ML19221A777
| ML19221A777 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 02/28/1979 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUREG-0555, NUREG-0555-04.3.1, NUREG-555, NUREG-555-4.3.1, SRP-04.03.01, SRP-4.03.01, NUDOCS 7907090107 | |
| Download: ML19221A777 (18) | |
Text
Section 4.3.1 February 1979 ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARD REVIEW PLAN FOR ES SECTION 4.3.1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF CONSTRUrTION - ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS:
TEF.RESTRIAL ECOSYSTEMS 4.3.'
The Site ar Vicinity 4.3._.
Transmission Corridors and Of fsite Areas REVIEW INPUTS Environmental Report Sections 2.2 Ecology 4.1 Site Preparation and Station Construction 4.3 Resources Committed 4.5 Construction Impact Control Program Environmental Reviews 2.4.1 Terrestrial Ecology Standards and Guides Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act of 1958 Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 Endangered Species Act of 1973 Regulatory Guide 4.7, " General Site Suitability Criteria for Nuclear Power Stations" Regulatory Guide 4.11, " Terrestrial Environmental Studies for Nuclear Power Stations" Memorandum of Understanding between the Corps of Engineers, U. S. Army, and the USNRC r'or the Regulation of Nuclear Power Plants,1975 Memorandum of Understanding between USNRC and USEPA on Responsibilities Under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, 1975 Guidelines for Dredging and Dredge Spoil Disposal, 40 FR 19794, May 6, 1975; 40 FR 41292, September 5,1975.
Environmental Criteria for Electric Transmission Systems, Department of Interior and Department of Agricultare Electric Power Transmission and the Environment, Federal Power Commission Other The site visit Responses to requests for additional information Consultation with local, State, and Federal agencies 7 9 07 0 90\\cq
/g 4.3.1-1
,,_w CHpu
Fibruary 1979 9
REVIEW OUTPUTS Environmental Statement Sections 4.3.1 Environmental Impacts 'f Construction - Ecological Impacts:
Terrestrial Eco;ystem.
4.3.1.1 The Site and Vicinity 4.3.1.2 Transmission Corridors and Of fsite Areas Other Environmental Reviews 2.4.1 Terrestrial Ecology 4.6 Measures and Controls to Limit Adverse Impacts During Construction
- 6. 5.1 Environmental Measurements and Monitoring Programs - Biological:
Terrestrial Ecology and Land Use 9.3 Alternative Plant and Transmission Systems 10.1 Unavoidao!e Adverse Environmental Impacts 10.2 Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources I.
PURPOSE AND SCOPE The purpose of this environmental standard review plan (ESRP) is to direct the staff's description, quantification, and assessment of the impacts of construc-tion of the plant on the terrestrial ecosystem. The scope of the review directed by this plan includes assessing both onsite and offsite construction activities including transmission line and access corridor construction in suf ficient detail to allow the reviewer to predict and evaluate potential impacts and to recommend how these impacts should be considered in the licensing decision. If necessary, the reviewer will recommend consideration of alternative designs or construction practices to mitigate the intensity of environmental impacts.
II.
REyUIRED DATA AND INFORMATION The kinds of data and information required will be af fected by site-and station-specific factors, and the degree of detail will be mcdified according to the anticipated magnitude of potential impacts. The following data or informa-tion will usually be required:
O
}fj'{ F 4.5.1-2 6 13
February 1979 A.
SITE AND VICINITY 1.
A site map showing proposed buildings, the land to be cleared, waste disposal areas, the construction zone, and the site boundary (from the ER and ESRP 3.1).
2.
Clearing me* hods; temporary and permanent erosion, run-off, and siltation control methods; dust suppression methods; and other constructien practices for control or suppression specific to the site (from the ER).
3.
To;cl area of land to be disturbed (from the ER).
4.
Maximum area of soil to be exposed at an/ one time (from the ER).
5.
The area (hectares) of each plant community and habitat type to be cleared or disturbed (e.g., marshes, agricultural fields, and deciduous forests)
(from the ER).
6.
The area to be covered by permanent statien fccilities, including new ponds and lakes (from the ER).
7.
The area to be used on a short-term basis during construction, a7d plans for restoration of this land (from the ER).
8.
Any proposed constrcction activity expected to impact communities that have been defined as rare or unique or that support threatened and endangered sp3cies (f rom the ER).
