ML19221A803
| ML19221A803 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 02/28/1979 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUREG-0555, NUREG-0555-05.8.2, NUREG-555, NUREG-555-5.8.2, SRP-05.08.02, SRP-5.08.02, NUDOCS 7907090154 | |
| Download: ML19221A803 (8) | |
Text
Section 5.8.2 February 1979 ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARD REVIEW PLAN FOR ES SECTION 5.8.2 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF STATION OPERATION -
SOCIOECONOMIC IMPACTS: SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC REVIEW INPUTS Environmental Report Sections 2.1 Geography and Demography 2.6 Regional Historic, Archeological, Architectural, Scenic, Cultural, and Natural Features 8
Economic and Social Effects of Station Construction and Operation Environmental Reviews 2.1 Site Location 2.2 Land Use 2.5 Socioeconomics 4.4.2 Environmental Impacts of Station Construction - Socioeconomic Impacts: Social and Economic 5.1.1 Land Use Impacts, Site and Vicinity (Operation) 5.2.2 Water Use Impacts (Operation)
Standards and Guides None Other The site visit Responses to requests for additional information Consultation with local, State, and Federal agencies REVIEW OUTPUTS Environmental Statement Sections 5.8.2 Environmental Impacts of Station Operation - Sccioeconomic Impacts: Social and Economic 108 301 7 9070 90C 5.8.2-
February 1979 Other Environmental Reviews 5.10 Measures and Controls to Limit Adverse Impacts (Operation) 9 Alternative Plant and T'ansmission Systems 10.1 Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts I.
PURPOSE AND SCOPE The purpose of this environmental standard review plan (ESRP) is to direct the staff's analysis and evaluation of the social and economic impacts of plant operation on the surrounding region
- and individual communities that could be affected.
The reviewer will identify specific impacts, where they will occur, and will predict their relative magnitude.
The scope of the review t rected by this plan includes those social and economic impacts resulting from operation of the plant and from requirements of the operating staff. Categories of inpacts resulting from operation of the sta-tion include (1) regional labor, (2) tax revenues to local jurisdictions, (3) g public facilities and services, (4) social or economic consec,Jences of water use or land use impacts, and (5) local planning political decision processes.
Categories of impacts flowing from the requirements of the operating staf f include (1) settlement pattern and housing, (2) education, (3) other public facilities and service, (4) private sector goods and services (5) local employ-ment and income, (6) tax revenues to local jurisdictions, (7) local planning-political decision processes, and (8) social structure and community cohesion.
For most categories impacts will generally be minor when compared a the corres-ponding impacts during plant construction.
The review will be oi s..fficient detail to permit the reviewer to predict and assess potential impacts and to recommend how these impacts should be treated in the licensing process, i.e.,
consideration of alternative locations, designs, practices, or procedures that would mitigate predicted adverse impacts.
See the ESRP for ES Section 2.5.2 for a definition of ' region' 08 305 h
5.8.2-2
February 1979 II.
REQUIRED DATA AND INFORMATION The kinds of data and information required will be af fected by site-and station-specific ractors and the degree of detail wi1~ be modified according to the anticipated magnitude of the potential impact. The majority of this informa-tion has been developed under ESRP 2.5.2 and has ieen furtner processed in the analysis covered by ESRP 4.4.2.
The analysis of the impacts resulting from station operation requires knowledg.
f this data and information. Tha following data or information will usually b; i cquired:
A.
Political Structure (from ESRr 2.L.2)
B.
Demography / Settlement Pattern (from ESRP 2.5.1)
C.
Social Structure (from ESRP 2.5.2)
D.
Housing: Estimated operating staf f housing requirements (f rom the ER).
t E.
Education: (from ESRP 2.5.2)
F.
Recreation: (f rom ESRP 2.5.2)
G.
Taxation: (from ESRP 2.5.2)
H.
Land Use Planning and Zoning: (f rom ESRP 2.5.2)
I.
Social Services and Public Facilities (from ESRP 2.5.2)
J.
Highways and Transportation (f rom ESRP 2. 5. 2)
K.
Operationally Induced Factors 1.
Expenditures within the region for materials and services during operation (from the ER).
lN 0 f 5.8.2-3 Q
February 1979 2.
Plans to adjust public facilities and services during the transi-tion period from the construction to the operation phase and agencies respor.sible for accomplishi g this adjustment (from the n
ER).
3.
Taxes by type and jurisdiction to be paid annually during opera-tion (from the ER).
4.
Annual operation labor force (from the ER).
III.
ANALYSIS PROCEDURE The reviewer's analysis of the social and economic impac+
of operation will be linked to the environmental descriptions provided by the reviewer for ES Section 2.5.2 and the construction impact assessments of ES Section 4.4.2.
The reviewer will ensure that those environmon'al factors most likely to be impacted by operation of the proposed plant are described in sufficient detail to permit asseument of the predicted impacts.
Based on these descriptions, the reviewer will identify and analyze components of the regional and community social, pclitical, and economic systems that would be potentially impacted.
The reviewer will determine, from the full scope of potential impacts, those that are minor and those that are likely to be suf ficiently important to require detailed analysis.
Generally, operating impacts other than those related to tax revenues will be less than the corresponding impacts of construction. When the reviewer for ES Section 4.4.2 determines that a specific impact is minor, it need not be readdressed in this environmental review.
Where practical, quantitative measures of idertified adverse impacts will be developed.
