Regulatory Guide 4.11: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Adams
{{Adams
| number = ML113350385
| number = ML003739930
| issue date = 03/31/2012
| issue date = 08/31/1977
| title = Terrestrial Environmental Studies for Nuclear Power Stations
| title = Terrestrial Environmental Studies for Nuclear Power Stations
| author name =  
| author name =  
Line 9: Line 9:
| docket =  
| docket =  
| license number =  
| license number =  
| contact person = Bayssie Mekonen/RES 251-7489
| contact person =  
| case reference number = DG-4016
| document report number = RG-4.11
| document report number = RG-4.011, Rev 2
| package number = ML113350061
| document type = Regulatory Guide
| document type = Regulatory Guide
| page count = 27
| page count = 11
}}
}}
{{#Wiki_filter:The NRC issues regulatory guides to describe and make available to the public methods that the NRC staff considers acceptable for use in implementing specific parts of the agency
{{#Wiki_filter:Revision 1 August 1977 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY  
=s regulations, techniques that the staff uses in evaluating specific problems or postulated accidents, and data that the staff needs in reviewing applications for permits and licenses.  Regulatory guides are not substitutes for regulations, and compliance with them is not required.  Methods and solutions that differ from those set forth in regulatory guides will be deemed acceptable if they provide a basis for the findings required for the issuance or continuance of a permit or license by the Commission.
COMMISSION
 
REGULATORY  
This guide was issued after consideration of comments received from the public.
GUIDE OFFICE OF STANDARDS
 
DEVELOPMENT
Regulatory guides are issued in 10 broad divisions C1, Power Reactors; 2, Research and Test Reactors; 3, Fuels and Materials Facilities; 4, Environmental and Siting; 5, Materials and Plant Protection; 6, Products; 7, Transportation; 8, Occupational Hea lth; 9, Antitrust and Financial Review; and 10, General.
REGULATORY  
 
GUIDE 4.11 TERRESTRIAL
Electronic copies of this guide and other recently issued guides are available through the NRC
ENVIRONMENTAL  
=s public Web site under the Regulatory Guides document collection of the NRC Library at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/ and through the NRC=s Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html , under Accession No. ML113350385.  The regulatory analysis may be found in ADAMS under Accession No. ML113350388.
STUDIES .FOR NUCLEAR POWER STATIONS  
 
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
March 2012 Revision 2 REGULATORY GUIDE
  OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCH
    REGULATORY GUIDE 4.11 (Draft was issued as DG-4016, dated August 2011)
TERRESTRIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES   FOR NUCLEAR POWER STATIONS


==A. INTRODUCTION==
==A. INTRODUCTION==
This guide provides technical guidance that U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff considers acceptable for terrestrial environmental studies and analyses supporting licensing decisions for nuclear power reactors.  The NRC issued Regulatory Guide (RG) 4.11, Revision 1, in August 1977 before the implementation of many environmental regulations affecting licensing decisions. For purposes of this guide, the term "terrestrial" encompasses permanently dry lands (uplands) and those wetlands and other aquatic features supporting emergent (not submerged) vegetation. The NRC generally includes wetland and riparian (riverside) habitats with terrestrial issues as a matter of convenience, even though these habitats interface with aquatic habitats.  This guide does not address aquatic areas containing only submerged aquatic vegetation.  For purposes of this guide, the term "terrestrial environmental study" refers to ecological studies and assessments focused on characterizing environmental impacts on flora and fauna and their habitats.  Most terrestrial environmental studies performed in connection with NRC licensing decisions support decisionmaking under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).  This guidance is intended to improve the consideration of terrestrial environmental impacts in environmental impact statements and other documents produced to comply with NEPA.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission's policy and procedures for preparing and processing en vironmental impact statements and related docu ments pursuant to Section 102(2)(C)  
of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (Public Law 91 190, 83 Stat. 852) are set forth in 10 CFR Part 51, "Licensing and Regulatory Policy and Procedures for Environmental Protection." Regulatory Guide 4.2, "Preparation of Environmental Reports for Nuclear Power Stations," identifies the information needed by the NRC staff in its assessment of the potential en vironmental effects of a proposed nuclear facility.


This guide defines general objectives for terrestrial analyses but does not provide stepwise instructions or technical protocols.  Professional judgment is necessary when identifying analytical methods appropriate to each licensing decision and when collecting the associated data.  Various agencies and other parties are continually refining terrestrial ecology protocols and developing new approaches to achieve regulatory objectives.  Applicants using this guide should contact appropriate Federal and State Rev. 2 of RG 4.11, Page 2 environmental regulatory agencies and search recent scientific literature for specific data collection protocols and analytical processes.  Applicants should justify the methods selected.
This regulatory guide provides technical information for the design and execution of terrestrial en vironmental studies for nuclear power stations.


This guide focuses on terrestrial analyses for licensing new nuclear power stations under the combined licensing process in Title 10, of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 52, "Licenses, Certifications, and Approvals for Nuclear Power Plants" (10 CFR Part 52) (Ref. 1) and power reactors under 10 CFR Part 50, "Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities" (Ref. 2).  This guide is also useful in identifying the more limited studies and analyses needed for nuclear reactor operating license renewal under 10 CFR Part 54, "Requirements for Renewal of Operating Licenses for Nuclear Power Plants" (Ref. 3), and portions may also be relevant to nuclear reactor decommissioning.
The information resulting from the studies, as they relate to ecological aspects of site selection, assessment of terrestrial effects of station construction and opera tion, and formulation of related monitoring ac tivities, may be appropriate for inclusion in the appli cant's environmental report.This guide is intended to reflect current practice, i.e., the siting of up to several power plants at a single site. Prior consultation with the staff is recommended if larger-scale "Energy Centers" are contemplated.


Terrestrial analyses are also addressed in guidance documents that the NRC has developed to help applicants prepare multidisciplinary environmental information for license applications.  These documents include RG 4.2, "Preparation of Environmental Reports for Nuclear Power Stations" (Ref. 4), and RG 4.7, "General Site Suitability Criteria for Nuclear Power Stations" (Ref. 5).  This guide provides focused guidance on terrestrial environmental studies and analyses supporting the broader environmental objectives in these other RGs.  Like other NRC RGs, this guide addresses information that the NRC uses in making regulatory decisions.  It does not necessarily cover all of the terrestrial environmental information that other Federal, State, or local regulatory agencies may need.
Although there is a need for a thorough evaluation of environmental impacts, it is important that effort not be needlessly dissipated on programs of limited value. The need for accurate evaluation and timely review of the environmental report makes it essential to focus quickly on meaningful issues and to avoid exhaustive analyses not directly related to station im pacts. This guide recommends site selection assess ments, resource management, source control, and control of effects as means for protecting the ter*Lines indicate substantive changes from previous issue.restrial ecology. The approach recommended for ter restrial surveys begins with broadly based land-use and biotic inventories and then focuses on a limited number of significant environmental issues.
 
The NRC issues regulatory guides to describe to the public methods that the staff considers acceptable for use in implementing specific parts of the agency's regulations, to explain techniques that the staff uses in evaluating specific problems or postulated accidents, and to provide guidance to applicants. Regulatory guides are not substitutes for regulations and compliance with them is not required.
 
This regulatory guide contains information collection requirements covered by 10 CFR Part 51 (Ref. 6) that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approved under OMB control number 3150-
0021.  The NRC may neither conduct nor sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, an information collection request or requirement unless the requesting document displays a currently valid OMB control number.  This regulatory guide is a rule as designated in the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801-808).  However, the NRC has determined this regulatory guide is not a major rule as designated by the Congressional Review Act and has verified this determination with the OMB.
 
The NRC has an interest in facilitating the harmonization of standards used internationally.  In this case, we did not find similar elements between this regulatory guide and the IAEA safety guides.


==B. DISCUSSION==
==B. DISCUSSION==
Background Terrestrial analyses can be broadly classified as those providing siting support, baseline investigations, identification of important species and habitats, impact analyses, monitoring efforts, and decommissioning support.  The applicant should use best professional judgment to develop and justify the objectives of terrestrial studies, their spatial and temporal coverage, their level of detail, and methods of data collection.
It is important that environmental assessments provide the information needed to estimate and limit potential environmental impacts of nuclear power station construction and operation.


Terrestrial Siting Support
If important en vironmental impacts are identified prior to site preparation and station construction, these impacts can be reduced to acceptable levels by selecting an ap propriate site, revising the station design, or modify ing operating procedures.


Rev. 2 of RG 4.11, Page 3 Terrestrial ecology is one of several technical disciplines involved in the site selection (screening) process commonly used to license a new nuclear power plant under 10 CFR Part 50 or 10 CFR Part 52.    The discussion of site selection procedures in this guide is limited to terrestrial ecological issues.  The presence or absence of terrestrial ecological resources contributes to screening a region of interest to identify sites for further evaluation.  Information on the site selection process commonly used for nuclear power plants appears in Electric Power Research Institute Report No. 1006878, "Siting Guide:  Site Selection and Evaluation Criteria for an Early Site Permit Application," issued 2002 (Ref. 7); RG 4.2; and RG 4.7.  Terrestrial ecology is also a factor in evaluating alternative energy sources and alternative heat dissipation systems.  The siting guidance below is expected to be useful only to licensing new reactors; siting is generally not a consideration in license renewal.
In this guide, environmental studies are divided into five phases: site selection, baseline studies, decommissioning studies, construction monitoring, and operational monitoring.


Site Selection (Site Alternatives)
Table 1 shows the organization for terrestrial studies and identifies ma jor tasks and their approximate time schedules.
  Reconnaissance-level information and published data are the primary information sources used to identify terrestrial ecology resources for site selection purposes.  Each step in the site selection process increases the level of detail used in identifying sensitive resources (including but not limited to terrestrial ecological resources), further narrows the field of possible sites, and increases confidence in the extent to which the resulting field of sites avoids sensitive resources.  The region of interest may be initially screened at a coarse scale (e.g., using maps or aerial photographs at a scale of 1:250,000) to identify candidate areas that best exclude large land areas dedicated to ecological management (e.g., national wildlife refuges, critical habitat for Federally listed threatened or endangered species, and State wildlife or natural areas) and larger wetlands or floodplains.  Areas passing the initial screen may then be screened more closely by overlaying a polygon approximating the size of a project site on a resource map with a finer scale showing protected species and smaller wetland and floodplain areas that had been indiscernible at the coarser scale.  The polygon may be repositioned multiple times over the map as needed to identify a suite of candidate sites for further investigation.