9.
Documentation that the applicant has consulted with the appropriate Fed?ral and State agencies (e.g.
as required by the Fish and Wildlife Coordina-tion Act) (f rom the ER).
10.
Proposed schedule of construction activities (from the ER).
Mr 4.3.1-3 W
February 1979 11.
A map of the site showing the boundaries of major plant commu-nities, the location of minor communities, or special hchitats (e.g.,
spring seeps, bots, sink holes, cliff faces, undisturbed areas, or unique habitats),
and any habitats critical tc "important"* species.
ihe site boundary, the con-struction zone, and other treas to be clea ad should ba shown on this map.
A map showing habitats critical to "important" species in the vicinity of the site that are expected to be impacted by construction should be provided. These maps should be supplemented with recent aerial photographs, when available, showing the site and adjacent land areas (from the ESRP for ES Section 2.4.1).
12.
Hectares occupied by each natural and man made habitat type as identified in Item 11 above (f rom the ESRP for ES Section 2.4.1).
13.
USGS topographic map of the site and vicinity (7-1/2 min. when available) (from the ESRP for ES Section 2.4.1).
14.
The botanical species composition of and relative abundance in the major vegetation layers (e.g., overstory and understory) in enough detail to identify the communities as to dominant species (from the ESRP for ES Sec-tion 2. 4.1).
15.
Summary of current onsite natural and man-induced effects (e.g.,
farming, logging, grazing, and burning) and the successional stage (for example weed, brush, pole, and mature stages) (from the ESRP for ES Section 2.4.1).
16.
List of "important" terrestrial vertebrate species known to occur on or near the site (f rom the ESRP for ES Section 2.4.1).
17.
Invertebrate species if they are important disease vectors or pests (f rom the ESRP for ES Section 2.4.1).
18.
Estimates of the relative abundance of both commercially and recrea-tionally important game and nongame vertebrates (f rom the ESRP for ES section 2.4.1) x See definition of "important" in the ESRP for ES Section 2.4.1.
102 M 4.3.1-4 015
February 1979 19.
Lists of threatened or endangered species known to occur on or near the site (from the ESRP for ES Section 2.4.1).
20.
Identification of'other Federal and State projects within the region that are or will be affecting the same threatened or endangered species (or their habitats) that occur on or near the site (f rom the ER).
21.
Potential for bird collisions with cooling towers or other elevated construction equipment or plant structures (from the ER and consultation with Federal, State, and local agencies).
B.
TRANSMISSION CORRIDORS AND OFFSITE AREAS 1.
Topographic maps (7-1/2 min. or 15-min. scale) showing proposed routes of transmission and access corridors from the station site to inter-connecting points on the existing high voltage system (from the ESRP for ES Section 2. 4.1).
2.
Major vegetation types along the proposed corridors (from the ESRP f or ES Section 2.4.1).
3.
A map showing the locations of nctional, State, or private wildlife refuges or other land areas that are dedicated to preservation, management, or study of wildlife and wildlife habitats within 2 km of the proposed corridors (f rom the ESRP for ES Section 2.4.1).
4.
A list of commercially or recreationally important vertebrates known to occur along the proposed corridors (from the ESRP for ES Section 2.4.1).
5.
Invertebrate species if they are important disease vectors or pests (from the ESRP for ES Section 2.4.1).
6.
A list of threatened or endangered species (plants and animals) known to occur along the proposed corridors and adjacent areas, their seasons 4.3.1-5 Jg m u Dfb
February 1979 0
of occurrence, local flight patterns, and critical areas (from the ESRP for ES Sec tiun 2.4.1).
7.
Where proposed transmission lines cross important waterfowl areas, descriptions of these areas and data on the local abundance and distribution of waterfowl, their seasonal status, and lccal flight patterns (from the ESRP for ES Section 2.4.1).
8.
Clearing methods, erosion, runoff and siltation control methods (both temporary and permanent), dust suppression methods, and other construction practices for impact control or minimization specific to the proposed transmission system (from the ER).
9.
Potential for bird collisions with transmissi. towers or lines (from the ER and consultation with Federal, State and local agencies).
III.
