ML19221A776
| ML19221A776 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 02/28/1979 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUREG-0555, NUREG-0555-04.2.2, NUREG-555, NUREG-555-4.2.2, SRP-04.02.02, SRP-4.02.02, NUDOCS 7907090104 | |
| Download: ML19221A776 (13) | |
Text
Section 4.2.2 February 1979 ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARD REVIEW PLAN FOR ES SECTION 4.2.2 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF CONSTRUCTION - HYDROLOGICAL ALTERATIONS AND WATER-USE IMPACTS:
WATER-USE IMPACTS REVIEW INPUTS Enteironmental Report Sections 2.1 Geography and Demography 2.4 Hydrology 3.1 External Appearance 3.9 Transmission Facilities 4.1 Site Preparation and Station Construction 4.2 Transmission Facilities Construction 4.3 Resources Committed 4.5 Construction Impact Control Program Environmental Reviews 2.1 Site Location 2.2 Land 2.3.1
.iydrology 2.3.2 Water Use 2.3.3 Water Quality
- 2. 3 Related Federal Project Activities 3.1 External Aopearance and Plant Layout 3.3 Plant Water Use 3.4 Cooling System 3.7 Power-Transmission Systems 4.2.1 Hydrological Alterations (Construction)
Standards and Guides State water laws and water rights State water quality standards State shoreline management laws and regulations Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 Coa;tal Zone Management Act of 1972 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (40 CFR 125)
River Basin Commission guidelines and regulations Clean Water Act of 1977 Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management, May 1977 Corps of Engineers Permits f or Activities in Navigable or Ocean Water (40 CFR 209)
EPA and Corps of Engineers Regulations for Ocean Dumping (40 CFR 220-22/)
EPA Ef fluent Guidelines and Standards for Steam-Electric Power Plants (40 CFR 423) 107 359 7 9 970 90 0<
4.2.2-1 1
February 1979 Second Memorandum of Understanding Petween NRC and EPA, December 31, 1975 Memorandum of Understanding Between NRC and the Corps of Engineers, August 1975 Other The site visit Responses to requests for additional information Consultation with local, State, regional and Federa' agencies Applicant's Preliminary Safety Analysis Report (if tendered with the ER)
REVIEW OUTPUTS Environmental Statement Sections 4.2.2 Environmental Impacts of Construction: Water-Use Impacts Other Environmental Reviews 4.1 Land-Use Impacts (Construction) 4.3 Ecological Impacts (Construction) 4.4 Socioeconomic Impacts (Construction) 4.6
'ieasures and Controls to Limit Adverse Impacts during Construction 6.3 Environmental Measurements and Monitoring Programs: Hydrological
- 9. 3 Alternative Plant and Transmission System 10.1 Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts 10.2 Irreversible and irretrievable Commitments of Resources I.
PURPOSE AND SCOPE The purpose of this environmental standard review plan (ESRP) i e.
tc direct the staf f's analysis and assessment of proposed project construction impacts un water use.
The scope of the review directed by this plan will include (1) identi' a
of those proposed construction activities or hydrologic alterations re" i
proposed construction activities that could have impacts on water use, (,
i-fication of changes in water quality resulting f rom hydrologic alterations from construction activity ef fluents, (3) analysis and evaluation of spacts resulting from these alterations and activities, (4) analysis and evaluation of proposed practices to minimize adverse construction imparts on water use, and (5) evaluation of compliance with local, Statc, regional and Federal regulations applicable to 107 M'J 3a 4.2.2-2
e
- +
<d. ' *OS, se,a s'-
o
~
d e.
e
%\\\\;//)/(g\\'l' Qff*%#gy
/ g,/ %V I
/ lll' e g?
a g
\\\\Y//
IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1,0
' j ' 2 8, ln 2 5_
~--a gg L +se Ell@2P l,l g
m 1.25
'IA I i.6 l
6" kr$s%
'ti??'?k n'y
/
ac.
0
-- t t
g
., v s.
gt --
4 A 16 vs{w @w l'
,.s
'?
L ~
ff//
?l 'Q?
'k'j~Nl*a
?
p sq, g
+,
T.ST TARG.T (MT-3) 1.0 P '* '23 E 's nn
,u -
- g l,l bS lnua v==
! l.25 1.4 1.6 il 6"
w,
<> :s e C
.v.
n q.-
Q
., 1;-
.t'
.. t.'