Candidate sites can then be compared using specific qualitative and quantitative criteria.  Criteria may include numbers of known occurrences of Federally or State-listed species; the amount and quality of upland and wetland habitats; distance from wetlands, shorelines, and riparian zones; and other pertinent ecological attributes. Criteria may be scored and potential sites compared using the scores.  Scoring criteria should reflect information that is as uniform in detail and accuracy as possible among candidate sites.  Scores should be reviewed for possible bias derived from the differing quality of available data.  For example, the number of known occurrences of Federally or State-listed species may vary from site to site depending on how well the differing geographic regions have been characterized in the past.  Applicants should justify the criteria selected and the criteria scoring schemes.
Adverse impacts on terrestrial organisms or ecological systems have historically resulted from loss or modification of habitat, release of minerals or tox ic chemicals into the environment, and direct destruc tion of biota. A biological effect may be expressed at the level of the individual organisms or through the collective response of organisms at the system level.  Examples of effects on individual organisms include death, reduction of health or vitality, accumulation of toxic substances, and alteration of reproductive success. Examples of ecological system effects include changes in birth or death rates; changes of toxic ele ment concentrations throughout entire food webs; and changes in population size, habitat, or com munity structure.


The applicant may identify a final suite of alternative sites, including a proposed site and alternative sites, by comparing candidate sites based on potential impacts to the terrestrial ecology resources noted above. The analysis normally entails further screening at a higher confidence level using more detailed, site-specific data developed from onsite verification surveys; the analysis should also consider potential impacts from transmission lines and other offsite development (e.g., pipelines or access roads). Site preparation and other project development impacts (e.g., presence of high-quality habitats and proximity to protected species) and operation impacts (e.g., distance to wetlands potentially affected by surface water drawdown or groundwater depletion) can be scored subjectively and then compared.
USNRC REGULATORY
GUIDES Comments should be sent to the Secretary of the Commission, US. Nuclear Regu latory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555, Attention:
Docketing and Service Regulatory Guides are issued to describe and make available to the public methods Branch. acceptable to the NRC staff of implementing specific parts of the Commission's regulations, to delineate techniques used by the staff in evaluating specific problems The guides are issued in the following ten broad divisions or postulated accidents.


The evaluation of alternative sites needed by NRC staff may partially overlap that required by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) (Ref. 8).  Applicants may find it efficient to evaluate terrestrial ecology resources at alternative sites following an integrated approach that simultaneously achieves what is needed by both NRC and the Corps.
or to provide guidance to applicants.


Applications for Section 404 permits must demonstrate that the proposed site is the least environmentally Rev. 2 of RG 4.11, Page 4 damaging practicable alternative (LEDPA) under the alternatives analysis guidelines in 40 CFR Part 230, "Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines for Specification of Disposal Sites for Dredged or Fill Material" (Ref. 9), developed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).  Practicable alternatives include, but are not limited to, discharges of dredged or fill material at other locations (see Subpart B, "Compliance with the Guidelines," of 40 CFR Part 230).  Applicants may contact the regional Corps district office to acquire information on local application of the LEDPA guidelines in 40 CFR Part 230 for site selection.
Regulatory Guides are not substitutes
[or regulations, and compliance with them is not required.


Energy Alternatives Terrestrial ecology is one of several technical disciplines involved in evaluating whether alternative energy sources requiring new generating capacity are competitive with the proposed energy source.  RG 4.2 identifies alternative energy sources for new generating capacity. Nuclear, coal, natural gas, and a combination of alternatives are the most commonly considered alternative energy sources for new baseload power generating capacity; these alternative energy sources are normally compared under the assumption that they would be developed on the proposed site.  There are no specific terrestrial ecology criteria to evaluate competitiveness between the alternative energy sources and the proposed source. Instead, terrestrial resources potentially affected by each energy alternative typically are described and compared at a coarse (low) level of resolution (e.g., use of previously disturbed versus undisturbed habitat) and are not quantified.
1. Power Reactors 6. Products Methods and solutinons different from those set out in the guides will be accept- 2. Research and Test Reactors 7. Transportation able if they provide a basis for the findings requisite to the issuance or continuance
3. Fuels and Materials Facilities
8. Occupational Health of a permit or license by the Commissaon.


As indicated for site alternatives, the evaluation of alternative energy sources needed by NRC staff may partially overlap that needed by the Corps to demonstrate that a nuclear energy source is the LEDPA under the EPA alternatives analysis guidelines in 40 CFR Part 230.  Practicable alternatives include functional alternatives (see Appendix B, "NEPA Implementation Procedures for the Regulatory Program," to 33 CFR Part 325, "Processing of Department of the Army Permits" (Ref. 10)) such as energy alternatives.  Applicants may contact the regional Corps district office to acquire information on local application of the LEDPA guidelines for energy source evaluation.  The Corps may require terrestrial environmental data beyond those recommended for NRC purposes in this guide.
4. Environmental and Siting 9. Antitrust Review 5. Materials and Plant Protection
10. General Comments and suggestions for improvements in these guides are encouraged at all Requests flor single copies of issued guides (which may be reproduced)
or for place times, and guides will be revised, as appropriate, to accommodate comments and ment on an automatic distribuation list for single copies of future guides in specific to reflect new information or experience.


Heat Dissipation System Design Alternatives Terrestrial ecology is also a factor for assessing design alternatives for heat dissipation systems for nuclear power plants.  Depending on the particular site, possible alternative heat dissipation systems may include once-through systems and closed-cycle systems such as mechanical draft wet cooling towers, natural draft cooling towers, wet-dry cooling towers, dry cooling towers, cooling ponds, and spray ponds.  No specific terrestrial ecology criteria are normally used to compare the alternative heat dissipation systems. Instead, terrestrial resources potentially affected by each alternative are typically described and compared at a coarse (low) level of resolution (e.g., identifying general habitat types, such as forests or wetland, that system development would impact and the general operational effects of different cooling tower systems, such as salt drift and avian collisions) and are not typically quantified.
This guide was revised as a result of divisions should be made in writing to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, substantive comments received from the public and additional staff review. Washington.


Sources of Information The following information sources are useful for identifying terrestrial ecological resources for purposes of project siting:
D.C. 20555, Attention:
Director, Division of Document Control.*I
TABLE 1 OPERATION, TERRESTRIAL
ENVIRONMENTAL
STUDIES RELATED TO THE SITING, CONSTRUCTION, AND DECOMMISSIONING
OF NUCLEAR POWER STATIONS Phase Site selection Baseline studies at the proposed site Decommissioning studies Construction monitoring at the approved site Operational monitoring at the approved site MajorTask Regional land-use analysis Ecological analysis Local land-use analysis Ecological analysis Biological inventories Planning station design and construction prac tices to reduce impacts Reclamation analysis Planning station design and construction prac tices to reduce impacts Monitoring of construc tion practices Problem-oriented monitor ing (short-term and con tinuing programs)Time When Task Performed*
Prior to application for CP when candidate areas are being selected Prior to application for CP when preferred site is being selected Prior to application for CP when ER is being pre pared; may continue into construction period.  Prior to application for CP when ER is being prepared During period between CP issuance and OL issuance After OL is issued* CP = construction permit ER = environmental report OL = operating license (
Most plant and animal populations have sufficient reproductive capacity to make up for losses of a few individuals without changes in average population sizes or community structure.


a. online mapping products, including but not limited to topographic maps from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS);
When the loss of in dividuals becomes sufficiently great, however, the population as a whole may cease to function as a self sustaining, renewable resource.
b. National Wetland Inventory (NWI) maps from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS);
c. State wetland maps such as those developed by Maryland and New Jersey; 
Rev. 2 of RG 4.11, Page 5 d. State (e.g., Natural Heritage Program) and Federal (e.g., FWS) data on the potential occurrence of threatened, endangered, and other protected species and habitats;
e. county soil surveys from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) (formerly the Soil Conservation Service);
f. flood insurance rate maps from the Federal Emergency Management Agency;
g. Federal, State, and private land use and land cover maps, including the following:
- the USDA National Agricultural Imagery Program (Ref. 11), - multiple-resolution land characteristics consortium national land cover database (Ref. 12), 
- others described in the section below regarding terrestrial habitat identification, and - existing and projected future land use maps from local planning and zoning offices. State and regional wetland maps are generally more reliable than NWI maps.  However, some maps only show tidal (coastal) wetlands or wetlands that meet size or quality thresholds.  Therefore, applicants may have to use State or regional maps in conjunction with NWI maps (or other broadly scoped maps) to provide information on all wetland types.  County soil surveys show soils indicative of wetlands (hydric soils) and other potentially sensitive habitats such as sand dunes.  Floodplains depicted on flood insurance rate maps may contain sensitive riparian or coastal habitats.  If land use or land cover maps are not available, aerial photographs or satellite imagery can provide similar data.


Terrestrial Environmental Baseline Investigations
The population may then be overstressed, and species extinction or un desirable shifts in community structure may become possible.


Terrestrial environmental baseline investigations inventory and characterize upland and wetland flora, fauna, and habitats in potentially affected areas on, and in the vicinity of, a proposed site, including the associated offsite rights-of-way for features such as transmission lines.  Baseline investigations form a basis for assessing potential impacts to terrestrial resources and serve as a foundation for related Federal and State monitoring and mitigation requirements.  The detail should be roughly proportional to the anticipated magnitude of potential impacts and the level of information needed to evaluate the significance of the impacts.  The spatial extent of potential impacts can extend beyond the proposed limits of ground disturbance to encompass areas potentially affected by other activities, such as surface water or groundwater drawdown, spoils disposal, noise, runoff, dust deposition, and cooling tower drift.  Studies of terrestrial resources within the area of development and operation  should generally be more detailed than studies of peripheral areas.  The spatial extent and detail of baseline investigations may have to be expanded to address the concerns of interested Federal, State, Tribal, local, and private organizations.
Excessive population stresses have resulted from natural phenomena, hunting, trapping, draining of wetlands, harvesting forests, plowing prairies, widespread dispersion of toxic substances, and other activities.


The detail needed for baseline investigations may be less for proposed sites that have been partially developed (e.g., sites within an existing nuclear power plant property or a property with other energy production facilities) and that have been the subject of recent past ecological investigations.  The applicant may use descriptive field information gathered during previous environmental reviews to contribute to the description of the current condition of terrestrial resources, as long as the information is updated and augmented as necessary with current field investigation data.  The updated data collection should address habitats lost and created by development of existing facilities (e.g., early successional upland habitats created by prior establishment of borrow and laydown areas, shoreline habitats that develop after the creation of cooling reservoirs) and ongoing natural processes that have taken place since collection of the earlier data. In general, the detail needed for license renewal is expected to be less than what is needed for new reactors.  Not only does license renewal typically involve less extensive modifications to the terrestrial environment, the ecological conditions on renewal sites are more likely to have been previously characterized.
This does not imply that these activities are always incompatible with the well-being of natural systems. Experience has shown that good manage ment often permits the coexistence of desired ecological systems with various human enterprises.