ANALYSIS PROCEDURE The reviewer will identify those construction activities that impact "important" flora and fauna of the site and vicinity, transmission corridors, and of fsite areas; will determine the areal extent of potential impact; and will relate this to the location of resources. This should include preparation of a map superimposing impact areas over resource areas. During the site visit, the reviewer should inspect areas wher2 construction activities will occur and inspect all other potentially impacted areas. When necessary, the reviewer will supplement the data and i', formation specified in Part II of this ESRP through consultations with local, State, and Federal agencies (e.g., the U.
S. Fish and Wildlife Service and State wildlife agencies).
For important species having commercial or recreational value, the reviewer will estimate the magnitude of the impact.
This may be expressed in terms of O
,9 4.3.1-6 lu0 e
ol7
Fearuary 1979 dollars, lost opportunity for recreational pursuits, percent reduction in harvest, percent loss of habitat, or other appropriate quanti fiers.
If threatened or endangered species are known to occur in the project area, and the proposed project is predicted to add to their further endangerment, the reviewer will request through NRC management channels a " threshold examination" by the Department of Interior.
In addition, the reviewer will usually consider the following:
A.
The number of hectares of plant community types preempted and the number of hectares modified by construction activities.
B.
The adequacy of proposed plans for preventing soil erosion runoff to surface waters, and revegetating disturbed soil.
C.
The impact of habitat modification (e.g., tree removal) on attendant animal populations.
C.
Construction activities that will dewater any wetlands, ponds, or alter surf ace drainage patterns supporting terrestrial seepages or biota.
E.
Disposal of construction wastes that will require landfill or special disposal.
F.
Construction activities that create obstacles to the movements of vertebrates or resuit in increased dispersal of invertebrate species known to be important as disease vectors or pests.
G.
Changes in terrestrial habitat resulti1g f rom establishment of cooling ponds or lakes.
108 018
- 4. 3.1-7
February 1979 H.
Ef fects of noise on "important" terrestrial biota.
I.
The potential for bird collisions with cooling towe s, other elevated plant structures and construct on equipment, transmission towers, ar:d transmission lir.es.
The reviewer rnust become familiar with the provisions of standards, guides, and agreements pertinent to the construction of nuclear power stations.
Those applicable to this environmental review are listed in the Standards and Guides section of this ESRP.
Where required by these provisions, the reviewer will consult with appropriate agencies (e.g.,
the U.
S.
Fish and Wildlife Service and the State wildlife agency) in compliance with the applicable regulations.
The reviewer will analyze construction activities in light of i nroanized " good practice." The term " good practice" as used here will refer to these construc-tion activities which tend to mitigate adverse environmental impact. Appendix A of this ESRP lists examples of construction activities considered to be in keeping with " good practice. "
IV.
EVALUATION Evaluation of each identified impact will result in one of the following conclusions:
The impact is minor and mitigation is not required. When inpacts are of this nature, the reviewer will accept construction of the plant, transmission lines, and access corridors as proposed.
The impact is adverse but can be mitigated by specific design or proce-Jre modifications that the reviewer has identified and deternined to be n Atical.
For these cases, t he reviewer will consult with the pro. ject manager and the reviewers f or ES Section 9.3 for verification that the recommended modifications are practical and will lead to an inprovement in the benefit-cust balance lhe reviewer will O
108 019 4.3.1-8
February '979 prepare a list of verified modifications and recommended measures and controls to limit the impact.
These lists will be provided the reviewer for ES Section 4.6.2.
The impact is adverse, cannot be successfully mitigated, and is of such magnitude that it should be avoided.
When impacts of this nature are identified, the reviewer will inform the reviewers for ES Section 9.3 that an analysis and evaluation of alternative designs or procedures is required.
The reviewer will participate in any such analysis and evaluation of alternatives that would avoid the impact and that could be considered practical.
If no such alternatives can be identified, the reviewer will be responsible for providic7 this information to the reviewer for ES Section 10.1.
The reviewer will screen each predicted impact using criteria appropriate to the impacted segment of the ecosystem.
For example, loss of more than a few percent of the habitat available in the region for an "important" species could be considered of sufficient importano to require consideration of mitigating action.
Where such mitigation of a pre:icted impact is required, the reviewer will recommend appropriate measures, which could include alternative placement of structures, alternative scheduies, or alternative construction practices.
The following specific factors are to be inciuded in the reviewer's evaluation:
A.
Loss of habitat for endangered or threatened species should be evaluated in the cortext of guidelines under the Endangered Species Act of 1973. Where loss of habitat for commercially or recreationally important species occurs, the reviewer will consider the ef fects on the harvestable crop.
