ML19221A753
| ML19221A753 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 02/28/1979 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUREG-0555, NUREG-0555-02.4.2, NUREG-555, NUREG-555-2.4.2, SRP-02.04.02, SRP-2.04.02, NUDOCS 7907090042 | |
| Download: ML19221A753 (9) | |
Text
Section 2.4.2 February 1979 ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARD REVIEW PLAN FOR ES SECTION 2.4.2 AQUATIC ECOLOGY 2.4.2.1 The Site and Vicinity 2.4.2.2 Transmission Corridors and Of fsite Areas REVIEW INPUTS Environmental Report Sections 2.2 Ecology 2.4 Hydrology Environmental Rev;ews 2.3.1 Hydrology 2.3.3 Water Quality Standards and Guides Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1948 Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act of 1958 Marine Sanctuaries Act of 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 Endangered Species Act of 1973 State and local laws affecting water quality Other The site visit Consultation with local, State, and Federal agencies Responses to requests for additional information REVIEW OUTPUTS Environmental Statement Sections 2.4.2 Aquatic Ecology 2.4.2.1 The Site and Vicinity 2.4.2.2 Transmission Corrid.cs and Offsite Areas 107 1ooU 7 907090044 2.4.2-1
February 1979 Other Environmental Reviews 4.3.2 Ecclogical Impacts:
Aquatic Ecosystems (Construction) 5.3.1 Cooling System Impacts:
Intake System (Operation) 5.3.2 Cooling System Impacts:
Discharge System (Operation) 5.6.2 Transmission System Impacts:
Aquatic 6.5 Environmental Measurements and Monitoring Programs:
Biological I.
PURPOSE AND SCOPE The purpose of this environmental standard review plan is to direct the staff's description of the aquatic environment and biota at and in the vicinity of the site and other areas likely to be impacted by the construction, mainte-nance, and operation of the proposed project.
This review will provide input to reviews dealing with evaluation of construction and operational impacts on aquatic ecosystems and to other reviews that deal with the aquatic environment.
The scope of the review directed by this plan will include the distribution, abundance, and other structural and functional attributes of biotic assemblages on which the proposed action would have an impact.
The review will also identify any important or irreplaceable aquatic natural resources and the location of sanctuaries and preserves that might be impacted by the proposed action.
II.
REQUIRED DATA AND INFORMATION The kinds of data and information required will be affected by site-and station-specific factors and the degree of detail will be modified according to the anticipated magnitude of the potential impact.
The following data or infor-mation will usually be required:
A.
The Site and Vicinity 1.
Characterization of the aquatic environment of the water body and onsite streams including the following:
107 199 2.4.2-2
February 1979 a.
Biological (from the ER and the general literature) b.
Hydrological (from ESRP.".3.1) c.
Physicochemical (from ESRP 2.3.3) 2.
Relative significance of various aquatic habitats in a regional context (from the ER, the general literature, and consultation with local, State, and Federal agencies).
3.
The location and value of the commercial and sport fisheries and the seasonal distribution of landings by species (from +ae ER, the general literature and consultation with local, State, and Federal agencies).
4.
The temporal and spatial (including depth) distribution and abundance of "important"* finfish, shellfish, and other invertebrates including benthos and quantitative estimates of abundance, when appropriate.
Such critical life support requirements as spawning areas, nursery groJnds, food habits, feeding areas, wintering areas and migration routes to the extent that power plant construction and/or operation is expected to affect these parameters.
Maps for location of any important or irreplaceable aquatic natural resources such as wetlands, sanctuaries or preserves (from the ER and consultation with local, State, and Federal agencies).
5.
The general distribution and relative composition of the plankton community with quantitative estimates of abundance, when appropriate.
Emphasis should be placed on the eggs and larvae of important fin and shellfish, as well as on primary and secondary productivity.
Information on physical, chemical, and biological factors (including nutrient concentrations) known to influence distribution and abundance, and tha diel and seasonal variation in abundance (from the ER).
6.
The general distribution and abundance of important periphyton communities and floating and attached macrophytes (from the ER).
xSee definition of "important" in ESRP 2.4.1.
4 np I
/
-UJ 2.4.2-3
February 1979 9
7.