Rev. 2 of RG 4.11, Page 6 Because baseline investigations form the foundation for subsequent analyses and monitoring, applicants should initiate them as early as possible and ensure that they are broad enough to support anticipated subsequent studies. Applicants performing terrestrial baseline investigations should seek input from interested Federal, State, Tribal, local, and private organizations when initially designing the investigations. Some baseline investigations commonly useful for NRC-licensed activities include the following:
Site Selection The results of site selection surveys are useful in identifying potential impacts of station siting, con struction, and operation on terrestrial ecological systems and permit evaluation of alternatives that could reduce adverse effects. In this guide, the sug gested site selection procedures'
are limited to ter restrial environmental considerations.


a. terrestrial habitat identification, b. terrestrial habitat mapping, c. terrestrial habitat description, d. flora studies, e. fauna studies, f. wetland delineations, g. wetland functional assessments, and h. identification of important species and habitats.
Site selection surveys may be descriptive in nature. In describing biota, emphasis is generally placed on ecologically significant, groupings of organisms and management of resources rather than on ecological detail. It is important, however, that the investiga tions rapidly focus on matters of special sensitivity, rather than retaining a broad and diffuse approach.


Applicants can prepare terrestrial baseline studies as stand-alone reports or present them initially within an environmental report (see RG 4.2) or other broadly scoped environmental document.  Applicants can combine closely related baseline studies into single reports (e.g., presenting terrestrial habitat identification, mapping, and description logically in a single report) and prepare flora and fauna survey reports separately, together, or combined with a terrestrial habitat survey report and map.  Wetland delineations and functional assessments are commonly prepared as stand-alone reports.
Site selection surveys can be conducted in two phases: regional land-use analysis and local land-use analysis.


Applicants may be able to draw upon existing scientific literature to obtain some of the necessary baseline data. Terrestrial ecological baseline studies may have already been prepared to support other projects on or near the site. Websites, databases, or other information sources maintained by Federal, state, or local agencies or conservation organizations may also contain useful data. Applicants would have to use professional judgment to evaluate the applicability or possible obsolescence of the data.
Regional land-use analysis is used in con junction with engineering surveys to select candidate areas for the nuclear station. Local land-use analysis is directed to candidate sites and is used in conjunc tion with engineering considerations to select a preferred site. Site selection surveys of terrestrial ecology are coordinated with preliminary engineering studies. The information needed could be obtained from such sources as aerial photographs, topographic maps, reconnaissance, literature, and regional or local zoning and planning data. Site selection surveys are performed with. the objective of providing data for resource analysis, rather than for detailed func tional analysis of ecosystems.


Terrestrial Habitat Identification Terrestrial habitats should be identified on the proposed site and adjoining property, as well as along any new or existing transmission line corridors affected by the proposed action.  The area of potential effects can extend beyond the proposed limits of ground disturbance to encompass habitats potentially affected by surface water drawdown or groundwater depletion, spoils disposal noise, runoff, dust deposition, cooling tower drift, and other activities.
'See also Regulatory Guide 4.7, "General Site Suitability Criteria for Nuclear Power Stations." Terrestrial criteria at the regional level that are needed in the selection of candidate areas include the extent of prime and unique farmland 2 in the region and the alternatives available for siting on land of lower utility; the occurrence and extent of critical wildlife habitat' in the region and alternatives to its use; and the extent of valuable forests, prairies, wetlands, and deserts in the region and alternatives to their use. Also needed is information on the current status of land-use and zoning plans within the region.  This may be done through the use of maps, aerial photographs, and tabulations within the region.  Identification of major categories such as agricultural land, forest land, urban areas, parklands, highways, and airports is useful.The selection process examines reasonable oppor tunities for using sites that have minimal impact on the diversity of regional land use, present and future.  Preservation of a range of options for land use is im portant for the consideration of biologically rare or unique areas. A unique or critical wildlife habitat may be undesirable for a site since to use it could foreclose opportunities for propagation of wildlife, scientific study, natural history study, recreation, and public enjoyment of wildlife.


Although environmental documents have traditionally designated terrestrial habitats using broad vegetation-based terms such as "forest," "scrub," "thicket," "field," "open land," "marsh," and "swamp," nomenclature systems with more precisely defined terms are available as discussed below.  Applicants should inquire with Federal and State regulatory agencies whether they recommend use of a specific identification system.  Newer systems and updated versions of current systems may be developed or updated over time.
Federal, State, regional, and local planning authorities are logical sources to be consulted to determine the existence and location of areas within the region that have been dedicated to the public in terest or areas in which siting would be in conflict with preexisting zoning'plans.


The USGS attempted to standardize the nomenclature for land cover, and hence terrestrial habitat, in the 1970s (Ref. 13).  Its system comprises a broad "Level I" series of land cover classes resolvable from satellite imagery, followed by tiered Level II, III, and IV classes resolvable from progressively more detailed aerial photography.  The Nature Conservancy (TNC) later developed the U.S. National Vegetation Classification (USNVC) system (Ref. 14).  The highest tier "class" distinguishes broad features such as forest and shrubland.  The next tier "subclass" distinguishes gross vegetation differences such as deciduous versus evergreen forest.  Lower tiers provide increasing specificity.  The lowest (most Rev. 2 of RG 4.11, Page 7 detailed but least commonly used) levels of the USNVC system, the alliance and association, rely on indicator species.  Indicator species characterize a habitat because they are dominant or otherwise distinguish the vegetation.  Separate from the USNVC system, the U.S. Forest Service has developed standardized designations for forest cover using indicator species (Ref. 15).  However, the U.S. Forest Service system is useful only in describing forested habitats.
Examples of such areas include dedicated parks and forests; productive farmland;
places where specialty crops are produced;
unique but as yet undedicated forests and wildlife habitats;
scenic areas; wetlands;
and unique mineralogical, paeleontological, or geological areas.  More specific land-use classes are needed in the local surveys than in the regional surveys, but they should be based on information obtained by recon naissance rather than detailed biological inventory.


Perhaps the most broadly available uniform source for terrestrial land cover data geared specifically to ecological management is the national landcover map produced as part of the Gap Analysis Program (GAP) administered by the USGS (Ref. 16).  The GAP strives to identify wildlife species and plant communities that are not adequately protected by conservation programs.  As with the earlier USGS approach to land cover, the GAP national landcover map provides three levels of detail.  As of 2010,
Land-use categories may include farms; fields; secon dary successional areas (indicating dominant species);
Level 1 contained eight classes based on generalized vegetation physiognomy (e.g., grassland, shrubland, and forest).  Level 2 contained 43 classes distinguishing broad vegetation differences, such as deciduous versus evergreen forest.  Level 3 contained 590 classes.
forests; and residential, industrial, and com mercial areas. If aerial photographs are used for local land-use analysis, it is important that their scale is sufficient to present views of the candidate sites and their immediate environs.


Some States have also developed terrestrial habit/resource classification systems.  For example, Florida developed a tailored version of the USGS system called the Florida Land Use, Cover, and Forms Classification System (Ref. 17).  Other States, such as Maryland, have tailored the USNVC system to regional conditions (Ref. 18). 
Soil association data for each site being considered should be supplied.
The degree of habitat resolution within the geographic area of interest will vary among the different land cover and land use systems.  Thus, applicants should select the tool or combination of tools that provides habitat resolution adequate to identify habitat impacts and to quantify impacts where necessary.  The applicant should contact the regional Corps district office to ascertain recommended tools for identifying and quantifying impacts to wetlands.


Terrestrial Habitat Mapping Habitats can be mapped using USGS Level I and II classes, USNVC system classes and subclasses, or equivalents using only aerial photography or aerial photography with limited site reconnaissance.  More detailed field observation is usually needed to use USGS Level III or IV classes, USNVC system floristic alliances or associations, or indicator species.  Map detail should generally be greater for the proposed footprint of ground disturbance than for peripheral areas.  The applicant  should adjust the level of detail to meet the anticipated complexity of impact assessment and to address the concerns of various interested agencies and organizations. Table 1 provides an example of how terrestrial habitats might be mapped for a new reactor licensing project under 10 CFR Part 52.
Soil Conservation Service offices :The terms unique and prime farmland, as used in this guide, are discussed in "Land Inventory and Monitoring Memorandum-3," Soil Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture, October 15, 1975.  'The terms critical habitat and endangered species, as used in this guide, are defined in the "Endangered Species Act of 1973" (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543, 87 Stat. 884).4.11-3 I
are usually able to supply sufficient information.


Table 1.  Example Approach to Habitat Mapping for a New Reactor Project AREA OF COVERAGE EXAMPLE LEVEL OF DETAIL  FOR TERRESTRIAL HABITAT MAPPING Areas subject to land clearing or grading on, or in the vicinity of, the proposed site plus a reasonable buffer tailored to site conditions GAP Level 3, USNVCS alliance, or equivalent or use of indicator species; based on satellite imagery, aerial photographs, and detailed field investigation Areas subject to land clearing or grading on a transmission line right-of-way (or other offsite rights-of-way) plus a reasonable buffer GAP Level 3, USNVCS alliance, or equivalent or use of indicator species; based on satellite imagery, aerial photographs, and detailed field investigation Areas not subject to land clearing GAP Level 2, USNVCS subclass, or equivalent; based on satellite Rev. 2 of RG 4.11, Page 8 or grading or within the associated buffer but subject to other types of impacts such as noise or atmospheric deposition imagery, aerial photographs, and reconnaissance-level field investigation Areas not subject to impact but for which information is needed to understand the spatial context of impacted areas GAP Level 2, USNVCS subclass, or equivalent; based on satellite imagery, aerial photographs, and reconnaissance-level field investigation Boundaries between adjoining terrestrial habitats can usually be traced from vertical aerial photographs or satellite imagery.  Aerial photography flown during leaf-off seasons (usually winter) is superior because it differentiates deciduous from evergreen forest, woodland, and shrubland subclasses.
In formation may be furnished as a soil association map that is keyed to a table of descriptive information which includes a listing of soil management capabilities.


Leaf-off color infrared aerial photography can be used to differentiate fine twig and foliar differences between tree species (e.g., to distinguish bald cypress (Taxodium distichum) from pines (Pinus spp.)).  Table 2 presents suggested ideal and minimal conditions for imagery used to delineate terrestrial habitats.  The ability to acquire better remote sensing imagery at reasonable cost and effort will likely continue to improve with technological advances.
The selection of a cooling method for the proposed plant is an important consideration in site selection.


Remote-sensing imagery should always be representative of current habitat conditions and thus should be confirmed by data as necessary.
Cooling reservoirs may require loss of land, which may be unacceptable compared to the uges of cooling towers in some regions. However, cooling towers could be objectionable in scenic areas where a cooling lake could be an asset. Visible plumes from cooling towers could be more objectionable environmentally at some sites than at others because of ground fogs or icing. Table 2 is an example matrix that could be used in balancing the above factors.