It will generally be concluded that loss of up to 5 percent of such habitat in the site cicinity will have negligible impact on the crop and require no further analysis. Where losses exceed 5 percent, the reviewer will consider the loss in relation to regional abundance of these species.
108 020 4.3.1-9
February 1979 O
B.
Construction practices to minimize soil erosion and the number of hectares disturbed.
C.
Clearing cf vegetation from stream bank ; should be limited to that required for placement of structures.
D.
Guidelines under the FWPCA amendments of 19 72, the Coastal Zone Manage-ment Act of 1972, and the Marine Sanctuaries Act of.972 should be followe. in evaluating the significance of dewatering wetlands.
Because of the importance of wetlands, any unavoidable impact to this habitat must be considered in the overall benefit-cost balancing.
E.
The intrusion on or destruction of terrestrial plant communities that are regarded as representative of natural, undisturbed, or remnant communities or that show unusual ecological or geographical distributicns. Loss of fragile or sensitive nabitat should be evaluated.
F.
The reviewer should evaluate proposed procedures for compliance with EPA guidelines for drainage f rom dredge apoil. Filling of biologically productive wetlands is generally to be avoided.
Plans for dumping of dredge spoils must be approved by the EPA and the District Of fice of the Corps of Er.gineers.
G.
Where cooling reservoirs are to be constructed, the potential benefi-cial impacts (e.g., provision of water for irrigation, lisestock watering, or the creation of riparian habitat) and adverse impacts (e.g., the shortstopping of migratory waterfowl) should be considered and balanced aoainst the ecologi-cal losses associated with inundation of the land area by the reservoir.
H.
The reviewer will assess the applicant's commitment to the use of good construction practices (see Appendix A to this ESRP).
e s
e n 4.3.1-10
February 1979 I.
In addition to direct impacts on animals such as loss of habitat and road kills, the reviewer will consider secondary impacts such as altered behavior resulting from construction noise.
J.
The reviewer should use an order of magnitude approach in evaluating potential bird collisions. Predicted collisions of a few tens of birds per year generally require no action. Hundreds to thousands of collisions could require mitigating actions. Thousands to tens of thousands of bird collisions annually could require major redesign or relocation.
V.
INPUT TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT Sections 4.3.1.1 and 4.3.1.2 of the environmental statement should be planned to accomplish the following objectives:
(l) public disclosure of major direct ecological consequences of the proposed construction project, (2) presentation of the basis of staff analysis of the project, and (3) presentation of staff conclusions, recommendations, and conditions regarding impacts cf construction on the terrestrial ecosystem.
Public disclosure may be accomplished by including a description of the intended construction activities along with a description of the timing for such efforts. A map locating construction boundaries and estimating the extent of the impact should be included.
These sections should relate important biota (as described in ES 2.4.1) to areas of intended construction and should discuss susceptibilities to proposed construction activities.
These sections should include a summary of impact for each of the construction activities as described under Sections III and IV above.
For all the activities, the commitment of terrestrial resources should be indicated. These sections should discuss compliance with other agency guidelines and should document consultations with other Federal agencies made in response to the requirements of these guidelines. Any letter received from the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the State Fish and Wildlife agency that contains recommendations pursuant to the Fish and Wildlife Coordina-tion Act shall be included in draft and final environmental statements.
4.3.1-1 108 o?,
'L
Febreary 1979 9 Any construction activity that requires mitigative action will be described with the staff's recommendations for mitigation. The reviewer will recommend con-sideration of alternatives for any proposed construction activity that is predicted to result in an adverse impact that cannot be mitigated.
Practices proposed by the applicant for the protection of
,~e environment should be described if the reviewer determines that they are necessary.
The reviewer will provide inputs or ensure that inputs will be made to the following ES sections:
A.
Section 2.4.1.
The reviewer will recommend inclusion in ES Section 2.4.1 of descriptive material on the terrestrial ecology of the site and vicinity needed to support the analyses.
B.
Section 4.6.
The reviewer will provide a list of applicant commitments and staff recommendations of practices to limit adverse environmental impacts of construction.
C.
Section 6.5.1.
The reviewer should provide as input to ES Section 6.5.1 a discussion of any deficiencies in the site preparation anc ostruction monitoring program that should be corrected by additional monitoring provisions.
