ML19242D209
| ML19242D209 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Skagit |
| Issue date: | 06/01/1979 |
| From: | Bivins W, Goldstein R ARGONNE NATIONAL LABORATORY, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19242D197 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7908140689 | |
| Download: ML19242D209 (19) | |
Text
___._
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATCMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of
)
)
PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT
)
Docket Nos. STN 50-522 COMPANY, ET AL.
)
STN 50-523
)
(Skagit Nuclear Power Project,
)
Units 1 and 2)
NRC Staff Assessment of Impacts Associated with the Delivery of the Reactor Pressure Vessel f, i O J _; 7, r/
7908140467
Af fidavit of William S. Bivins State of Maryland
)
County of Montgomery
)
1.
I, William S. Bivins, being duly sworn do depose and state that:
2.
I am the Section Leader, Hydrologic Engineering Section on the staff of the Hydrology-Meteorology Branch, Division of Site Safety and Environ-mental Analysis of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. My statement of professional qualifications is attached.
I have reviewed submittals by the applicant and have checked other sources to deternine if there is an adequate water depth in the Skagit River in order to allow the barge delivery of the Reactor Pressure Vessels for the Skegit units without dredging of the river. My evaluation, which follows, leads me to the conclusion that barge delivery of the Reactor Pressure Vessels will be pos.ible and that there is a high probability that dredging will not be required.
3.
I certify that the statements made in this assessment regarding the hydrological aspects of the barge delivery are true and correct to the best of my knowledge.
h f
LN/M h A
William 5/31rins Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of June, 1979 Notary Puolic My Ccmission Expires :
(, 'i: G
?
r,
- T /
1 3
,1
~.-
Affidavi t of Dr. Robert M. Golds tein State of Maryland
)
County of Montgomery
)
1.
I, Dr. Robert M. Goldstein, being duly sworn do depose and state:
2.
I am an Aquatic Ecologist wi.h the Division of Environmental Impact Studies, Argonne National Laboratory.
I have previously tastifie'J in this proceeding and my statement of professional qualifications has been entered into the record (Tr. 6,727).
I have reviewed tne applicant's proposal for barge delivery of the Reactor Pressure Vessels and have concluded that removal of some snags along the delivery route may occur. My assessment of the potential impacts to aquatic biota from such removal is incluced in this affidavit in Section A.
In addition, I have assessed the potential aquatic impacts resulting from the place-ment of culverts at the creek crossings on SR-20.
This assessment is discussed in Section B. below.
3.
I certify that the statements made in this assessment regarding potential aquatic impccts are true and correct to the best of my knowledge.
Racer: M. Golcstein Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of June, 1979 Notary Public My Comrission Expires:
? n u f l '!
/
e
NRC Staff Assessment of Imoacts Associated With The Delivery of The Reactor Pressure Vessels This assessment by the NRC Staff of the impacts associated with the delivery of the Skagit Reactor Pressure Vessels (RPV) was initiated by a letter from Samuel W. Jensch, Chairman of t'.e Atomic Safety and Licensing Board to Richard L. Black, Counsel for NRC Staff, dated June 8,1978.
Chairman Jenscn indicated that the Board would like the Staff to review the applicant's plans for RPV delivery that were outlined in an April 24, 1978 letter /
1 to the Staff to deternine if the impacts were any different than those assessed in the issuance of the Skagit FES (NUREG-75/055)2/ and the FES Final Supple-ment (NUREG-0235).2/ Additional information concerning the RPV delivery is also set forth in a June 27, 1978 letter from J. E. Mecca to W. H. Regan, J r.5/ After a review and evaluation of this additional information, the NRC Staff has determined that the original impact assessment of activities associated with RPV delivery in the FES and Final Supplement has not changed.