A ~et to
'Q3N'I >
- i' j//g/
\\\\p,,,/m;+g4,4,
/g,fiy;;9,,
<gy v
4 V+9
/% y V
immee evituarios TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 "3 72* "23
- c. 'q;.b n-p. az lfSS
~'*
l,l g
, _ =
I!l 1.8 Ic==
1.25 Ill IA
-_ ki
!l 1.6 4
6" dd m,
3.$dr,
- A w-
/.
yc nf ')hpp' Q
p.
February 1979 water use and water quality. The review will include analysis and evaluation of irr. pacts to water quality, water availability and water use.
Te review will be in sufficient detail to predict and assess potential impacts and to recommend how these impacts should be treated in the licensing process.
Where necessary, the reviewer will recommend consideration of alter-native designs, practices or procedures T. hat would mitigato predicted advserse impacts.
II.
REQUIRED DATA AND INFORMATION The kinds of data and information required will be af fected by site-ind station-specific factors, and the degree of detail will be modified according to the anticipated magnitude of the potential impacts. The following data and information will usually be required:
A.
Descriptions of the site and vicinity water bodies and ground water aquifers (from ESRP 2.3.1).
B.
Descriptions of hydrologic alterations and their related construction activities (f rom ESRP 4.2.1).
C.
Physical effects of hydrologic alterations (f rom ESRP 4.2.1).
D.
Comparisons of water quantity available to other water users with ex' sting and known future water rights and allocations (from ESRP 4.2.1).
E.
Identification of water bodies receiving construction ef fluents (e.g.,
sanitary wastes, cleaning wastes, dust control, fuels 'nd lubricants, chemical, herbicides, pesticides) and the expected average and maximum flow rates and com-position of these effluents (from the ER).
F.
Baseline water quality data for surf ace-and ground water sources used during construction and impacted by construction activities (f rom ESRP 2.3.3).
O 4.2.2-3 m
February 1979 G.
Potential changes to surface-and ground-water quality (e.g., heavy metal contamination) resulting from substrate exposure during construction (from the ER).
H.
Identification and locations of ground-and surface-water users and areas that could be impacted by project-related construction activities af fecting water use (from ESRP 2.3.2, the site visit, and the ER).
I.
Predicted impacts to the water users identified in item H (from the ER).
J.
Descriptions of any proposed practices and measures to control construc-tion-related wa te r-us e impacts.
Factors to be considered include flooding, drainage, ground-water elevation, erosion, sedimentation, water quality, protec-tion of natural drainage channels and water bodies, protection of shorelines and beaches, restrictions on access to and use of surface water, protection against saltwater intrusion, and handling of fuels, lubricants, oily wastes, chemical wastes, sanitary wastes, harbicides, and pesticides (from the ER).
K.
Local, State, regional, and Federal standards and regulations appli-cable to vater quality and water use (from consultation with local, State, regional and Federal agencies).
L.
Descriptions of proposed means to ensure construction activity com-pliance with water quality and water use standards and regulations (from the ER).
III.
ANALYSIS PROCEOURE The reviewer's analysis of construction impacts on
.,a t e r use will be coordinated with the hydrologic alteration descriptions pr;vided by the environ-mental review for ES Section 4. 2.1.
This coordination will ensure that those environmental factors most likely to be impacted by hydrologic alterations are described in suf ficient detail to permit assessment of the predicted impacts.
The reviewer will independently identify and analyze those construction activ-ities exoected to af fect receiving water body quality. The reviewer will consult 9
in l
U JW 4.2.2-4 00'1.
February 1979 with the reviewers for ES Sections 2. 3. 2, 4.1, 4. 3 and 4.4 ta establish the loca-tion and nature of those water users potentially impacted by hydrologic alterations and water quality changes.
The information obtained during the site visit will contribute to the analysis.
During the site visit, the reviewer will observe the general pattern of water use in the site and vicinity and at those offsite and transmission corridor areas where construction activities could be expected to impact water use; and will identify those water users and water uses that should be analyzed. The reviewer will consult with appropriate nearby local, State, regional and Federal organiza-tions and agencies for further identification of water users, water uses, or water quality considerations that should be analyzed.
The following analysis prc edure will be followed:
1.
Reduced Water Avai' ability This analysis m #1 be initiated when the reviewer for ES Section 4.2.1 determines that construct ion activities will result in decreased water availabil-ity. When this is predicted to occur, the reviewer will identify the location of those water users likely to be affected, and will consult with the reviewer for ES Section 4.2.1 to determine the hydrological effects at these locations.
The reviewer will consider these effects (e.g., lowered ground water table, reduced well yields, lowered surface water levels at intcha structures) and will deter-mine their impacts on individual water users or water use areas. Seasonal require-ments f or water anJ temporal variations in water availability will be considered.