Table 2.  Suggested Remote Sensing Imagery Characteristics for Habitat Mapping PARAMETER RECOMMENDED IF POSSIBLE RECOMMENDED IF BETTER  IMAGERY NOT AVAILABLE Age Previous 5 years Previous 20 years but interpret with extreme care Scale 1:6,000 or better 1:24,000 Orientation Vertical, georeferenced Vertical, georeferenced Color Leaf off, color infrared Leaf off, color or black and white Habitat maps should be scaled and created from georeferenced geographic information system layers. Maps should include a title, date, revision number, north arrow, graphic scale bar, and legend identifying each habitat type and other mapping features. Maps should show features such as existing topography, roads, streams, and buildings as necessary to provide general spatial orientation.
TABLE 2 FACTORS CONSIDERED
IN THE SELECTION
OF SITES AND COOLING METHODS Environmental Once-Through Variable Cooling Cooling Lake Cooling Spray Tower Canals Table 3 is an example matrix that could be used in weighing and balancing alternative sites. Site selec tion is dependent on a wide range of factors other than those relating to terrestrial ecology. In some cases, the weighing and balancing of all factors may result in a selection that is less than optimum by ter restrial ecological criteria.


Terrestrial Habitat Description Most terrestrial habitats are best described by vegetative strata, which are groupings of plants at the same general height.  Various definitions are available for vegetative strata. The following set was originally developed for wetland delineation (Refs. 19 and 20), but it can used to describe most natural vegetation: 
In these cases, the need for subsequent monitoring programs may be greater than in the case of more nearly optimum choices.


* Tree canopy includes woody plants over 20 feet (6.1 meters) tall and 5 inches (0.13 meter) in diameter at breast height.
However, the candidate sites should not be located in critical, unique, or highly valuable habitat areas if it can be avoided.


* Subcanopy (sapling stratum) includes woody plants over 20 feet tall (6.1 meters) and under 5 inches (0.13 meter) in diameter at breast height.
The goal of the regional and local land-use surveys is the selection of a preferred site the use of which has minimal environmental impact and does not conflict with other societal uses. Any site selected, of course, will result in the loss of some habitat and its as sociated residents.


* Shrub stratum includes woody plants over 3 feet (1 meter) and under 20 feet (6.1 meters) tall.
This loss is assessed through an in ventory of species present. Societal uses are balanced by consultation with planning bodies and by reference to pertinent statutes and regulations.


* Groundcover includes woody and nonwoody plants (i.e., forbs, grasses, grasslike plants, ferns, and bryophytes) under 3 feet (1 meter) tall.
TABLE 3 Farmland Woodland Wasteland Coastland Wetland Special Wildlife Habitats Preserves and Parks Esthetic Impacts For the local studies, it is important to establish whether there are obvious differences among sites with respect to endangered species, game animals, or other impQrtant species or habitats.


* Woody vine stratum includes woody vines supported by trees, saplings, and shrubs.
The assessment for each site should include consideration of the areas of preferred habitat of important species (see Section 2.2 of Regulatory Guide 4.2) that would be adversely affected.


Descriptions should identify dominant (the most prevalent) plant species in each stratum.  Commonly used dominance metrics include percent cover (for any stratum), basal area (for trees), stem Rev. 2 of RG 4.11, Page 9 count (for subcanopy, shrub, or woody vine strata), or fresh or dry weight (for groundcover) (Ref. 21).  Traditional application of these metrics entails the use of quantitative field methods, which are the most accurate means of distinguishing dominant species.  However, experienced biologists might be able to identify the dominant species more readily through visual estimation.  For example, a tree species might be visually estimated to have the greatest canopy cover or basal area without actual collection of such measurements.  In most instances, visual estimation of dominant species within vegetation strata is sufficient for the purpose of habitat description.
Information required for transmission corridors is similar in nature to that for candidate site selection.


Descriptive detail should generally be greater for the footprint of potential impacts on, and in the vicinity of, the proposed site and along affected new or existing transmission lines than for the surrounding areas.  Other descriptive information may be useful when describing terrestrial habitats, including the following:
4 Detailed corridor routes will not be known at this stage. Nevertheless, consideration needs to be given to probable corridor length, natural barriers, impact on land use, opportunities for combining new trans mission lines with preexisting routes, and esthetic ef fects in the selection of candidate sites.  'The Commission has under review a petition for rulemaking filed on September
15, 1975, requesting that the Commission amend its regulations to clarify the extent of the Commission's regulatory authority over the construction and routing of transmission lines, and to clarify the extent to which the environmental impact of such lines and equipment must be considered in the environmental im pact of the licensing of a particular nuclear facilit


* Presence of invasive species.  Executive Order 13112, "Invasive Species," dated February 3, 1999 (Ref. 22), defines invasive plant species as alien species whose introduction does, or is likely to, cause economic or environmental harm or harm to human health.  Invasive plant species include, but are not limited to, species on Federal or State noxious weed lists.  Information may be available from the USDA cooperative extension service local or regional offices and relevant departments of the State's associated land-grant university.
====y. Factor SELECTION ====
OF SITES: TERRESTRIAL
FACTORS6 Site A Site B SiteC Land Use Farmland Woodland Wildlife Habitat Unique or Rare Habitats Area of Site Transmission Corridors Terrestrial Ecology Important Species Present Endangered and Threatened Species Present Baseline Studies Baseline studies of the preferred site, including transmission corridors, are needed to fully describe the site and to establish a basis for predicting the im pact of construction or operation.


* Disease vectors, pests, or nuisance species.  Examples include chestnut blight fungus (Cryphonectria parasitica), Dutch elm disease fungus (Ophiostoma ulmi) carried by the American elm bark beetle (Hylurgopinus rufipes), and emerald ash borer (Agrilus planipennis).
Baseline studies may be used for comparison with later construction or operational studies as well as during decommis sioning of the station.
* Landscape biogeography information.  A habitat description should indicate whether the habitat serves as a wildlife travel corridor.  Examples include forested stream valleys traversing agricultural landscapes and linear threads of naturally vegetated land traversing urban landscapes.  Similarly, the habitat might serve as an "oasis" or "stepping stone" facilitating wildlife movement across a landscape.  Examples include forested woodlots in agricultural settings and parklands in urban settings.


* Existing natural and human-induced effects.  Past or ongoing natural and human processes have altered most terrestrial habitats.  Examples of natural processes include wildfires, flooding, and wildlife grazing.  Examples of human-induced processes include agriculture and timber management, livestock grazing, and the dumping of solid waste.
Biological studies of the proposed site are made in advance of station construction or operation.


* Recent or ongoing ecological or biological studies or management.  The description for a terrestrial habitat should note whether the habitat is the site of ecological investigations or management actions. If so, impacts to the habitat could simultaneously affect the studies or programs.
The 'Units should be quantitative whenever appropriate:
however, judgmental entries are acceptable if needed.4.11-4 qualitative notations of plant and animal abundance included in the baseline inventory are normally suf ficient. Quantitative measurement of population den sity is not usually needed as part of the species inven tory unless qualified professional judgment based on -' field study leads to a reasonable conclusion that one or more populations of important species could be adversely affected by station construction or opera tion. This judgment should be based on examination of each species using the criteria cited here and on professional biological interpretation.


Flora and Fauna Surveys Tabular lists of observed plant and wildlife species greatly enhance habitat descriptions.  The majority of plant and wildlife species in the area of potential impacts should be identified.  Therefore, field surveys are best conducted when flora and fauna are most readily detected and identified.  For example, in temperate regions of the United States, plants generally flower in the spring, summer, or fall; therefore, flora surveys are best conducted in each of these seasons.  Birds may be resident or migratory or both at various times during the year, so fauna surveys addressing birds are best conducted in each of the four seasons.  Amphibians and reptiles are generally active from spring through fall; however, Rev. 2 of RG 4.11, Page 10 amphibians are most detectable by their calls in spring during the reproductive period.  Thus, amphibian and reptile surveys are best conducted in the spring, and supplementary surveys may be conducted as necessary in the summer or the fall.  Mammals are generally active from spring through fall, so surveys addressing mammals should be conducted during one or more of these seasons.  Investigations for subtropical sites may be enhanced by supplemental winter surveys for plants and wildlife.
Considera tions include the biological reason for importance and the link between the nuclear station and the organism.


Applicants should be generally familiar with the species that could potentially occur in the areas where they will conduct flora and fauna surveys. Thus, applicants should review any existing botanical and wildlife data for the survey area or nearby areas with similar habitats.  Applicants should contact Federal, State, Tribal, local, and private organizations to acquire such data. These data may identify wildlife and plant species that could potentially inhabit the subject areas and may help the applicant identify suitable survey methods.  The agencies may also direct the applicant to survey for specific listed species and other species of regional interest and may provide recommended survey timings and protocols specific to such species.  For certain species, the agencies may request that uniquely qualified specialists conduct the surveys.  Examples of potentially useful sources of information include the following:
The species considered important are those that meet the definition in Regulatory Guide 4.2 and that are linked adversely to the station in some reasonable way. These may require further quan titative effort in the baseline studies and in the con struction and operational monitoring surveys.
a. conservation plans that FWS or State wildlife agencies may have prepared for privately owned tracts; b. detailed botanical and wildlife inventories that TNC may have conducted on public and private lands; c. conservation plans NRCS may have prepared for agricultural properties;
d. surveys conducted at nearby public facilities such as parks, national or State forests or wildlife refuges, and institutional properties containing similar habitat types as the area to be surveyed;
e. regional biological surveys, such as the Christmas Bird Count and Breeding Bird Survey, and State game data; and f. field guides with range maps indicating species that could potentially occur in a geographic area.


Existing botanical and wildlife inventory data collected from the survey area may serve as a partial substitute for new field surveys in areas where the habitat has not changed substantially.  Existing survey data that reflect current conditions should be updated and augmented through limited field surveys (i.e., a lesser level of effort than that for surveys of areas with no existing botanical and wildlife data) and may be used to plan such limited surveys. When using existing data, the applicant should consider the spatial extent, purpose, and techniques of the original data collection. Consideration of these factors may identify certain locations and groups of plants and animals that were omitted during the original data collection effort and that should be surveyed.  Existing site-specific botanical and wildlife data that no longer reflect current conditions (e.g., a habitat has substantially changed) and areas without existing data will require reconnaissance surveys for planning purposes, followed by detailed field surveys (i.e., a greater level of effort than that for surveys of areas with applicable existing botanical and wildlife data).
It is important that judgment be exercised in selecting the time for initiating quantitative popula tion studies if they are needed. Where construction effects are anticipated, quantitative studies should begin in the baseline phase. Where an effect of station operation is expected, it would be best to defer quan titative studies until some time prior to operation to ensure reasonable compatibility with the operational studies. It will usually be adequate to bracket the period of anticipated impact within I or 2 years of prior studies and an appropriate term of following studies that would be determined in consultation with the staff.  Properly designed studies will avoid placing undue emphasis on certain easily accessible groups of organisms.
Flora surveys should include well-defined survey routes in all potentially affected plant communities and habitats.  Survey routes should be spaced so that plant communities and their vegetation strata are thoroughly (although not necessarily exhaustively) covered, including any substantial microenvironments.  The spacing of survey routes will depend on the density of vegetation and topography because these factors affect visibility.  Botanical surveys should list, but do not need to enumerate, individuals of common species; however, they should include numbers or estimates of numbers, where feasible, of rare species.  Applicants should list each observed species in a table.  For each species, the table (at a minimum) should provide the scientific name, common name, habitat(s) and vegetative strata where observed, and observation date.  The table should also include a verbal description of abundance.  The text should explain the data collection methods used.  A graphic should show survey routes or transects overlaid on a map or sketch of the investigated habitats.


