ML19221A811
| ML19221A811 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 02/28/1979 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUREG-0555, NUREG-0555-06.5.2, NUREG-555, NUREG-555-6.5.2, SRP-06.05.02, SRP-6.05.02, NUDOCS 7907090170 | |
| Download: ML19221A811 (8) | |
Text
Section 6.5.2 February 1979 E_NVIRONMENTAL STANDARD REVIEW PLAN FOR ES SECTION 6.S.2 ENVIRONMENTAL MEASUREMENTS AND MONITORING PROGRAMS:
AQUATIC ECOLOGY REV!EW INPUTS Environmental Report Sections 2.2 Ecology 6
Ef fluent and Environmental Measurements and Monitoring Programs Environmental Reviews 2.3 Water 2.4.2 Aquatic Ecolcg, 4.3.2 Ecological Impacts: Aquatic Ecosystems (Construction) 5.3 Cooling System Impacts (Operation) 5.6.?
Transmission System Impacts: Aquatic (Operation)
Standards aiu Suides Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act of 1958 Marine Sanctuaries Act of 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendmonts of 1972 Endangered Species Act of 1973 Regulatory Guide 4.7, " General Site Suitability Criteria for Nuclear Power Stations" Regulatory Guide 4.8, " Preparation of Environmental Technical Specifications f or Nu : lear Power Plants" Other The site visit Responses to requests for additional information Consultati n with local, State, and Federal agencies REVIEW OUTPUTS Environmental Statement Sections 6.5.2 Environmental Measurements and Monitoring Program:
Aquatic Ecology 109 000 7 9070 9ono 6.5.2-1
February 1979 Other Environmental Reviews 6.7 Encironmental Measurements and Monitoring orograms: Staff Recommendations I.
PURPOSE AND SCOPE The purpose of this environmental standard review plan is to direct the staf f's analysis and evaluation of the applicant's preapplication, site prepara-tion and construction, and preoperation monitoring programs in suf ficient detail to lead to decisions on site acceptability and, ultimately, plant construction and operational procedures. The scope of the review directed by this plan will include evaluations of standardization, adequacy and accuracy of data collection and analytical methods used in the monitoring programs. If elements of the moni-toring program are determined to be inadequate, staf f recommendations for supple-mental programs will be presented.
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.
A map showing detailed features of the site (as modified by the pro-posed station) including major hydrological teatures and sampling station locatione (from the ER).
B.
The frequency of sampling, number of replicates, depth and date taken, and gear type employed for each type of sample at each location (from the ER)
C.
A description of sampling gear and methods (f rom the ER)
D.
Sample analysis procedures (from the ER) c.3 6.5.2-2
February 1979 E.
Data analyses and reporting procedures (from the ER)
F.
The applicant's NPDES permit, if available (from the ER).
III.
ANALYSIS "ROCEDURE In this analysis, the reviewer will consider the following separate but related aspects of the applicant's aquatic ecolo(y monitoring program:
Preapplication Monitoring.
The program of monitoring and data collec-tion used to support the applicant's environmental descriptions of aquatic ecology.
Site Preparation and Construction Monitoring.
The proposed program of aquatic environmental monitoring to control anticipated impacts from site preparation and plant construction.
This program may include pre-construction monitoring to establish a baseline for assessing the subsequent impacts of site preparation and construction.
Such monitoring will be required only in uausual circe 11 stances when specific adverse impacts are predicted.
Preoperational Monitoring.
.e proposed program of aquatic environ-mental mor.itoring to establish a baseline for identifying and assessing the envi-ronmental impacts to aquatic biota resulting from plant operation.
A.
Preap;,lication monitoring.
The applicant's preapplication monitoring program is used to aid in the assessment of site suitability and to support the staf f's data base necessary to identify and evaluate potential impacts to the aquatic environment that would result from construction and operation of the pro-posed project.
Generally, data is needed on a seasonal basis and should be suffi-cient to characterize seasonal variations throughout at least one annual cycle.
Additional data (e:g., spawning periods for "important"* species) may be needed on a site-specific basis.
- See the ESRP for ES Section 2.4.1 for a definition of "important" 6.5.2-3 109 0.0
February 1979 The reviewer will analyze the available data to determine that they are adequate to support the environmental descriptions in CSRP 2.4.2.
The fol-lowing parameters should be considered:*
i.
The location and value of commercial and sport fisheries by species, season, and catch.
2.
The distribution arid abundance of "important" fish, shellfish, and other invertebrates including benthos.
Critical life history information should include spawning areas, nursery arounds, feeding areas, wintering areas, and migra-tion routes to the extent that t
.aroposed project is expected to affect these parameters.
3.
The distribution and abundance of plankton.
Emphasis should be placed on the egg; and larvae of "important" fish and shellfish and important organisms in their food webs.
4.
The distribution and abundance of "important" macrophyte and periphyton communities.
5.
Endangered or threatened species which are known or expected to be present, together with any specific habitat requirements or community interrelationships.
6.
Food webs leaaiag to man.
7.
Cor. sideration should also be given to the physical, chemical, and biological factors known to influence distribution and relati /e abundance of "important" biota.
8.
Man-induced manipulations that are contributing to the existing patterns of plant and animal communities.
A Where available, the reviewer will consider the results of related environ-mental monitorir.g programs that are applicable.
O I
\\q; 6.5.2-4
February 1979 B.