The reviewer will also consider the potential for impacts when +
3 reviewer for ES Section 4.2.1 predicts an incompatibility between water avail:.oility as af fected by project construction activity and existing and known f uture water rights and allocations. For these cases, the reviewer wil' analyze the potential for future inequalities in water availability to determine their probable nature and extent.
6
- 4. 2. ;-5 D
February 1979 2.
Construction Activity and Hydrologic Alterations The reviewer will considt the hydrolegic alterations identified by the reviewer for ES Section 4.2.1 and will compare them with pr^sent and pre-dicted future water uses that could be affected.
Those alterations that can be shown to represent a potential fo water use impacts will be analyzed in f urther detail. The reviewer will consider both short-term impacts (e.g., f rom tempor ary channel diversions) that will occur only during the construction period, and long-term impacts (e.g., channel restriction by a breakwater) that will occur for the lifetime of the plant. The reviewer wili identify individual water users or water use a aas, and will predict impacts to these users or areas.
The reviewer's analysis will identify those proposed construction activities that will restrict non-consumptive water use or water access. The rev iewer will identify those water users so affected and wi1' categorize the impacts as either short-or long-term.
Special consideration will be given to hydrologic alterations af fecting floud-plains. When such alterations are predicted, the reviewer will consult with the reviewer for ES Section 4.1.1 or 4.1.2 to complete the analysis of any resulting impacts.
3.
Water Quality The reviewer will consider those construction activities and hydrologic alterations expected to result in altered water quality, and those water users or water use areas that could be impacted by the water quality alterations.
The reviewer wili consult with the reviewer for ES Section 4. 2.1 to identity the af fected receiving water bodies and those hydrologic alterations (e.g., erosion, sedimentation) that could affect water quality.
The reviewer will consult with the reviewer for ES Section 2. 3.3 to determine the baseline water quality of the recaiving water bodies, and with the reviewer for ES Section 2.3.2 to identi fy potent ; ally af fected water users. The reviewer will identify the water bodies receiving construction effluents, the flow rates and chemical composition nf 9
4.2.2-6 oM
February 1979 these effluents, and the potential for and nature of any contaminants that could be released to surface or ground water as a result of substrate exposure during construction.
The reviewer will consider potential impacts to water users in terms of the intended usage - e.g., heavy metals as a contaminant af fecting a municipal water supply, suspended solids af fecting industrial use. The reviewer will consult with nearby local, State, regional and Federal agencies in analyzing potential water quality impacts.
The reviewer will consult with the reviewer for ES Section 4.3.2 to ccordi-nate the analysis of impacts to water quality and to evoid any duplication of effort in this analysis.
IV.
EVALUATION Evaluation of each identified impact will result in one of the follc -
determinations:
The impact is minor and mitigation is not required. When all impacts are cf this nature, the reviewer will accept design and construction as proposed.
The impact is adverse but can be mitigated by specific design or proce-dure modifications that the reviewer has identified and determ ned to be practical.
i For these cases, the reviewer will consult with the project manager and the appro-priate ES Section 9.3 reviewer f or verification that the reviewer's recommended modifications are practical and will lead to an improvement in the benefit-cost balance.
The reviewer will prepare a list of verified modifications anJ recom-mended measures and controls to limit the corresponding impact.
These lis' will be provided the reviewer for ES Sectior The impact is adverse, cannot be successfully mitigated, and is of such magnitude that it should be avoided. When impacts of this nature are identif ied, the reviewer will inform the appropriate ES Section 9.3 reviewers that an analys is and evaluation of alternative designs or procedures is required.
The reviewer will participate in any such analysis and evaluation of alternatives that woulu avoid the impact and that could be considered practical.
If no such alternatives 103 leg 5 4.2. s dor
February 1979 can be identified, the reviewer e responsible for providing this information to the reviewer for ES Section 10.1.
The reviewer will evaluate the impacts identified in the Analysis Procedure section of this plan for the following:
A.
Water Quantity and Availability 1.
The reviewer will ensure that those water users potentially impacted by alterations in water quantity and availability have been identified and that any impacts of reduced water quantity and availability have been assessed. Since there are no quantitative criteria for determining the severity of any such impact (e.g., percent reduction in yield f rom a well), the reviewer will make this assess-ment through consultation with the reviewers for ES Sections 4.1 and 4.4 and, where necessary, with the assistance of nearby loc-1, State and Federal agencies.
When adverse impacts have been identified, the reviewer will consult with the reviewer for ES Section 4.2.1 to identify means to mitigate or avoid the impact.
2.