Rev. 2 of RG 4.11, Page 11 Fauna surveys should employ standard techniques suitable for the detection and identification of the category of wildlife (i.e., mammals, birds, amphibians, and reptiles) and any life stages of interest.  Wildlife surveys should also note the presence of any insects or other invertebrates of interest.  Survey methods should readily permit the detection and identification of species preferably by sight first, then by calls, and followed by other signs (e.g., tracks, scat and guano, nests, feathers, skulls, eggs, burrows, food caches, and scratches or drags on the soil surface) that permit positive identification of the species.  Wildlife survey sample locations (e.g., stations, transects, and points) should be spaced such that most of the wildlife species are identified.  Spring and fall surveys are best timed to coincide as closely as possible with peak bird migration or amphibian calling periods.  Wildlife surveys are best conducted during the time of day that maximizes the detection and identification of species (e.g., early morning for breeding birds and dusk and nighttime for breeding amphibians and bats).  Wildlife surveys should list, but do not need to enumerate, individuals of common species; however, they should include numbers or estimates of numbers, where feasible, of rare species.  Applicants should list each observed species in a table.  For each species, the table should (at a minimum) provide the scientific name, common name, habitat(s) where observed, date(s) observed, sex and age class, sign observed, and qualitative notes on abundance.
Most species of insects, for example, are ecologically important in local food webs. However, species that cannot reasonably be judged threatened by the nuclear station or that are not likely to become of economic or public health significance because of station construction or operation need not be studied quantitatively beyond the initial inventories.


Other field observations useful in evaluating the suitability of terrestrial habitats for wildlife include the following:
Rodents are also ecologically important food web organisms.
a. wildlife food sources such as hard mast (nuts), soft mast (berries and other soft fruits), grain and small seeds, and foliage (browse);
b. standing dead trees (snags) with and without cavities;
c. downed dead trees, limbs, and other woody debris;
d. trees with exfoliating (flaking or peeling) bark (favored by certain bats and small birds);
e. the presence of trees near shorelines (favored by bald eagles and water birds); and f. small ground depressions that can trap rainwater (favored by many amphibians).  


Wetland Delineation Wetlands are a special habitat category that provide unique hydrological and ecological functions and receive special regulatory protection.  In 33 CFR Part 328, "Definition of Waters of the United States" (Ref. 23), the Corps defines wetlands as "areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions."
However, quantitative population measurements are not needed as long as there is no reason to believe that station construction or operation will have an ef fiect on their populations beyond that caused by the loss of habitat.
Section 404 of the CWA authorizes the Corps to issue permits for work in "waters of the United States," a term that includes many but not all wetlands.  Michigan and New Jersey have been delegated partial responsibility for administering Section 404, although the Corps retains oversight.  Some other States have implemented State wetland regulations that complement Section 404.  Some States protect certain categories of wetlands, such as tidal wetlands (e.g., most coastal states) or wetlands exceeding specified size or quality thresholds (e.g., New York).  The NRC does not directly regulate wetlands or issue permits for wetland impacts, but it does consider impacts to jurisdictional and nonjurisdictional wetlands when making licensing decisions.


Wetland delineation is the process of identifying and mapping wetlands. The Corps presently requires CWA Section 404 permit applicants to conduct onsite wetland delineations using the following guidance documents:
Certain station sites and designs have required special environmental assessment effort. These in clude sites with large cooling lakes or reservoirs and plants having cooling towers, particularly if the water source is seawater or brackish water. These are dis cussed in n;ore detail in the following sections.
a. Technical Report Y-87-1, "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual," issued January 1987 (commonly referred to as the "1987 Manual") (Ref. 24); 
Rev. 2 of RG 4.11, Page 12 b. "Clarification and Interpretation of the 1987 Manual," dated March 6, 1992, (Ref. 19); and c. "Use of NRCS Field Indicators of Hydric Soils," dated March 21, 1997 (Ref. 25).
The Corps is also developing regional supplements to the 1987 Manual that provide guidance for individual physiographic regions.  Wetland delineators should confer with the Corps and any State wetland regulatory agencies to determine which, if any, regional supplement or other updated guidance to the 1987 Manual should be followed. Wetland delineation reports should include a map showing delineated wetland boundaries and the locations of data points or transects used for collecting field data.  The map should label wetlands using nomenclature such as that of FWS (Ref. 26).  Wetland delineations should be completed as soon as practicable on sites proposed for new ground disturbance.


Wetland Functional Assessment Multiple techniques, called "functional assessment methods," are available for use in assessing the ecological and hydrological roles that individual wetlands play.  The NRC does not require or endorse the use of any specific procedure, but applications should include an analysis of the functions and values of wetlands affected by licensed activities.
It is important that the baseline studies of power stations having proposed man-made cooling lakes consider physical and chemical relationships between the watershed and lake; use of a new habitat by birds, insects, and other animals of both beneficial and adverse aspects; and the potential for successful rehabilitation of the lake basin if the station is decommissioned.


Functional assessment methodologies can be descriptive or semiquantitative.  The oldest Federal technique, called the Wetland Evaluation Technique (Ref. 27), uses the responses to a questionnaire to predict whether a wetland may provide specific functions and values.  Functions are physical, chemical, or biological activities that directly benefit society or the environment.  Values are indirect social benefits such as aesthetic qualities or availability for recreation.  The New England District of the Corps developed a structured approach, called the Highway Methodology (Ref. 28), for a descriptive functional assessment.  Descriptive methodologies provide good information when performed by an experienced professional.  Specific values and functions considered by the Highway Methodology include the following:
Both beneficial and adverse effects of the lake on the environment should be considered.


a. groundwater recharge and discharge (function);
Water quality of the artificial lake may be in fluenced not only by source water quality but also by relationships with soils and the surrounding land scape. Development of a watershed management plan is needed as well as an estimate of the amount of runoff of dissolved substances and soil into the lake from the surrounding landscape.
b. floodflow alteration (function);
c. fish and shellfish habitat (function);
d. sediment, toxicant, and pathogen retention (function);
e. nutrient removal, retention, and transformation (function);
f. production export (function);
g. sediment and shoreline stabilization (function);
h. wildlife habitat (function);
i. recreation (value);
j. education and scientific value (value);
k. uniqueness and heritage (value);
l. visual quality and aesthetics (value); and m. threatened or endangered species habitat (value).
Several semiquantitative functional assessment methods involve the calculation of scores based on geographic, physical, and biological properties.  Some methods, such as the Corps' Hydrogeomorphic Approach (Ref. 29), compare scores against corresponding "reference" wetlands.  Other methods, such as the Florida Uniform Mitigation Assessment Method (Chapter 62-345 of the Florida Administrative Code) (Ref. 30), generate scores based on observed conditions.


The NRC encourages best professional judgment when selecting a functional assessment methodology.  Environmental Concern, Inc., has summarized 40 separate functional assessment methodologies (Ref. 31).  When selecting a methodology, applicants should consider regional suitability Rev. 2 of RG 4.11, Page 13 and ease of use.  The NRC also encourages informal consultation with State agencies and Corps districts to help identify the best methodology.
A new reservoir forms a new habitat for plants and animals and results in a loss of existing habitat.


Summary of Common Useful Terrestrial Environmental Baseline Data Table 3 summarizes some of the types of terrestrial baseline environmental data that are commonly helpful in supporting NRC licensing actions. The table provides separate information for new reactor licensing, relicensing of existing reactors, and decommissioning and covers applications for limited work authorizations. The text discusses the data in more detail.
Waterfowl may be attracted in substantial numbers during their normal migration, and their migration habits may be altered, e.g., by overwintering in a northern climate on a warm-water lake. Waterfowl attracted to a lake may cause economic loss to agriculture by their feeding activities, degradation of water quality, and other adverse effects. In addition, the birds themselves may suffer adversely from such effects as disruption of migrational patterns.


Rev. 2 of RG 4.11, Page 14 Table 3.  Types of Terrestrial Environmental Baseline Data and Utility  for Reactor Licensing, Relicensing, and Decommissioning DATA TYPE DATA UTILITY LICENSING OPERATING LICENSE RENEWAL DECOMMISSIONING Land cover and land use data (various scales and sources)
These and other factors need to be discussed.
* Site selection
* Habitat impacts at the proposed site  Habitat impacts from refurbishment and operation Habitat impacts in and outside operational areas due to large component removal and material storage Reconnaissance-level data on species and habitats
* Site selection


* Impacts to species and habitats at the proposed site  Impacts to species and habitats from refurbishment and operation Impacts to species and habitats in and outside operational areas due to large component removal and material storage Old habitat, botanical, and wildlife data collected previously in support of the licensing of existing facilities at the proposed site (i.e., use professional judgment to evaluate the utility of possibly obsolete data)
Evaporative cooling towers affect ecosystems by deposition of drift containing dissolved minerals on the landscape or by production of fog. Drift may be beneficial or adverse depending on the chemical com pounds and elements being deposited and the amounts of deposition.
* Possible partial substitute for field surveys at the proposed site if the accuracy of old data is verified in the field


* The planning of vegetation and wildlife surveys to augment old data at the proposed site  
The baseline program is designed to evaluate the potential effects of drift and to establish reference measurements for comparison with later operational monitoring observations by determining the amounts and kinds of airborne chemicals being deposited on the site prior to cooling tower operation.


* New and old data used to analyze impacts to habitats, vegetation, and wildlife  Impacts to habitats, vegetation, and wildlife from refurbishment and operation Impacts to habitats, vegetation, and wildlife in and outside operational areas due to large component removal and material storage Current habitat, botanical, and wildlife data collected in onsite field investigations Impacts to habitats, vegetation, and wildlife  Impacts to habitats, vegetation, and wildlife Impacts to habitats, vegetation, and wildlife Site-specific Federally and State-listed species occurrence data from current field investigations Impacts to Federally and State-listed species  Impacts to habitats, vegetation, and wildlife Impacts to habitats, vegetation, and wildlife Wetland delineation and functional assessment Impacts to wetlands; completion of the CWA Section 404 application Not usually needed unless new wetland impacts are anticipated Not usually needed unless decommissioning activities proposed for naturally vegetated areas are outside of the former operations area Locations of bald and golden eagle nests and roosting and foraging areas Impacts to these species at the proposed site  Impacts to these species from refurbishment and operation Impacts to these species in and outside operational areas due to noise and human activity associated with large component removal Rev. 2 of RG 4.11, Page 15 Identifying Important Species and Habitats Terrestrial environmental impact analyses for the NRC generally emphasize species and habitats meeting one or more importance criteria established by the agency (Ref 32).  The criteria have been commonly used to address terrestrial and aquatic ecology impacts in NRC environmental documentation since the 1970s. Baseline data and natural resource agency consultations should form the basis for identifying specific important species and habitats.  The following are criteria used by NRC at this time to identify important species and habitats:
Acceptable data could be obtained from existing sources of information or from monthly sampling of collectors that collect both dry and wet fallout. If a monitoring program is used, it is normally continued for at least 1 year. Table 4 sug gests chemicals that are usually considered in plan ning the program.