It is the Staff's opinion that the RPV delivery will affect the aquatic systems in the Skagit River and those creeks which will be crossed by the delivery route. Although some terrestrial impacts are expected due to the widening of Fruitdale Road and construction of two creek crossings next to bridges along SR-20, these impacts will be minor and similar to the terres-trial impacts evaluated in the applicant's proposal to widen tne ir,tersection of 3R-20 and Backus Road in its pre-LWA activities.
In addition, the local cammunity will face scme disruption of traffic alcng the delivery route, but
.,I.
8
,(
i
. it will probably last not more than a day on each of two occasions and can be avoidec by.taking alternative routes.
Finally, we would note that impacts to the Skagit River from barge slip construction have been addressed in the Final Supplement to the FES, Section 4.4, and are not included in this assessment since there is no change in the proposed construction and impacts thereof.
A.
Imcacts to the Skaoit River The RPVs are to be delivered up the Skagit River by barge to a barge slip just east of Sedro Woolley. The barge would have the following general
~
specifications: width 55 feet; length 276 feet; design draft 6 feet 2 inches (loaded); height to deck 15 feet 4 inches; height from deck to top of components 28 feet 9 inches. Ceneral Electric Company, which is responsible for delivery of the RPV to the Skagit site, made a test barge run in 1976. The test barge was 165 feet in length and ballasted to the proper depth for a fully loaded barge. The test barge did not experience any height, width, or depth restrictions on its journey, however, a section of an old railroad bridge near Sedro Woolley will have to be removed for the actual RPV delivery.
This stretch of the Skagit River is navigable and is maintained by the Corps of Engineers up to Mount Vernon. Maintenance usually consists of the removal of saags once or twice a year. The Corps of *gineers does not dredge the Skagit River.
If navigation is impeded and dredging recuired, it would be
- o r)
- - ?
O7 /
t )
. the resconsibility of the commercial hauler and would require a prior permit by the Corps of Engineers.
Based upon information in the report entitled " Delivery of the Skagit Reactor Pressure Vessel Equipment for Puget Sound Power and Light Company," dated March 1978 (Rev.1),1/ and on subsequent discussions with both the applicant and the reactor vendor who prepared the report, including a review of the actual depth soundings made at the time of the test run, we conclude that the test run provided adequate information to support the applicant's con-tention that the RPV can be jelivered by barge up the Sk?J t River.
In i
addition, based upon information in the report and an independent evaluation of water supply records of the river, the Staff concludes that it is highly probable that the river ficw will exceed, or can be made to exceed by con-trolled releases from upstream dams, the minimum required to move the barge without requirements for dredging.
However, transportation of the RPV barge may be impeded by snags which can be defined as trees, root balls cr other objects that hinder navigation.
The occurrence of snags and their movement is a natural process in the Skagit River. As previously noted, the Corps of Engineers removes snags from parts of the Skagit River.
Since General Electric intends to sur/ey the river at least 30 days prior to transport, adequate time exists to clear such impediments to navigation.
In the event that snags do impede naviga-tion, they will ce removed by the commercial hauler--usually by lifting them cut af the river by a crane and alacing them cn a barge for ultimate disposal.
6 /; 9
.,/
4
_4_
Removal of snags will cause minor impacts on the aquatic biota as discussed below. However, snags periodically move especially during periods of high river ficw.
In a survey of the river by the applicant on May 16,1979, only two snags were observed in the expected path of the bart Thus, the impact to the aquatic biota from snag removal is expected to be insignificant.
(1) Potential Imoacts to Primary Producers There are two major types c' primary producers or green plants, in aquatic systems: algae and macrcphytes.
Removal of snags from the river will reduce the instances of slow water aret *nd potential habitat for these plants. After a snag is removed, the area downstream of the snag is no longer protected from the full velocity of the river.
Accumulated detritus, silt, and mud, which serve as favorable substrate for macrophytes, will be washed away by increased scour.
Periphytic algal growth cn the snag will be removed along with the snag.