The reviewer will also consult with the reviewers for ES Jections 5.1.1 and 5.2.2 to determine it any of the impacts identified under these sections will be of st.f ficient social or economic consequence to be examined further under this plan.
For analytical purposes, it is effective to categorize impacts into those resu' ting directly from plant operation and those resulting from the require-ments of the operating staff.
The reviewer will use the following steps for 10B 3u; S.8.2-4
February 1979
\\
the analysis of social and economic impacts directly associated with plant operation.
A.
Determine by jurisdiction the tax revenues derived from station operation.
B.
Predict the physical demands placed on local public facilities and services (e.g., fire, police, sewer and water) by plant operation and compare these demands with existing facilities and services.
C.
In consultation with appropriate reviewers, determine if any impacts identified under land use or water u;e impacts require further analysis regarding social and economic consequences.
The reviewer will use the following steps for the analysis of socioeconomic impac'.s associated with the operating staff:
A.
Determine the operating staf f requirements.
Predict the number of workers originating from within the region and the numbc r of in-movers.
B.
Predict the geographic distribution of in-mcvers.
C.
Estimate the overall impact of in movers on ecgional income, employ-ment, and population.
D.
Estimate the flow of tax revenues generated by the operational payroll and induced economic activity.
The reviewer will also describe any unique changes predicted to occur in the social and political structure and character of impacted communities, and describe the mechanisms available to these communities to plan for and accom-modate change induced by plant operation.
l{U0 7nn JUV 5.8.2-5
February 1979 IV.
EVALUATION Evaluation of each identified impact will result in one of the followinc, determinations:
The impact is minor and mitigation is not required. When all impacts are of this nature, the reviewer will accept operation as proposed.
The impact is adverse but can be mitigated by design or procedure modi-fications that the reviewer has identified and determined to be practical, For these cases, the reviewer will consult with the project manager and the reviewers for ES Section 9.3 for 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 and recommended measures and controls to limit the corresponding impact. These lists will t orovided the reviewer for ES Section 5.10.
The impact is adverse, cannot be successfull) mitigated, and is of such magnitude that it should be avoided. When impacts of this nature are identi-fied, the reviewer will inform the reviewers for ES Sec+ on 9.3 that an analysis and eve.luation of alternative designs or procedures is required.
The reviewer will participate in any such analysis and evaluaticn of alternatives that would avoid the impact and that could be considered practica-If no such alternatives can be idei.tified, the reviewer will be responsible f or providing this information to the reviewer for ES Section 10.1.
The reviewer will categorize impacts as those over which the applicant has some control and those over which the applicant has little or no control. Where the applicant has control over impacts the criteria outlined above will be applied.
Where the applicant has little or no control over alternatives to mitigate impacts that in the reviewer's judgment are adverse, the reviewer will (1) prepare a description of these impacts for inclusion in the environmental s ta tr.me n t,
(2) where appropriate identify potential solutions.o Se problem that are beyond 9 ma m 5.8.2-6
February 1979 the jurisdiction of the NRC, and (3) ensure that these impacts will be considered in the staf f's final evaluation of the proposed action.
V.
INPUT TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT A.
This section of the environmental statement should be planned to accomplish the following objectives: (1) public disclosure of social and economic impacts resulting from plant operation; (2) p?>,entation of the basis for the staff analysis; and (3) presentation of staff conclusions, recommendations, and conditions regarding impacts of plant operation to the region's social, political and economi; structure. The following information will usually be included in ES Section 5.8.2:
1.
A statement of the scope of coverage and the objectives of the analysis.
2.
A summary of the steps taken in the analysis and reference to methodologies employed.
3.
A summary of the findings of the analysis.
The level of detail provided will be related to the severity of the anticipated impact.
4.
I.'entification and assessment of potential mitigation measures.
The reviewer will provide inputs or ensure that i. puts will be made to the following ES sections:
Section 5.10.
The reviewer will provide the reviewer for E5 Section 5.10 with a list of applicant commitments and staff recommendations of measures and controls to limit adverse impacts of operation.
Sectic, 9. 3.
When the reviewer ccncludes that there are social and economic 'mpacts of operation that are adverse and shauld be avoided, the 5.8.2-7
February 1979 reviewers for ES Soction 9.3 will be requested to consider alternative plant designs, locations or operating procedures that would avoid the impacts.
Section 10.1.
The reviewer will provide a list of any unavoidable impacts that are predicted to occur as a result of the proposed plant operation.
VI.
REFERENCES 1.
" Social Assessment Manual: A guide to the Preparation of the Social Well-Being Account," by S. J. Fit 7.simmons, L. E. Stuart, and P. C. Wol f f, Abt Associates,
Inc., for the Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Department of the Interior, Contract
- lo. 14-06-D7342(5), July 1975.
2.
" Social Impact Assessment: An Overview," a consulta t report (7 universi ty team) to the U. S.
Army Engineer Institute for Water Resources, Kingman Building, Fort Belvoir, Va., IWR Paper 75-P7, December 1975.
3.
" Guidelines for the Preparation of Environmental Reports for Fosc41-Fueled Steam Electric Generating Stations," by United Engineers and Constructors, Inc., for the Of fice of Water Research and Technology and the Office of Environmental Project Review, U.S.
Department of the Interiors, Contract Number 14-31-0001-5238, November 1976.
1 ', '^
\\
)i 5.8.2-8