* Federally listed threatened or endangered species and designated critical habitat under the Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) (Ref. 33).  Although 50 CFR Part 17, "Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants" (Ref. 34), undergoes periodic updates to present each officially listed species, the NRC encourages informal consultation with the agencies responsible for administration of the ESA.  For most terrestrial species, that agency is FWS. Note: For some analyses, it may be necessary to distinguish between species and habitats on Federal land and those on non-Federal land.
Drift from saltwater or brackish-water cooling towers contains NaCI and other salts. The baseline chemical measurements establish the Na and C I con tent of soils and plants in the expected drift field of cooling towers that use seawater or brackish water. Baseline soil measurements normally include the con ductivity of saturated extracts and pH of samples ob tained from the expected drift field.  If the drift from either freshwater or saltwater towers is likely to contain toxic substances, their con centrations are measured unless it is clear that the amounts and concentrations are sufficiently low to 4.11-5 TABLE 4 ELEMENTS AND COMPOUNDS
OF POSSIBLE CONCERN IN CHEMICAL MONITORING
PROGRAMS FOR TERRESTRIAL
SYSTEMS Group Macronutrient Micronutrient Chemicals commonly found in environ ment, some required by animals Toxic Biocides added to.  cooling waters Chemical Substances
+ -.3 .2 NH 4 , NO ,PO 4 SO 4 , Ca, Mg, K Cu,Zn,B,Mo,V,Mn,Fe-I -2 Na.C,F,HCO ,CO 3 ,Co,I Pb,Hg,Cd,Cr,As,Ni All Relative Biological Hazard Minor or no risk except in extremely large quantities.


* Species that are proposed or are candidates for Federal listing as threatened or endangered and a habitat that is proposed for designation as critical habitat.  As for listed threatened or endangered species, informal consultation with the FWS is the best source of information. Note: For some analyses, it may be necessary to distinguish between proposed species and habitats on Federal land and those on non-Federal land.
No hazards within the range of concentrations found in nature. Toxicity possible if concentrations are moderate.


* State-listed threatened or endangered species and species otherwise considered rare in the State (in contrast to species that are widespread, abundant, and secure). As for Federally listed species, informal consultation with State agencies is the preferred basis.  State natural heritage programs may provide a listing of Federally listed species and State-listed and rare species that occur within specified buffers of a proposed site and transmission line corridors.  The use of databases is encouraged, but direct communication with State regulators is still preferred.  Impacts from facilities near State borders can extend to neighboring states; consultation with both affected States is encouraged.  For sites near the Canadian or Mexican borders, consultation with appropriate foreign agencies may be appropriate.
Minor risk at ordinary concen tration. Risk from halogens dependent on chemical form.  Carbonates usually innocuous.


* Bald eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and golden eagles (Aquila chrysaetos) regulated under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940 (Ref. 35).  Locations of bald and golden eagle nests and roosting and foraging areas are sometimes available from State wildlife agency nongame departments.
Sodium salts have high-risk osmotic effects on plants at high concentration.


* Recreationally valuable species.  Game species used for hunting are the obvious examples of important species under this criterion. Informal conversation with State game officials could identify species used for consumptive and nonconsumptive recreational uses.  Increasingly, many areas, especially along coasts and bird migration routes, have derived substantial commercial benefits from recreational bird watchers.  The inclusion of at least one bird species valued by bird watchers may be appropriate.
Presumed high biological risk at all concentrations above those normally found in nature.  Presumed high biological risk if present in cooling-tower drift.(I (i preclude both short-term and cumulative adverse ef fects. Adverse biological effects can usually be ruled out with reasonable certainty for most elements and compounds found in nature when the expected addi tions combined with preexisting levels would not raise the concentration of the toxic substance outside the range of variation normally found in the biota or soils of the region.  Chemical analyses of soils, plants, and animals in the drift field of freshwater cooling towers are not usually needed when all of the following apply: (1) the dominant salts are harmless mixtures of biological nutrients as shown in Table 4, (2) the ex pected peak deposition beyond the site boundary is less than 20 kg/ha-yr (no more than 50% in any 30 day period during the growing season) of mixed salts, 6 and (3) the drift does not contain toxic ele ments or compounds in amounts that could be hazar dous to plants or animals either by direct or indirect exposure over the expected lifetime of the facility.


* Species essential to the maintenance and survival of species that are rare and recreationally valuable, as identified in the above bullets.  Information may be available in scientific literature and from relevant Federal and State agencies.  Consideration of habitat requirements and food web relationships is necessary.  For example, the Federally endangered red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis) depends on large longleaf pine (Pinus palustris) trees where it can build nest Rev. 2 of RG 4.11, Page 16 cavities.  The Federally endangered Kirtland's warbler (Dendroica kirtlandii) depends on jack pine (Pinus banksiana) stands for habitat.  Many shorebirds valued by bird watchers on the mid-Atlantic coast depend on horseshoe crab (Limulus polyphemus) eggs for food.
Usually, reference specimens of soils, plants, and animals for possible future analysis are retained in cases where it is determined that drift presents a chemical hazard to the environment.


* Species that can serve as biological indicators to monitor the effects of the proposed action on the terrestrial environment.  Some species are exceptionally sensitive to impacts and can serve as indicators of otherwise inconspicuous adverse conditions.  For example, flowering dogwood (Cornus florida) and white ash (Fraxinus americana) have displayed visible injury when exposed to salt drift deposition rates substantially lower than those that produce visible symptoms in other trees (Ref. 30).  Visible injury to these species could indicate less visible effects, such as growth reduction, in other plant species.
The specimens may consist of subsamples of materials that were col lected prior to tower operation and analyzed for baseline data. Such stored samples should be ade quately protected for analytical purposes.


* National wildlife refuges, State wildlife areas, or other wildlife sanctuaries or preserves designated as such by State or Federal agencies.  Examples include national and State parks and wildlife refuges.  Although not formally designated by Federal or State agencies, lands owned by private conservation organizations, such as TNC or the National Audubon Society, might also be considered as important under this criterion.
Construction Monitoring If unavoidable construction practices cause a threat to some natural population or ecosystem that could extend beyond the bounds of the area actually dedicated to construction or associated activities, conscientious construction practice control coupled with systematic inspection is usually sufficient but sometimes biological monitoring of important species is necessary.


* Wetlands (Executive Order 11990, "Protection of Wetlands," dated May 24, 1977 (Ref. 36)) and floodplains (Executive Order 11988, "Floodplain Management," dated May 24, 1977 (Ref. 37)).  The delineation of wetlands is discussed above as a baseline investigation.  The Federal Emergency Management Agency has mapped floodplains for many rivers and streams.  Floodplains can also be mapped by independently performing hydraulic calculations based on local soils and precipitation data.
In such cases, it is reasonable that studies be designed to document the impact and develop possible corrective actions.


* Other habitats identified by State or Federal agencies as unique or rare or prioritized for protection.  The NRC recommends informally meeting with agencies such as FWS and State conservation or game agencies.  Some States have unique conservation agencies such as the water management districts in Florida, the Critical Areas Commission for the Chesapeake and Atlantic Coastal Bays in Maryland, and the New Jersey Pinelands Commission.  The NRC also recommends informally speaking with potentially interested local agencies such as county or municipal planning and zoning departments, county wetlands boards, and town conservation commissions.
Decommissioning Consideration should be given to the potential for reclamation of the plant site, impoundment basins, and transmission corridors upon decommissioning of the station (see Regulatory Guide 4.2).  Operational Monitoring Monitoring after commencement of station opera tion is intended to determine whether or not there are adverse biological effects attributable to operation.


* Invasive species (Executive Order 13112 (Ref. 22)).  Invasive plant species are alien species whose introduction does, or is likely to, cause economic or environmental harm or harm to human health. Invasive plant species include, but are not limited to, species on Federal or State noxious weed lists. Information may be available from the USDA cooperative extension service local or regional offices and relevant departments of the State's associated land-grant university.
This monitoring program is outlined in detail in the technical specifications that are issued in connection with the station operating license. The scope of these 'Interim value based on staff experience to date.studies is determined by the degree of direct linkage between the proposed station and the terrestrial ecosystem.


The baseline studies described in the text sections above should form a generally adequate basis for identifying important species and habitats.  However, it may be necessary to conduct specialized field searches to establish the presence or absence of certain important species.  FWS has established specific field protocols for investigating sites for the presence of some threatened or endangered species and specific qualifications for field surveyors.  Information on suitable methods for surveying other important species may be obtained from FWS or State agencies or from the scientific literature.  Surveys should enumerate or estimate, where feasible, numbers of individuals observed of Federally listed species, species proposed or that are candidates for Federal listing, State-listed species, and species considered rare by the State.
It is not necessary to hypothesize vague effects or to undertake a program to measure a phenomenon that has no reasonable relationship to station operation.


Rev. 2 of RG 4.11, Page 17 Terrestrial Environmental Impact Analyses Professional judgment is necessary to determine the types of terrestrial environmental impact analyses appropriate to an NRC licensing action.  In general, the level of detail needed to evaluate impacts from new reactors is expected to be  higher than that required for license renewal. Applicants should consult recent scientific literature and natural resource regulatory agencies for direction in planning impact analyses.  This guide cannot anticipate all categories of terrestrial environmental impact analyses potentially appropriate to NRC licensing actions.  However, the following general recommendations apply: 
However, when an adverse relationship between station operation and a ter restrial community is reasonably thought to exist, a thorough evaluation is necessary.


* Impact analyses should be based on the best available baseline data, whether collected specifically for the subject licensing activity or available from published sources, agency files, or communication with regional experts.
This evaluation should begin I to 2 years prior to station operation.


* Impact analyses should be clearly supported by data and logic.
Consultation with the NRC staff is recommended to determine the appropriate scope and term of any fol lowup studies.


* Impact analyses should be as quantitative as practicable.
There may be cases in which no important impact on the terrestrial ecological community is an ticipated.


* Impact analyses should use methodologies or models that are widely accepted by scientific authorities and natural resource regulatory agencies.
When such cases are adequately supported, there may be no necessity for terrestrial monitoring during operation.


* Impact analyses should avoid use of experimental or unproven methodologies, assumptions, or models.
There also may be cases in which no significant impacts are detected by the required monitoring programs.


* Impact analyses should employ the best professional judgment and avoid unsupported speculation or opinion.
In such cases, after review and approval by the staff, these programs may be eliminated.


Habitat Loss Analyses
It should be noted that some minimal effort programs may be designed for detection of long-term impacts or unanticipated changes and thus should not be- eliminated.