In both instances the primary production potential of the river is reduced.E A high order river (large size with many smaller tributaries) such as the Skagit has a diverse base of primary production. This base includes (1) imported organic matter (::crticulate organic matter of both terrestriai and aquatic origin) frca upstream reaches and tributaries and (2) organic matter produced photosynthetically in the river proper by periphytic algae (primarily bkh
,f.
diatoms and attached green algae), planktonic algae, and rooted acuatic macrophytes.
In a large river like the Skagit, the dominant source of organic matter would be both imports from upstream and that produced by algae, primarily diatoms, epiphytic on the rocky substrate.
Based on the prooortional amount of surface area available as substrate for epiphytic algae on the river bottom as compared with snags, the latter is probably not a major contributor to the total primary production of the Skagit River. Loss of substrate for rooted aquatic macrophytes is also unquantifiable, however these plcits are not abundant in the Skagit River (FES, Section 2.7.2.7).
(2) Potential Imoacts to Macrcinvertebrates Macroinvertebrates have an important function in the trophic structure of acuatic systems. This function is to process organic matter (both imported and that from primary production) into a fom more available (as food) to the next trophic level (primarily fishes). Macroirvercebrates feed on both detritus (dead organic matter and its associated microflora - bacteria and fungi) and living organic matter (algae, macrophytes, and other inverte-brates). Most macroinvertebrates are associated with relatively scecific substrate tyces and have evolved marchologically to util ze a scecific sub-strate type and focd source efficiently.
Snags provide unicue substrate tyces and harbor focd sources for invertebrates.
Rer.. oval of snags will
()!} ()
'i l (;
. therefore also remove this unique habitat from the river.
Remov:1 of snags will also expose downstream collected mud, silt, and sand substrates to the full velocity of the river current and potentially erode these substrates s
thereby eliminating these habitats and their fauna.
In the Skagit River the dominant macroinvertebrates are the lar/al stages of insects (FES, Section 2.7.2.4), and the dominant substrate type is rocky bottom with sand and silt in the interstices of the rocks.
Although snags are conmon, their surface area plus the surface area of velocity protected substrates does not contribute c major portion of the total invertebrate habitat in the river. By far, the majority of snags are lccated in areas of low velocity and away from areas of major flow in the river. Therefore, the majority of snags and their associated habit ts and fauna would be unaffected by the delivery of a reactor pressure vessel. More importantly, the unaffected areas also serve as reservoirs of the types of invertebrates which can utilize snag produced habitats and provide colonizers in downstream dr#fts The potential loss to fishes in both the amount of available food items and the types of food items should be small and probably undetectabte in terms of reduced growth or sur/ival.
(3) Datent al Imcacts to Fishes Fishes obtain two major benefits from snags:
(1) cover - shelter protected from predation and (2) velocity protection - energy expenditures are reduced
, by maintaining a position cut of the direct current of the river.b Removal of snags ca., reduce the carrying capacity of a rive-by increasing terri-torial competition for cover. Alterratively, ;ae carrying capacity of a stream for trout has been increased by adding cover.E Removal of snags reduces the cover and shelter capabilities of a river and could have a measurable effect on abundance of fishes.
In the Skagit River, the dominant source of cover is snags.
Snags may pro-vide more cover than undercut banks, riprap, or natural structure combined.
Removal of snags may therefore have a significant effect on the fish popu-lations of the Skagit River.
If the number of snags removed is small, thich the Staff expects from current infornation, no significant loss of cover should occur and aquatic impacts should be insignificant.
If a large number of snags have to be re:noved, the resulting loss of cover may have.
more severe impact on the aquatic biota and mitigating measures ma. become appropriate.
For example, snags whicF are removed can be returned to the water as soon as possible and as close to the original positicn as practicable.
This procedure would insure that impacts are kept to an acceptable leve!
because (1) loss of pr l nary prcduction to the system shculd be undetectable, (2) loss of invertebrate habitat would be limited to the depositional areas downstream frca snags, and these areas would be recreated at the disocsal locacion, and (3) cover for fish would not be lost.
Each time a sn3g is b k ')
,?