Endangered and threatened species that are known to be present and any specific habitat requirements and community interrelationships (from the ER, the general literature and consultation with l' cal, State, and Federal agencies).
8.
Important food webs or food chains, including those leading to man (from the ER and the general literature).
9.
The time frame and magnitude of existing and planned manipula-tions that contribute or are expected to contribute to the patterns of aquatic plant and animal communities (from the ER).
B.
Transmission Corridors and Offsite Areas The following data and information will be required only when the proposed transmission corridors and offsite areas intersect or are adjacent to sensitive aquatic resources (e.g., wetlands) designated as such by Federal or State agencies.
1.
The Mcation and extent of threatened and endangered aquatic species that are known or expected to be present (from the ER and consultation with local, State, and Federal agencies).
2.
The location, extent, and designation (e.g., " critical habitat" for threatened and endangered species, wildlife preserves, sanctuaries) for any such designated areas (from the ER and consultation with local, State, and Federal agencies).
III.
ANALYSIS PROCEDURE Since specific Sforn tion requirements are dictated by the assessments in the ESRPs for ES Sections 4 and 5, the reviews of this and other sections dealing with aquatic ecology will be closely coordinated so that appropriate feedback to establish the extent and relevance of information contained in this section is provided.
The reviewer's analyses will be discussed with the reviewers for ES
)G}
0 2.4.2-4
February 1979 9
Sections 4 and 5 to identify those aquatic resources that could be impacted by plant construction and operation and thus should be discussed in the ES.
In performing an analysis of the aquatic resources of the site and vicinity likely to be affected by construction and operation of the proposed plant, the reviewer will (1) describe the aquatic communities and their interactions with the environment, (2) describe relative importance and abundance of habitat types at and in the vicinity of the site, (3) discuss relative productivity of water bodies that may be affected, and (4) identify "important" species. The reviewer will identify those water bodies of the site and vicinity that may serve as an important habitat, taking into consideration applicable Federal, State, or local classifications.
Aquatic plant and animal populations that may be adversely impacted by plant construction and operation need to be identified.
For of fsite areas, the reviewer's analysis of sensitive aquatic resources (e.g., sanctuaries, preserves) should consider that water bocies and their inherent aquatic resources may be modified or adversely affected by activities associated with the construction of transmission facilities, including substations, access corridors, and switching yards, and by the maintenance of transmission rights-of-way during the operational phase. Although for the most part impacts associated with the offsite project areas are terrestrial in nature, ecological damage to aquatic systems could result from construction and maintenance activities adjacent to water bodies. The reviewer will identify and consider any offsite sanctuaries or preserves that may be modified or adversely affected by activities associated with the construction and maintenance of access or transmission corridors for the proposed project.
IV.
EVALUATION The reviewer will ensure that the regional and site-specific aquatic ecological information is adequate to serve as a basis for assessment of the ef fects of design and siting of the plant, and to serve as a basis for assessment of the impacts on the aquatic ecosystem resulting f rom plant construction and operation. In assess-ing the adequacy of the description of aquatic esources of the site and offsite 2.'.2-5 107 m lum
February 1979 areas, the reviewer should consult the applicable standards and guides (those that are most pertinent are listed under Review Inputs). Here, the reviewer may find a framework of those descriptive features of aquatic resources judged adequate for most situations of nuclear power station siting. The reviewer will also become familiar with the provisions of the legislation listed under the Standards and Guides section.
The reviewer will ensure that (1) information on important aquatic rescurces of the site vicinity are of sufficient detail and accuracy to provide adequate quantitative data on the value, distribution, and abundance of vulnerable biota to allow a meaningful assessment of the construction and operational impacts; (2) if indicator species are involved, criteria as to their selection have been verified; (3) if diversity indices or other statistics are used, each index chosen for the analysis is appropriate; (4) descriptions will include existing site and vicinity environmental or man--induced stresses to aquatic biota; and (S) local, State, and Federal fish and garae and conservation departments as well as other appropriate resource agrncies and institutions or their publica-tions have been consulted (e.g., Ref. 11 to verify commercial fishery data) to verify inputs to the reviewer's analysis.
V.