D.
Section 9.3.
Where, in the judgment of the reviewer, a proposed con-struction activity resu s ts in an adverse environmental impact that cannot be mitigated by alternative construction practices and procedures, the reviewer will recommend that alternative locations and plant or component designs be considered.
E.
Section 10.1.
The reviewer will prepare a brief summary of the unavoid-able impacts which are predicted to occur during construction. This will usually be limited to the more significant impacts as, for example, modification of habitat for "important" species.
108 023 4.3.1-12
February 79 Section led The reviewer will prepare a brief summary of irreversible F.
and ivretrievable commitments of terrestrial resources which are predicted to occur during construction.
For example, this would include pormanent loss of terrestrial habitat or loss of productive wetlands.
VI.
REFERENCES 1.
Office of Air and Water Programs, Processes, Procedures and Methods to Con-trol Pollution Resulting frc-all Construction Activity, EPA 430-9-72-007.
USEPA, Washington, D.
C.,
1973.
2.
M. B. Boyd, et al., Disposal of Dreage Spoil - Problem Identification and Assessment of Research Program Deve!cpment, Technical Report H-72-8, U. S.
Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi, 1972.
3.
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Protection Measures for Con-struction Practices, Corps of Engineers, Seattle District, Seattle, Washington, 1971.
4.
General Environmental Guidelines for Evaluating and Reporting the Effects of Nuclear P_nwer Plant Site Preparation, Plant and Transmission Facilities Construction, Atomic Industrial Forum, Inc., Washington, D. C.
1974.
108 024,!
4 4.3.1-13
Appendix A to ESRP 4.3.1 February 1979 ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARD REVIEW PLAN FOR ES SECTION 4.3.1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF CONSTRUCTION - ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS:
TERRESTRIAL ECOSYSTEMS APPENDIX A CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES OF RECOGNIZED GOOD PRACTICE 1.
TREE AND BRUSH CLEARING Tree and brush clearing should be confined to minimum-sized areas.
tin-struction areas should be judiciously located so as to avoid excessively steep slopes. Buffer zones of trees and brush should be left standing near all surface wate rways.
This can range from absolute prohibition of cutting and intrusion by work forces and equipment to selective clearing.
Figures of anywhere from 15 to 200 metres have been used for the width of this buffer strip. Slash can be chipped and used for mulch.
If burning is performed, it should not be done during excessively windy periods or periods of high air pollution conditions (inversions).
2.
PETROLEUM PRODUCTS, SALVABLE MATERIALS, LANDFILL Petroleum wastes should be collected and saved for possible reuse. Salvable materials should be collected and stored in designated areas.
Landfills for burial of dry wastes should not be located in or near wetlands and surface water-ways, nor should they be located where ground water or surface water can become contaminated.
Landfill areas should be revegetated with plant species suited to the soij and climatic regime of the region, with concern for beautification or wildlife habitat enhancement.
3.
BURNING, FIRE Burning practices range from "no burning" to " burning" all combustible materials.
Burning should not be performed near waterways where the residue can wash into the water.
In remote, heavily forested areas with potentially 108 02.
4.3.1-A-1
February 1979 9
high fire hazard, no burning should be permitted and vehicles should be equipped with devices to reduce the chances of inadvertent fire damage.
Open burning should be done in accordance with State er local regulations.
4.
EXCAVATION, GRADING, DRAINAGE, EROSION, AND SEDIMENT CONTROL, REVEGETATIiN Excavation and earth moving should be balanced so that removal from one area is used as fill for another area.
If permanent borrow pits must be dug, they should not be located in wetiands.
Topsoil should be segregated and stored for use # n revegetation.
Stored topsoil and other excavated materials should be contoured and treated for erosion control. Excesc excavated macerials should be spread out in such a manner that they will not erode into nearby waterways.
Drainage, e r.'s i o n, and sediment control practices are highly variable and extremely site-specific.
They basically involve keeping land disturbance to a minimum both in area and time, controlling drainage so runoff rates and amounts are controlled, stabilltation o f land sur face with mats, mulches, chemicals, vegetation, etc., and providing places for suspended materials to settle out of runoff before draining into waterways.