Clearing, grubbing, grading, inundation, and other site-preparation activities result in the loss of terrestrial habitats, including wetlands. Habitat losses can be quantified by overlaying the following:
C. REGULATORY
a. a habitat map that outlines the spatial extent of the terrestrial habitats (including wetlands), and b. a limits of disturbance plan that defines the proposed extent of ground surface and vegetation disturbance.
POSITION 1. It is important to coordinate all the programs discussed in Regulatory Guides 4.1, "Programs for Monitoring Radioactivity in the Environs of Nuclear Power Plants," and 4.2, "Preparation of En vironmental Reports for Nuclear Power Stations." Since precise predictions and assessments of impacts on terrestrial ecological systems are not always possi ble, reasonable professional interpretations should be made when quantitative prediction is impossible.


The limits of disturbance plan can be based on a formal grading plan or on a conceptual estimate of the bounds of vegetation or soil disturbance.  The most accurate basis is a drawing depicting proposed grading overlaying existing topography.  However, the outer limit of vegetation clearing may extend beyond the outer limit of grading.  Vegetation clearing may also occur off site on rights-of-way or on locations for associated activities such as the excavation of borrow or disposal of dredged material.
2. Adequate assessment of current land-use status should show (by a table, for example) major land-use categories and areas devoted to each category along with aerial photographs showing the same categories.


Distinguishing between permanent and temporary habitat losses and distinguishing among habitat losses attributable to each major project element are both important.  Impact analysis usually needs to extend beyond quantifying the acreage of habitat losses.  It should evaluate the effects of habitat losses on the distribution, movement, and reproduction of flora and fauna.
When data are not available from existing records, an acceptable means of acquiring them would be through the use of aerial photographs in conjunction with ground reconnaissance.


Wildlife Noise Impact Analyses Impact analyses should consider the possible effects of proposed short-term and long-term noise sources on terrestrial wildlife in surrounding habitats.  Noise generated by the operation of cooling towers and the use of equipment such as bulldozers, chainsaws, backhoes, trucks, and jackhammers can influence wildlife in nearby undeveloped habitats.  Noise can adversely affect wildlife physiology and behavior such as migration, feeding, reproduction, and communication.  Analyses can compare projected noise levels in wildlife habitats near project sites with species noise tolerance levels reported in the scientific Rev. 2 of RG 4.11, Page 18 literature.  Responses reported in the literature vary widely among species and are a function of sound level (measured in decibels), sound duration, and pattern and frequency of occurrence (Refs. 38, 39, and 40).  If quantitative noise data are not available in the scientific literature, qualitative evaluations may be substituted to account for the effects of existing background noise.
The scale of photographs should be appropriate to the degree of detail required.


Wildlife Displacement Analyses Impact analyses should consider how habitat loss and noise generation displace wildlife from affected habitats to nearby habitats.  The receiving habitats may lack the resources necessary to accommodate the displaced wildlife, or the displaced wildlife may compete for limited resources with existing wildlife, resulting in net losses to affected populations.  Habitats can optimally support only a certain population level, called the carrying capacity.  Once the carrying capacity of habitats receiving displaced wildlife is exceeded, displaced individuals compete for resources until the population returns to the carrying capacity.  Resource depletion during periods when the carrying capacity is exceeded can affect other species, thus disturbing delicate equilibriums that underlie food chains.  In many areas of the United States, displacing species, such as the white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus), resident Canada geese (Branta canadensis), or American alligators (Alligator mississippiensis), can lead to indirect impacts in nearby habitats such as heavy feeding on vegetation or forcing dangerous wildlife into sensitive urban settings like parks and playgrounds.
Federal, State, regional, and local planning authorities should be consulted to deter mine the existence of present or planned areas dedicated to the public interest or in which siting would be in conflict with preexisting zoning plans.  Such contacts should be documented.


A qualitative discussion of possible wildlife displacement may be adequate.  Applicants should confer with local, State, and Federal resource agencies.  Analyses can include a discussion of possible mitigation measures such as regional habitat improvement projects to accommodate displaced wildlife or the use of hunters or trappers to reduce wildlife populations before habitat disturbance.
3. Discussion of soils should include association names, capability classes, 7 and percentage of site coverage by each association.


Bird and Bat Collision Analyses Birds and bats can collide with any structure while in flight, but the primary collision risk is from structures exceeding 200 feet above ground level.  This is the minimum elevation for which the U.S. Department of Transportation's Federal Aviation Administration requires aircraft warning lights. Lights attract night-migrating birds and bats to the airspace around the structure, where they are physically injured by collision with the structure or the supporting guy wires (Ref. 41).  Collisions are most probable in fog, mist, or low clouds during the bird and bat migration seasons.  The cumulative impact from the hundreds of recently constructed communications towers is suspected in playing a role in population declines for several migratory bird species, such as the cerulean warbler (Dendroica cerulea) (Ref. 41).
When numerous as sociations of minor extent are present, it is acceptable
Impact analyses should discuss the potential effects on populations of migratory bird species colliding with any proposed structure exceeding the 200-foot (61 meters) threshold.  NUREG-1437 (Rev
'U.S. Department of Agriculture I-VIII System should be used.4.11-7 to account for 10 to 15% of the total area in a miscel laneous category, except for areas of unique value.  Detailed consideration of soils and their production potential is necessary for sites located in areas that are especially productive of agricultural or forestry products.
0), "Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants," issued May 1996 (Ref. 42), summarizes the quantitative data of bird collisions with natural draft cooling towers in operation at several nuclear reactors before 1991.  Applicants should also consider more recent, relevant data, including those published for other types of tall structures.


The impact assessment may be qualitative, but it should address the cumulative impacts on populations of potentially affected bird and bat species from the proposed nuclear plant and from other tall structures in the region, including transmission lines.  The analysis should consider site-specific factors such as occurrence of the site along coasts, near other high-quality bird habitats, or on migration flyways.
4. Biological monitoring programs should be in itially devised to be screening procedures to detect undesirable effects. If adverse biological effects are detected, detailed quantitative biological and ecological analyses may be required to determine causes and to devise remedies.


Rev. 2 of RG 4.11, Page 19 Avian Electrocution Analyses The electrical design factor most crucial to avian electrocutions is the physical separation between energized structures or energized and grounded structures, hardware, or equipment that birds can bridge to complete a circuit.  Electrocutions occur with raptors, colonial water birds, and other birds on structures where phase conductors or grounded hardware and phase conductors are separated by less than the wrist-to-wrist or head-to-foot distances of a bird (Ref. 43).
If adverse effects are not detected, quantitative studies are not needed.  The species inventory of the site should include im portant habitats and normal seasonal variations.
The impact of electrocutions on avian populations is poorly understood (Ref. 42).  Nevertheless, electrocution is a well-documented source of mortality (Ref. 43) and should be analyzed in terms of the species status locally and regionally (e.g., rare or declining versus widespread and abundant).  The applicant should take into consideration applicant commitments to implement conductor-to-conductor and conductor-to-structure separation distances, as recommended by the Avian Power Line Interaction Committee (Ref. 43), or to place transmission towers and lines outside of areas heavily used by birds (e.g., nesting and staging areas).  The impact assessment may be qualitative, but it should address the effects on bird species from the proposed transmission systems.


Cooling Tower Drift Analyses Operation of cooling towers releases plumes of water vapor and droplets of condensed water to the atmosphere.  The plume generally travels farther from taller natural draft cooling towers than it does from lower mechanical draft towers.  Water circulating through cooling towers never comes in contact with the reactor core; therefore, radioactive contamination in drift is not a concern.  However, drift carries dissolved salts, biocides, and other constituents.  Salts originate from makeup (source) water and become concentrated as water evaporates inside the tower.  Brackish makeup water is of greater concern than fresh makeup water.  Biocides are used to control microorganisms in the water.  Flora and fauna near cooling towers are exposed to drift, including salts and biocides.  Fogging from drift elevates the humidity experienced by flora and fauna.  In cold temperatures, drift can freeze to form ice on vegetation.
Locally prominent or important vascular plants, mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, insects, and other plants and animals should be included.


Based on studies summarized in NUREG-1437 (Rev 0), the NRC recommends preparing a graphic that overlays projected salt deposition isopleths on the terrestrial habitat map wherever projected deposition exceeds 1 kilogram per hectare per month.  Applicants should search scientific literature for any recently published data on plant responses to salt deposition.  The NRC also recommends a more detailed analysis if deposition rates in naturally vegetated terrestrial habitats exceed 10 kilograms per hectare per month.  In some settings, qualitative analyses are adequate to assess potential impacts to terrestrial habitats from the fogging and icing caused by cooling tower drift.  In other settings, such as in arid climates where fogging could generate unnatural humidity levels or in areas dominated by evergreen trees prone to ice breakage, quantitative analyses may be more appropriate.
The in ventory should be reasonably complete but may be terminated when additional field effort no longer yields significant numbers of previously unobserved species.


Analyses for Hydrological Impacts to Terrestrial Habitats Construction dewatering activities and water withdrawal during operations, including withdrawal of surface water or groundwater for cooling water, can affect the quality of terrestrial habitats.  Groundwater withdrawal can lower the water table, thereby shrinking or eliminating wetlands. Site preparation can also alter surface runoff patterns by directing water that once drained to depressional wetlands into stormwater management facilities.  In arid areas, cones of depression resulting from groundwater withdrawals can convert mesic forest and scrub-shrub upland habitats, which are common in floodplains and arroyos, into desert habitats.  Although terrestrial ecologists do not perform hydrological modeling, they should attempt to work with hydrologists to quantify hydrological alterations to any wetlands, mesic lowlands, and other hydrologically sensitive terrestrial habitats.
Insect surveys should provide information on im portant species such as disease vectors, pests, and pollinating insects. Interpretation of insect data should include consideration of the possibility of adverse consequences to animals, vegetation, or humans that might be caused by construction or operation of the station. Adverse consequences can usually be determined by consultation with State agricultural authorities.


Rev. 2 of RG 4.11, Page 20 Terrestrial Environmental Monitoring Most terrestrial environmental monitoring requirements are derived from environmental permits, the ESA, and State regulations that protect rare species.  Biological opinions issued by FWS or the National Marine Fisheries Service (collectively referred to as "the Services") under the ESA may call for the monitoring of areas containing threatened or endangered species or the evaluation of the success of mitigation actions to relocate or protect those species.  The Services or permits may outline specific monitoring and reporting protocols.  If not, the NRC recommends contacting the Services or responsible permitting agency for the following individualized direction:
Normally, detailed field sur veys of insect populations are not needed. Protection of terrestrial systems is usually adequate when it can be shown that (I) habitat losses or altera tions of important species' are small with respect to the amount available within the regional or local con text, (2) chemical emissions from the station are suf ficiently small to permit reasonable assurance that no adverse effect will occur, and (3) no mechanism ex ists for causing unintended destruction of organisms, or its occurrence is infrequent enough to give reasonable assurance that whole populations will not be adversely affected.
a. seasonal timing of monitoring visits, b. field data collection procedures, c. sampling approaches (e.g., use of sample quadrats or transects), d. field equipment specifications, e. qualifications of field personnel, and f. reporting requirements.