, moved, some amount of silt will be released to the river. However, this should be a relatively small amount of silt and create only a limited turbidity plume prior to settling out of suspension.
From an aquatic standpoint, the return of snags may be beneficial. Howev e r, the return of snags might not be feasible since they may float downstream with the :urrent and pose navigational hazards and other dangers to users of the river.
Based on these considerations and our expectation that only a few snags will have to be removed, the Staff does not recommend that snags be returned to the river.
B.
Potential Imoacts of Stream Crossinos After the RPV's are offloade at the barge slip, they will be transferred to an overland transporter which will move the DPV's down Fruitdale Road, SR-20, and Backus Hill Road to the site.
In order that SR-20 can accomma-date the baavy load, the applicant will place culverts at the crossings for both Hansen and Coal Creek. At each stream crossing the applicant plans to excavate the stream bad to a depth of 0.6-0.9 m (2-3 feet) and replace the original stream bed with comoacted sand and gravel. The culverts will be positioned in the stream bed and then sand and gravel will be used for backfill. The bottom of each culvert will be covered with accroximately 15-30 cm (6 to 12 inches) of gravel 0.5-2.5 cm (1/A" tc 1") in diameter, with fine; less than 5" by weight.
/d '/ O 7 i n/
T /
_9_
(1) Exca q ian Imcacts This construction activity may cau:e several types of impacts.
First, both the stream bed and bank excavation will cause siltation downstream.
Silta-tion with sand and silt can fill stream bed interstices, reducing the inter-gravel spaces. These spaces are utilized as habitat by benthic invert 2brates and as nursery and protected areas by eggs and alevins of salmonids. The time period for construction of the stream crossings is limited to summer, May 31 to September 15. During this period the streams should be experiencing l ow flowsU su/ that downstream dispersal of suspended solids. should be minimal. This would cause the majority of the produced particulate matter to settle out of suspension close to the construction area, minimizing the area that coula be affected. When fall precipitation rJnoff increases stream flow, the increased surficial sediments will be redistributed down-stream with natural sediments by the flushing action. Therefore, impacts to the streams and benthic fauna will be temporary. Affected areas will be recolonized from upstream reaches by invertebrate drift. The majority of salmonid emergence from the gravel beds will have occurred prior to the construction period. Some alevins may not have emerged by the time con-strJction begins, primarily those of steelhead trout (FES Table 1.11, cage a 2-31).
However, the numbers shculd be small and all emergence should be ccmoleted by mid-July. Coal Creek coes not accear to succort any anadrrrious solmonids, only resident cutthroat trout, although Hancen Creek does contain cono salmon, steelhead, and cucthroat trout (FES bk9 IJ
. Table 2.14, page 2-33). Considering that approxima ely 6000 m (3.7 miles) of stream are available to salmonids in Hansen Creek (FES Table 2.13, page 1-33), only a small section of this area would be affected.
Like-wise only a small area of Coal Creek would be affected.
The staff feels that the expected impacts from siltation are acceptable #cr the following reasons:
(1) the area of stream bed affected will be small, (2) natural flushing of sediment will occur prior to fall-winter salmonid spawning, and (3) benthic invertebrates can rapidly recolonize tre affected area from upstrean populations. However, the staff recommends that all areas of stream bank surrounding the culverts be covered with riprap to prevent erosion during periods of high stream flows.
(2)
Installatien of Culverts Installation of culverts in the stream will destroy existing benthic habitat and organisms. The area affected will be slightly larger than the area o
?
occuoied by the culverts, approximately 63.5 # (585 ft") in Coal Creek and 127.3 m2 (1370 ft ) in Hansen Creek (area of the culvert:- scan x length).
2 The botton of the culverts will be covered with gravel thus providing new substrate for benthic organisms.
It is highly likely that the new gravel fill will contain less fine material than the existing strean bed.