The reviewer will ensure that the possibility for inequalities between proposed construction water use and existing and known futuie~~ water rights and allocations has been considered, and that the probable nature and extent of these inequalities have been described.
B.
Construction Activities and Hydrologic Alterations 1.
The reviewer will ensure that those hydrologic alterations identi-fied by the reviewer for ES Section 4.2.1 have been analmd with respect to their potential impacts to water users or water use areas.
The reviewer will compare the ef fects of these alterations (e.g., increased temperature, salinity, erosion, sedimentation) with pre-construction conditions to assess the extent of the impact.
Impacts will be evaluated for individual water users and for water-use areas. The reviewer will concult with the reviewers for ES Sections 4.1.1, 4.3, and 4.4.1 for assistance in this evaluation. When necessary, nearby local, State, regional and Federal agencies will be consulted for assistance. The reviewer will seek means to mitigate or avoid any identified adverse impacts.
4.2.2-8 gob
February 1979 9
2.
The reviewer will seek confirmation that pr' posed construction or construction activities located on a floodplain have been identified and described by the reviewer for ES Section 4.2.1.
For any such activity, the reviewer will consult with appropriate State and local agencies to determine the extent to which any such activities will conform with applicable floodplain standards. The reviewer Will ensure that :he analysis has considered short-term effects (e.g., floodplain alterations resulting f rom temporary construction struc-tures or activities) as well as the long-term altarat. ion caused by the completed plant.
The reviewer wil' consult with the reviewer for ES Section 4.2.1 and th3 reviewers for ES Section 9.3 to analyze alternatives to any proposed activity located in the floodplain.
The intent of this instruction is to ensure that alternatives to avoid adverse effects and incompatible development in the flood-plain have been considered.
3.
The reviewer will ensure that construction and construction activ-ities that will alter or restrict shoreline access (e.g., beach closure) and surface-oriented water uses (e.g., commercial and recreational tishing, navi 0a-tion) have been identified and that their ef fects to water users have been described.
When potential adverse impacts are predict-d, the reviewer will identify alternative design, construction practices op' procedures that could mitigate or avoid the impacts.
C.
Water Quality 1.
The reviewer will ensure that hydrologic alterations and construc-tion activities affecting water quality have been identified and their effects to water usei s or water use areas described.
The reviewer will consult with the reviewers for ES Sections 2.3.2 and 2.3.3 to ensure that potentially af fected water users have been identified and that baseline water quality data for the af fected water bodies are available.
2.
The reviewer will evaluate impacts on the basis of altered water quality, taking into account the nature of the impact, the time duration or time Oi oeriods then the impact will be experienced, and the number of water userc or 4.2.2-9 l
y w,
CD ')
February 1979 extent of water use arer.s af fected. The reviewer will consult with the reviewers for ES Sections 4.1.1, 4. 3. 2, and 4..1 in making thi s eval uation. When necessary, the reviewer will consult with local, State, regional and Federal agencies for assistance in evaluating the identified impacts. When adverse impacts have been identified, the reviewer will seek means for impact mitigation or will recommend consideration of alternative construction procedures to avoid the impact.
3.
The reviewer will determine if construction activities affecting surface-and ground water quality will comply with State and Federal water quality standards for effluents and receiving water bodies.
This evaluation will be made cooperatively with the reviewer for ES Section 4. 3.2 to avoid any duplication of ef fort in the analysis and evaluation of water quality impacts.
V.
INPUT TO THE ENVIRONMEN#AL STATEMENT Environmental Statemer
' ntion 4.2.2 should be planned to accomplish the following objectives:
(1) p
.1c disclosure of major direct water use conse-quences of proposed project construction, (2) presentation of the basis for the staff analysis, and (3) presentation of staff conclusions, recommendations, and conditions regarding water use.
The reviewer will coordinate this input with the reviewer for ES Section 4.2.1 to avoid duplication.
A.
Th., following information will usually be included in ES Section 4.2.2.
1.
A description of plant design and construction activities that may cause adverse water.ise impacts and a quantitative description af these impacts for each affected water body. For plant facilities and construction activities located on the f '. 3odp l a i n, (J) staff conclusions as to the necessity of such location (e.g.,
intake structures), and a discussion of applicant commitments or staf f recommendations f or actions to minimize environmental harm to t".e flood-plain, (2) reference to appropriate ES Section 9.3 discussion of alternatives to facility or activity location in the floodplain, and (3) discussion of the extent of conformance with applicable State or local floodplain protection standards.
9 4.2.2-10 eD iut m m
cop
February 1979 2.