Some applicants have drawn up very specific plans that include information on percent slope, size of sediment basins based on expected storm runoff, percent of basin fill-in allowed, time of expo-sure of land, dates of seeding, size and number of terraces. and particle-size distribution (texture), organic matter content, and plant nutrient status of soil Long-term revegetation practices are usually tailored to specific soil and site growing conditions, but tempm ary erosion controls and revegetation practices should also be detailed.
5.
DUST The most common,ources of dust during construction include: dirt and gravel surfaced roads, unpaved parking areas, concrete batch plants, sanJ blasting, and bare ground. Paving and graveling of roads, spraying with water or calcium chloride, dust-control devices on batch plants, and revegetation of disturbed soils are common practices for minimizing dust. Spraying of bituminous coatings (oiling), asphalt, or water-soluble polymers may have adverse terrestrial impacts 108 026 4.3.1-A-2
February 1979 when these substances contaminate runof f and should either be avoided or carefully applied.
6.
PESTICIDE 3 AND HERBICIDES As a general rule, application of chemical herbicides and pesticides should be avoided during construction phases of the project. Alternatives to use of these chemicals, or measures that will serve to avoid the necessity to use these chemicals, should be considered, e.g., mechanical removal of weedy vegetation or brush or special policing of constructico areas for food scraps to reduce need of roder,ticides.
7.
CHEMICAL CLEANING Solid wastes (including those resulting from settling, precipitation, and evaporation) can be disposed of in a landfill or packaged and burieJ, prcferably in a location specifically designated for solid waste disposal.
8.
SANITARY WASTES Portable chemical toilets can be used during the early stages of construction and in remote areas (e.g., transmission lines). Wastes are usually collected by a licensed contractor. A temporary package sewage treatment plant can be used onsite. Wastes from the portable toilets can be brought to the site and processed along with the rest of the sanitary wastes.
9.
SPOIL DISPOSAL ON LAND Spoil disposal can be on land, transported by pipeline, barge, hopper, or railroad cars.
Control measures include confinement by dikes and confinement of water runoff long enough for settling of solids.
Spoil piles may be covered or treated to prevent resuspension of fine particles by wind.
108 027 4.3.1-A-3
February 1979 9
10.
STREAM CROSSINGS AND RIPARIAN AREA HABITATS Special consideration should be given to construction activities which involve stream crossing or riparian areas. Transmission towers should be placed far back from banks of waterways. A vegetative buffer strip should be maintained at all waterways and riparian areas (conditions can range frera no clearing to selective clearing). Stream crossings should be avoided but, if necessary, they can either be simple fords with rocks if the crossing is to be used only occasionally or culverts and a bridge (but this usually entails damaga to stream banks and riparian areas and may cause impounding of the water). Banks are sometimes rip-rapper., or other special erosion control measures are taken. Sometimes construc-tion of pipelines, transmission lines, etc., should be limited to the coldest winter months in wetlands. Sometimes activities in and cear streams and riparian areas should cease during flood season, spawning periods etc.
11.
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS S
Sometimes consideration should be given to the use of special equipment in unusual environments or unique situations that change with time.
It must be kept in mind that the following practices are highly site-specific.
Consideration sho sld be given to the use of special equipment, such as over-sized tires on vehicles that cross sensitive habitats, such es marshlands. Also, occasionally construction activities should be prohibitd during certain seasons (e.g., not filling a cooling pond during a low-flow pe ud, erectir.g or cle: ring during bird breeding season, ceasing dredging or other construction activities near streams during fish spawning periods). Occasionally, special efforts should be made to improve habitats or to replace habi its committed to facilities or other purposes. Use of wetlands for construction areas should be avoided.
12.
CONTROL Administrative control procedures should be established and shall previde the framework for the onsite quality assurance program. It should be the responsibility 4.3.1-A-4
/0/
04 8
February 1979 of the utility to select personnel with demonstrated ability and experience in assessing the relative importance of activities being performed to mitigate terrestrial impacts. A full-time coordinator should be assigned to the control and quality assurance program through the peak construction years of the project.
The function of this individual would include review of the construction activities to see that they conform to the conditions of the construction permit, and analysis of monitoring feedback to ensure a minimal impact of construction activities upon the terrestrial environment.
The coordinator would also be responsible for briefing construction personnel on the prevailing environmental policy and would provide supervision in sensitive ecological areas, such as riparian habitat, when they are crossed by transmission line corridois or bordered by excavation.
108 029 4.3.1-A-5