INPUT TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT The reviewer will prepare a description of site and vicinity and of fsite area aquatic ecology, stressing those elements that could be af fected by the proposed project.
The inputs should be brief, and will include the following information:
A.
The principal aquatic ecological features of the site and vicinity and those sensitive offsite areas affected by transmission and access corridors and rela.ed facilities, with emphasis on the communities of the ecosystem that will be ottentially af fected by project construction, operation, and maintenance.
The extenc of discussion of various biotic components should be in proportion to the estimated severity of impacts and should be adecuate to support the assessment of ES Sections 4 and 5.
107 203 2.4.2-6
February 1979 B.
Descriptions of existing site and vicinity environmental or man-induced stresses to aquatic biota.
C.
Special attention should be devnted to describing "important" species and aquatic food webs leading to ma i.
Estimates of their abundance should be provided where appropriate. Special habitat and forage needs should be empha-sized, if the proposed project would potentially disrupt these.
D.
Species lists should be included (as an appendix to the ES) only if it is impractical to reference them or if they are needed to support the reviewer's analysis. If included, such lists should:
1.
Identify only those species considered "important" or that charac-terize community structure or function; 2.
Identify the dominant species; 3.
Describe abundance in relative or absolute terms.
E.
The reviewer will provide inputs or ensure that inputs will be made to the following ES sections:
1.
Section 4.3.2.
The reviewar will provide aquatic ecosystem descrip-tions to the reviewer for ES Section 4.3.2 and will ensure that the data are adequate to permit assessme of construction impacts to aquatic ecosystems.
2.
Sections 5.3.1, 5.3.2 and 5.6.2.
The reviewer will provide aquatic ecosystem data to the reviewers of the listed ES sections nd will ensure that the data are adequate to permit assessment of operational and maintenance impacts to aquatic ecosystems.
3.
Section 6.5.
The reviewer will ensure that the aquatic ecosystem descriptions are adequate to serve as a baseline for assessing the proposed and required aquatic environmental monitoring programs.
107 204 2.4.2-7
February 1979 VI.
REFERENCES 1.
Atomic Industrial Forum, Inc., Environmental Impact Monitoring of Nuclear Power Plants, Sourcebook of Monitoring Methods, Vols. I and II, AIF National Environmental Studies Project (NESP), Washington, D.C.,
1975.
2.
L. L. Eberhardt and R. O. Gilbert, " Biostatistics Aspects," Part 8.
Environ-mental Impact Monitoring of Nuclear Power Plants, Atomic Industrial Forum, Inc., Washington, D.C., 1975.
3.
W. T. Edmondson and G. G. Winberg, IBP Handbook No. 17,
.anual on Methods for Measuring Secondary Productivity in Fresh Waters, International Bio-logical Programme, Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford and Edinburgh, 1971.
4.
W. E. Ricker, IBP Handbook No. 3, Methods for Assessment of Fish Production in Fresh Waters, International Biological Programme, Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford and Edinburgh, 1971.
5.
R. A. Vollandweider, IBP Handbook No. 12, A Manual on Methods for Measuring Primary Production in Aquatic Environments, International Biological Programme, Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford and Edinburgh, 1971.
6.
General Environmental Guidelines for Evaluating and Reporting the Effects of Nuclear Power Plant Site Preparation, Plant and Transmission Facilities Construction, Atomic Industrial Forum, Inc., Washington, D.C.,
1974.
7.
Russel-Hunter, W.
D., Aquatic Productivity, The MacMillan Company, New York, 1975.
8.
Cowardin, L. M.,
F. C. Golet, and E. T. LaRoe, Classification of Wetlands and Deep-Water Habitats of the United States, (an operationai draft), USDOI, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C.,
100 p, October 1977.
107 205 2.4.2-8
February 1979 9.
Goodwin, R. H. and W. A. Niering, Inland Wetlands of the United States, USD0I, National Park Service, Natural History Theme Studies, Number Two, 560 p, 1975.
10.
Soil Conservation Service, Atlas of River Basins of the United States, Second Edition, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, Washington, D.C.,
1970.
11.
National Marine Fisheries Service, Fisheries of the United States, 1977, U.S.
Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, April 1978.
107 206 2.4.2-9