Site preparation and construction monitor.1g.
This portion of the monitoring program consists of the following two parts:
1.
Quality )ssurance:
The reviewer will analyze the applicant's proposM quality assurance program for its ability to assure that good construc-tien prac.,ces will be followed. The reviewer will consider the following con-trol program elements:
(1) written procedures and instructions to control con-struction activities, (2) procedures that provide for detection of unexpected harmful effects or evidence of serious damage, (3) provision for periodic manage-ment audits to determine the adequacy of implementation of environmental license conditions, and (4) procedures for records retention.
2.
Construction Monitorino. Construction monitoring will be required only in unusual circumstances when s7ecific adverse in. pacts are predicted. The reviewer will determine these predicted impacts from the output of the environ-mental reviews af ES Sections 4.2 and 4.3.2 and will analyze the proposed monitor-ing programs associated with these predicted impacts to determine if adequate impact assessment is possible and that adequate mitigation programs can be selected if required.
C.
Preoperation monitoring.
The preoperational monitoring program is designed to provide the data base necessary for identifying, monitoring, and evaluating impacts to the aquatic environment arising from the operation of the proposed plant. The program should be statistically sound and designed to pro-vide an adequate baseline so that the operational monitoring program can detm 't expected impacts with a degree of confidence commensurate with the risks and costs involved. Where consistent with construction planning, two or more consecutive years of data collection should be planned and the program should demonstrate a logical extension of b.th the preapplication and site preparation programs, and should be integrated with any required construction monitoring programs.
The program should afford a detailed characterization of the aquatic resources of the site so as to provide a baseline for the identification and measurement of adverse environmental effects resulting from plant operation; 109 g'io 6.5.2-5
February 1979 i.e.,
habitat alteration, entrapment, impingement, en rainaent, thermal stress, and chemical toxicity.
The applicant's preoperationa monitoring plan should be analyzed to determine if adequate baseline data will be provided +o allow assessment of the following parameters:
1.
Alteration of Habitat.
The composition of bottoni substrates, movement cf material, and the siz9 of affected areas in relation to intake and discharge velocities and ambient env1 onn. ental conditions.
2.
Entrainment, Impingement, Entrapment. Tne distribution and abund-ance of "important" species and their various life stages susceptible to entrap-ment, entrainment, and impingement, so that estimates of potential losses and predictions of the effects of these losses can be made.
3.
Thermal and Chemical Stress.
The distribution and abundance by life stage of "important" species in the cooling water body to be influenced by thermal and chemical discharges, so that estimates of potential losses and pre-dictions of the effects of these discharges can be made. Water quality monitor-ing pertinent to determining the impact of station operation will be considered.
IV.
EVALUATION The reviewer's evaluation of these monitoring programs must establish that sufficient and adeouate data will be provided to accomplish the goals of the monitoring programs as outlined above. Where the monitoring programs are judged to be inadequate or to include unnecessary elements, the reviewer will recommend consideration of additions and deletions as required.
The reviewer will ensure that any such recommendations are consistent with provisions of the applicant's NPDES permit and with the findings of the agency or agencies responsible for FWPCA determinations.
The following features should be evaluated for each of the programs:
A.
Continuity of design, i.e., each monitoring program builds upon the methodology and informational outputs of the previous program.
b r\\ i 6.5.2-6
February 1979 B.
Where outputs of a preceding monitoring program or project demonstrate no significant impacts, then provisions to study such effects in successive moni-toring programs should be reduced or deleted.
C.
The intensity of sam) ling required for each anticipated impact should be commensurate aith the degree of impact expected.
The reviewer will consider the potential impacts of any sampling program in making this evaluation.
D.
Sampling equipment, pattern, frequency, size, and duration to measure anticipated impacts.
E.
Statistical validity, including th3 mean, standard deviation, and confidence limits.
F.
If population dynamics nndels were used in the impact analyses, the reviewer will determine if sampling data are available to support the model, and if not may recommend such sampling if verification of the model is necessary.
V.
INPUT TO THE ENVIRONJENTAL STATEMENT This section of the environmental statement should present the objec-tives of each monitoring program without detail and provide a brief outline of the methods, frequency, and duration of sampling used in each case.
Tables may be used if appropriate.
Where the inonitoring programs have been found inadequate, the reviewer's recommendations for modifying the programs should be included.
The reviewer will provide input to the following ES Sectiar-Section S.7.
The reviewer will provide the reviewer for ES Section 6.7 with a list of recommended additions or deletions to the appli-cant's proposed monitoring programs.
10* Q, D *.1 v,.,
6.5.2-7
February 1979 VI.
REFERENCES 1.
C. D. Becker, J. A. Strand, and D. G. Watson. " Aquatic Ecology, Part 6,"
Environmental Impact Monitori_ng of Nuclear Power Plants, Source Book of Monitc ring Methods, Atomic Industrial Forum, Inc., Washington, D.C.,
1975.
2.
L. L. Eberhardt and R. O. Gilbert, " Biostatistics Aspects, Part 8,"
Environmental Impact Monitoring of Nuclear Power Plants, Sour.e Book of Monitoring Methods, Atomic Industrial Forum, Inc., Washington, D.C.,
1975.
3.
W. T. Edmondsen and G. G. Winberg, IBP Handbook No. 17, A Manual 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. Vollenweider, 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.
g y) 0C 9
6.5.2-8