Intro-duction of gravel containing minor amounts of fine material is analogous to cleaning existing gravel of fine material. '4eehanE found that benthic
(/9
"]l
.. invertebrate densities initially were reduced by grc. vel cleaning, but that after three months densities increased to twice the previous levels.
After one year, populations returned to pre-cleaning levels.
Potential loss of salmonid spawning habitat may occur in Hansen Creek and Coal Creek.
If salmonids will spawn inside the culverts on the new gravel, then no spawn-ing habitat will be lost.
Requirements for salmonid spawning include pre-ferred water depth, veolcity, and substrate type.
Smiths / collectad water depth and velocity data from over 1000 coho and steelhead redds in Oregon and Washington to develop criteria.
Steelhead prefer a minimum depth of 0.24 meters (0.8 ft) and a water velocity of 0.40 - 0.91 m/s (1.3-3.0 f t/s).
Coho salmon prefer a.ainimum depth of 0.15 m and velocities of 0.21 -
0.70 m/s (0.7-2.3 f t/s). Although no data were given for cutthroat trout, the overall criteria for salmonids were a depth range of 0.22-0.43 m (0.7-1,3 ft) and "elocities of 0.11-0. 73 m/s (0.4 - 2.3 f t/s ).
Presence of these depths and velocities as well as the shading cover prov ded by the i
culverts may simulate salmonid spawning habitat.
Perhaps more important than depth and velocity criteria is substrate type.
Preferred substrate consists of gravel or cobble with minor amcunt: of detrimentally fine mate-rial. Detrimentally fine material is considered by the State of Washington as particles less than 0.84 mm (0.03 in) in diameter; hcwever, for Big Beef Creek in Washington this is increased to 3.33 n (0.13 in). The U.S. Forest Service definition is less than 2 mm (0.08 in) and the International Pacific Salmen Fisneries Commission defines detrimentally fine r..aterial at less than 12.7 mm (3.5 in). E/ Death of gravel in the stream bed is also imoortant.
(d9 G
,. Most salmonids will dig a redd 30 cm (12 inches) into the stream bed.
Fill-ing the bottoms of the culverts with large size, washed gravel, may produce salmonid spawning habitat but, at a minimum, culvert installation should not remove potential spawning habitat.
Alternatively, the accessible spawning area to anadromous salmonids in Hansen Creak is approximately 6000 m (FES Table 2.13, page 2-22).3/ The culverts are less than 20 m (60 ft) in length.
If this area were totally unusable by salmonids, there would be a reduction in available habitat of approximately 0.3%.
The Staff finds that impacts to Hansen and Coal Creeks from the installation of the culverts to be acceptable because (1) benthic habitat is replaced and recolonization should be rapid, (2) potential salmonid spawning habitat will still be available, and (3) the spawning area potentially affected is minor compared to the total spawning area available.
(3) Culvert Remeval After the pressure vessels have been delivered to the site, the applicant will remove the culverts and restore the stream beds to their original com-position. The acclicant has also suggested leaving the culverts in place.
The Staff finds both alternatives acceptable, but agrees with the applicant that by leaving tne culverts in place impacts from removal would be avoided hk9
>b
. and the benefits of stream soading and cover would be maintained.
Those impacts associated with removal will be similar in both character and magni-tude to those described in the previous section on excavation and installation, i
- ' {z
() 'F U
-'J T /
F REFERENCES 1.
" Delivery of the Skagit Reactor Pressure Vessel Equipment for Puget Sound Power & Light Company. March 1978.
Letter frca J. E. Mecca PSPL to Paul Leach, U.S. NRC. April 24, 1978.
PLN-185.
2.
Final Environmental Statement Related to the Construction of Skagit Nuclear Power Profect Units 1 and 2.
Puget Sound Power anc Light Con-pany et al. NUREG-75/055, Docket Nos. 50-522 and 50-523; (May 1975).
3.
Final Supplement to the Final Environmental Statement related to the Construction of Skagit Nuclear Power Project Units 1 and 2.
Puge t Sound Power & Light Company, et al.