Comparison of predicted ef fluent and receiving.iater quality with applicable ef fluent limitations and water-quality standa ds, and conclusions with respect to project compliance with these standards.
3.
The physical impacts of consumptive water uses during construction (e.g., ground water depletion) on other water users.
4.
The compatibilit / of proposed construction water use with existing and known water rights and allocations.
5.
Adverse impacts to surface-oriented water users (e.g., fishing, navigation) resulting from plant construction and construction activity.
6.
Recommendations for construction practices and procedures to mitigate potential adverse water-use impacts or that alternative project designs be considered to avoid these impacts.
B.
The reviewer will provide inputs or ensure that inputs will be made to the following ES Section:
1.
Section 4.1.
The reviewer will provide the reviewers for ES Sec-tion 4.1 with a list of construction activities (e.g., ground water depletion) that may have land use impacts and, when applicable, a description of altert flood patterns resulting from construction or construction activities in the floodplair..
2.
Section 4.3.
The reviewer will provide the reviewers for ES Sec-tion 4.3 with a list of construction activities (e.g., surface runoff and water quality degradation) that may have adverse terrestial and aquatic ecology impacts.
3.
Section 4.6.
The reviewer will provide the reviewer for ES Sec-tion 4.6 with a list of applicant commitments and staff recommendations for prac-tices co limit adverse water-use impacts.
h 4.2.2-11
%9
February 1979 4.
Section 6.3.
The reviewer will provide the reviewer for ES Sec-tion 6.3 with a list of recommended programs to monitor hydrologic parameters af fecting water use.
5.
Section 9.3.
The reviewer will provide the reviewers for ES Sec-tion 9.3 with a list of adverse environmental impacts affecting vater use that could be mitigated or avoided through alternative project designs or construction practices. The reviewer will assist the reviewers for ES Sectior, 9.3 in deter-mining appropriate alternatives.
6.
Section 10.1.
The reviewer will provide the reviewer for ES Sec-tion 10.1 with a list of the unavoidable water-use impacts that are predicted to occur during or as a result of project construction.
7.
Section 10.2.
The reviewer will provide the reviewer for ES Sec-tion 10.2 with a brief summary of the irreversible and irretrievable com.mitments of hydrological and water-use resources that are predicted to occur during or as a result of project construction.
VI.
REFERENCES 1.
Water Quality Criteria, 1972, Committee on Water Quality Criteria, National Academy of Sciences and National Academy of Engineering, Ecological Research Series, EPA-R3-73-033, March 1973.
2.
Atomic Industrial Forum, Inc., General Environmental Guidelines for Evalua-tion and Reporting the Effects of Nuclear Power Plant Sita Preparatica, Plant and Transmission Facilities Construction, Washington, D.C.,
1974.
3.
Devereauz Barnes, Development Document for Best Technology Available for the Location, Design, Construction, and Capacity of Cooling Water Intake Structures for Minimizing Environmental Impacts, Environmental Protection Agency, Ef fluent Guidelines Division, Report EPA /440/1-76/015a, NTIS PB 253 573, Washington, D.C., April 1976.
s 4.2.2-12 10 %,er,::q o
Cs10
February 1979 4.
B. C. Becker, and T. R. Mills, Guidelines for Erosion and tediment Control Planning and Implementation, for the Department of Water Res0;rces, State of Maryland, Annapolis, MD, and the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA /R2-72-015, August 1972.
5.
Curran and Associates, Inc., Guidelines for Review of Environmental Impact Statements, Volume IV, Channelization Projects, Enviro:. mental Protection Agency, Office of Federal Activities, Washington, D.C., Juiy 1976.
6.
R. M. Darnell, W. E. Pequegnet, B. M. James, F. J. Benson and R. A. Defenbaugh, Impacts of Construction Activities Wetlands of the United States, Tereco Corp., College Station, TX, EPA /606,a-/6-045, NTIS PB 256 674/3WP, April 1976.
7.
Environmental Protection Agency, Processes, Procedures, and Methods to Con-trol Pollution Resulting from All Construction Activity, EPA /430/9-73-007, October 1973.
8.
Environmental Protection Agency, Methods for Identifying and Evaluating the Nature and Extent of Non-Point Sources of Pollutants, EPA /430/9-73-014, October 1973.
9.
Environmental Protection Agen'cy, Guidelines for Review of Environmental Impact Statements, Volume III Impoundment Projects. Office of Federal Activities, 1976.
10.
U.S. Water Resources Council, F' odplain Management Guidelines for Imple-menting E.0. 11988, 43 FR 6030, tebruary 1978.
? m b
$D>
- 31/
4.2.2-13