indicated above, the final critical habitat designation becomes effective on September 18, 2017, which will place a duty to consult under Section 7(a)(2). Provided the analysis in this conference letter remains valid, it may be able to serve as the basis for completing consultation. Should you have any questions regarding this assessment or consultation on the final designation, please contact Julie Crocker of my staff at (978) 282-8480 or by e-mail (Julie.Crocker@,noaa.gov). I look forward to continuing to work with you and your staff during future Section 7 consultations.
CC:
Williams, GCNE Nieder, NYDEC Grange, NRC rile Code: Sec 7 NRC - Indian Point (conference)
NER-2012-02252 Sincerely,
~B.
Damon-Rand_a_ll _ _ ~
Assistant Regional Administrator for Protected Resources 6
Literature Cited Central Hudson Gas and Electric Corporation. 1999. Draft Environmental Impact Statement for State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permits for Bowline Point, Indian Point 2 and 3, and Roseton Steam Electric Generating Stations. Consolidated Edison Company New York, Inc.
New York Power Authority and Southern Energy New York. December 1999.
National Marine Fisheries Service. 2013. Endangered Species Act Section 7 Consultation Biological Opinion for Continued Operations of the Indian Point Nuclear Generating Station, Units 2 and 3, Pursuant to Existing and Proposed Renewed Operating Licenses. January 30, 2013.
7