Docket Nos. STN 50-522 and STN 50-523 (April 1977).
4.
Response to Staf f Questions. Letter from J. E. Mecca PSPL to W. H. Regan, Jr.
U.S. NRC June 27, 1978, PLN-191.
5.
Mar;:ol f, G. R.1978. The potential effects of clearing and snagging on stream ecosystems.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, FWS/0BS-78/14, 31 pp.
6.
Hynes, H. B. N., 1970. The ecology of running waters.
Univ. Toronto Press, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
555 pp.
7.
Hunt, R. L.
1971.
Responses of a brook trout population to habitat development in Lawrence Creek. Wisc. Dept. Nat. Res. Tech. Bull. 48, 35 pp.
8.
Water Resources Data for Washington, Water Year 1975.
U.S.G.S. Water-Data Report WA-75-1.
9.
Meehan, W. R.
1972.
Effects of gravel cleaning on bottcm organisms in three southeast Alaska streams.
Prog. F: sn-Cul t. 33(2):
107-111.
10.
Smi th, Al l an K.
1973. Development and apolication of s;: awning velocity and death criteria for Oregon salmonids. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc.102 (2):
312-315.
11.
Mih, Walter C.
1973. A review of restoration of stream gravel for spawning and rear ing of salmon species.
Fisheries 3(1):
15-18.
(y & ()
!) N ')
.4illiam S. Sivins, Leader Hydrologic Enginearing Section Hydrology-Peteorology Branch Division of Site Safety and Envircemental Analysis Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Professicnal Cuali fications I am the Section Leader, Hydrologic Engineering Section on the staf f of the Hydrology-Meteorology Branch, Division of Site Safety and Environmental Analysis.
My formal education consists of study in civil engineering at New Mexico State University, where I received a B.S.C.E. in 1966, and a M.S. in Water Resource Management from the University of Wisconsin in 1969. The graduate study was as a Planning Fellow under total sponsorship of the Corps of Engineers.
I have had courses in hydrology, water resources, fluid mechanics, engineering construction, soil mechanics, water supply, geology, hydro-geology, economics, water law, urban and regional planning, and advanced mathematics.
My present employment witn the NRC ( formerly the AEC) dates from 1972 in the area of hydrologic engineering with the Division (ncw Office) of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, with the Of fice of Standards Development, and for consultation on siting of materials facilities, and on environmental matters. My responsibility in the licensing review of nuclear facilities is in the area of flood vulnerability, adeouate water supply, and surface and groundwater acceptability of ef fluents. In additir n, I participate in the development of Regulatory Guides in these areas of interest.
From 1970 to 1972, I was a Hydraulic Engineer with the Southwestern Division of Corps of Engineers, Dallas, Texas.
I was responsible for the hydrologic review of multi-purpose cams, flood control projects, navigaticn projects, and coastal engineering development. The projects included those of the five districts of the Southwestern Division of the Corps of Engineers and included parts or all of the states of Colorado, New Mexico, Kansas, Cklahcma, Texas, Missouri, Arkansas, and Louisiana.
From 1966 to 1970, I was a Hydraulic Engineer with the Corps of Engineers, Albuquerque District, Albuquerque, New Mexico.
I worked on hydrolcgic engineering and hydraulic design projects such as multi-purpose reservoirs, channel s, and levees in New Mexico, Colorado, and Kansas; including estinates of long-term water availability, and hypothetical flood events.
I prepared hydrologic engineering estimates for major flood centrol levee systems including the water salvage potential of such projects.
f, mnO
e
'4ill i an S. Bivi ns Professicnal Cui. -'ications I have published in the Journal of the /cerican Society of Civil Engineers and in internal technical papers of the Corps of Engineers.
I am a registered Engineer-In-Training in the State of !!ew f*exico.
I am a member of the toerican Society of Civil Engineers, 'cerican Association for the Advancement of Science, and the American Geophysical Union.
t 9
9 f' ]
'T
. J
__