Decommissioning NUREG-0586, "Generic Environmental Impact Statement on Decommissioning of Nuclear Facilities," Supplement 1, "Regarding the Decommissioning of Nuclear Power Reactors," issued November 2002 (Ref. 44), summarizes the potential impacts that the decommissioning of nuclear reactors could have on terrestrial environmental resources.  Decommissioning does not usually result in significant adverse ecological effects when ground disturbance is limited to the former operational area.  However, it may be helpful to characterize ecological conditions before site development when managing ecological resources on decommissioned sites.  Potentially significant impacts are possible, however, when ground disturbance from decommissioning activities extends to naturally vegetated areas outside of the former operational area.  Many of the same terrestrial environmental baseline and impact analyses described above could help support the review of decommissioning impacts affecting naturally vegetated areas.
Environmental protection should be achieved by control of common sources of environmental effects.


C.  STAFF REGULATORY GUIDANCE
These include soil erosion, siltation, use of herbicides, dust and noise during construction, and others.  Biological consequences can usually be prevented or reduced to acceptable levels through proper manage ment.  If cooling towers are being considered, the mineral content of the cooling water supply should be deter"The term important species, as used in this guide, is defined in Regulatory Guide 4.2.mined in the baseline studies. An estimate should be made of the amounts and dispersion of salts expected to be deposited from the towers. The estimate should be based on the cooling water quality, manufacturer's specifications for drift release from the towers, con centration factors, and prevailing meteorological conditions at the site. Meteorological dispersion models are useful to obtain estimates of drift deposi tion.  Estimated drift deposition from cooling towers may be plotted on a base map or graph centered on the towers and showing isopleths of salt deposition.


1. Because precise predictions and assessments of impacts on terrestrial ecological systems are not always possible, reasonable professional interpretations are recommended when quantitative prediction is not practicable.
The maps should have a radius sufficient to show the points at which the amounts of drift from the tower fall within the normal range of annual variation of background deposition from other sources. They should also show the vegetation types that occur in the drift field.  Reconnaissance and inspection of biota in the drift field before and after cooling tower operation is a means recommended for detection of possible adverse effects of drift. The baseline inspection should be carried out by specialists in biology work ing systematically from checklists of possible adverse effects in the community.


2. Professional judgment is needed to identify appropriate analytical methods to support NRC licensing actions. Applicants should contact Federal, State, and local regulatory agencies and search recent scientific literature for specific analytical protocols.
Seasonal aerial and ground-level photographs in color or infrared false color of permanent vegetation plots are often useful aids. Quantitative chemical analysis of plants, animals, and soils are needed if chemical deposits are expected to exceed toxic or injurious thresholds.


3. Baseline investigations should be broad enough and completed early enough to support anticipated impact analyses and monitoring that might be required by federal and state agencies.  These investigations may be prepared as separate reports or presented as part of larger documents such as environment reports. Closely related baseline studies and analyses can be combined into single reports.
Population monitoring of selected species could also be needed in such cases. The assessment of cooling lakes and transmission and access corridors should include detailed con sideration of the effects of land diversion on local, regional, and State agricultural production, forest production, or recreational uses. The assessment should include both adverse and beneficial aspects.


4. Terrestrial habitats should be labeled on maps using names based on indicator species or habitat or land cover naming systems developed for statewide or nationwide use.  Wetlands should be identified using a widely recognized wetland nomenclature system.  Each vegetative stratum in Rev. 2 of RG 4.11, Page 21 each habitat should be described.
Where a cooling lake is proposed, the baseline studies should include a preliminary assessment of the poten tial for reclamation of the lake bottom for agricultural, ecological, or forestry use after decom missioning.


5. Wetland delineations for projects involving ground disturbance should be completed using routine Federal and State protocols.  Wetland delineation reports should include a functional assessment.
It is not necessary, however, to prejudge future use of the lake site. It is sufficient to establish whether the option exists to reclaim the site for other productive uses or whether the creation of the lake constitutes an irretrievable change in land use.  The assessment should also include a report of the number of hectares of the lake site that will remain undisturbed during construction, the number of hec tares and vegetation that will be disturbed, the source of "borrow" material for dike construction, and the management of topsoil removed during construction.


6. Applicants who can identify common plants and wildlife should visit project sites multiple times during the growing season.  When possible, they should time their visits to coincide with flowering seasons, bird migration seasons, and amphibian calling seasons.  The applicants should develop tables listing observed species with information on distribution and abundance.
Use of topsoil stripped from the lake bottom for vegetative stabilization of dikes and for ultimate replacement on the lake bottom for rehabilitation should be considered.


7. Terrestrial environmental impact analyses should focus primarily on species meeting NRC importance criteria (Ref 32). Specialists may need to conduct site visits at specific times of the year to determine whether important species are present and, if so, subject to impact.
4.11-8 When soil disruption during construction at the site or in transmission corridors is expected to expose substrates or a proposed lake is to be built on sub strates having a potential for affecting water quality, chemical analyses of the substrates should be per formed. The elements to be measured depend on the nature of the substrate.


8. Habitat losses should be quantified by overlaying the estimated limits of disturbance over a habitat map. Losses of jurisdictional and nonjurisdictional wetlands should be considered.
If the substrate is formerly fertilized farmland, analysis for elements common to chemical fertilizers is needed. If the substrate is land of some special history, such as strip-mine land, ap propriate chemical assessment of the water-soluble and exchangeable components of the substrate should be made to obtain an estimate of chemical in put to water bodies. Special attention is given those elements that could reach toxic concentrations in water, accumulate to toxic levels in food webs, or af fect the pH of water bodies. The chemical analyses should be performed on appropriate chemical ex tracts of the soil material.


9. Estimated salt drift isopleths from cooling towers should be plotted on a base map showing terrestrial habitats.
The characterization of soil material should also include determination of ex change capacity, organic matter, pH, and textural class. When a reservoir is proposed, the baseline studies should include reasonable predictions of the number of birds (especially waterfowl)
expected to use the lake on an annual basis, their expected residence time, the expected impact on farmlands, and all other impacts either on the birds themselves or on the sur rounding area due to their presence.


10. Other terrestrial environmental impact analyses that may be needed to support NRC licensing decisions include the following: 
The estimates should be the best obtainable based on known flyways, estimates of farm acreages nearby, literature, or local evidence of bird utilization of other reser voirs under similar conditions.


(1) noise impacts on wildlife, 
5. Information needed for transmission and access corridor assessment is generally similnr to that for sites; however, certain considerations apply specifically to corridors.
(2) interruptions in wildlife movement and migration patterns, 
(3) introduction and expansion of coverage by pests and invasive species, 
(4) the potential for displaced wildlife to exceed the carrying capacity in nearby habitats, 
(5) the potential for bird and bat collisions with elevated structures, 
(6) the potential for electrocution of birds, and 
(7) hydrological effects on wetlands and other terrestrial habitats.


11. Terrestrial environmental monitoring required by environmental permits or regulations should be carefully planned with responsible regulatory agencies.
Detailed land-use informa tion along corridors is needed. The description should include the distance transversed and locations of principal land-use types such as forests, permanent pastures, cultivated crops, parks, preserves, water bodies, recreation areas, and housing areas. Special features such as historic sites; monuments;
archaeological sites; caves; mineralogical, paleon tological, or geological areas of special interest;
stream crossings;
and road crossings should be iden tified and their locations specified.


12. Terrestrial environmental baseline studies and impact analyses may be necessary for decommissioning activities that disturb naturally vegetated lands outside of the former operational area.
Information may be presented in the form of land-use maps that are keyed to descriptive text. It is often useful to sub divide long corridors into convenient segments con taining similar land-use types for descriptive pur poses.  It is usually adequate to describe biotic com munities in terms of principal vegetative associations such as oak-hickory forest. The animals most likely to be found along corridors may be determined from literature studies, local experts, or field reconnais sance. Emphasis should be placed on "important" species as defined in Regulatory Guide 4.2.  Comprehensive field inventories of biota along tran smission corridors are not usually needed.  The potential occurrence of threatened or en dangered plants and animals or their critical habitat adjacent to or within the proposed corridors should be .investigated.


Rev. 2 of RG 4.11, Page 22
Local, State, and Federal authorities (e.g., the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and State wildlife agencies)
should be consulted to determine protected species that reasonably
'could be expected to occur and the locations of possible occurrences along corridors.


==D. IMPLEMENTATION==
If potential areas are identified, field inspection of these areas may be necessary to verify, the presence or absence of the protected organisms.
The purpose of this section is to provide information on how applicants and licensees
1 may use this guide and information regarding the NRC's plans for using this regulatory guide.  In addition, it describes how the NRC staff complies with the Backfit Rule (10 CFR 50.109) and any applicable finality provisions in 10 CFR Part 52.


Use by Applicants and Licensees Applicants and licensees may voluntarily
If proposed transmission corridors could add to the further endangerment of a protected species, realign ment in the critical areas might be required.
2 use the guidance in this document to demonstrate compliance with the underlying NRC regulations.  Methods or solutions that differ from those described in this regulatory guide may be deemed acceptable if they provide sufficient basis and information for the NRC staff to verify that the proposed alternative demonstrates compliance with the appropriate NRC regulations.  Current licensees may continue to use guidance the NRC found acceptable for complying with the identified regulations as long as their current licensing basis remains unchanged.


Licensees may use the information in this regulatory guide for actions which do not require NRC review and approval such as changes to a facility design under 10 CFR 50.59.  Licensees may use the information in this regulatory guide or applicable parts to resolve regulatory or inspection issues.
6. When adverse effects of construction or opera tion can be reasonably inferred from information ob tained during the baseline phase, quantitative studies that can be compared with later studies during con struction or operational phases should be initiated.


Use by NRC Staff During regulatory discussions on plant specific operational issues, the staff may discuss with licensees various actions consistent with staff positions in this regulatory guide, as one acceptable means of meeting the underlying NRC regulatory requirements.  Such discussions would not ordinarily be considered backfitting even if prior versions of this regulatory guide are part of the licensing basis of the facility.  However, unless this regulatory guide is part of the licensing basis for a facility, the staff may not represent to the licensee that the licensee's failure to comply with the positions in this regulatory guide constitutes a violation.
Such studies include measurements of population densities of endangered species, chemical measure ments of soils and biota within the potential drift field of a cooling tower, or annual aerial photography, for example.


If an existing licensee voluntarily seeks a license amendment or change and (1) the NRC staff's consideration of the request involves a regulatory issue directly relevant to this new or revised regulatory guide and (2) the specific subject matter of this regulatory guide is an essential consideration in the staff's determination of the acceptability of the licensee's request, then the staff may request that the licensee either follow the guidance in this regulatory guide or provide an equivalent alternative process that demonstrates compliance with the underlying NRC regulatory requirements. This is not considered backfitting as defined in 10 CFR 50.109(a)(1) or a violation of any of the issue finality provisions in 10 CFR Part 52.
The preferred method of biological protection on many construction sites is direct control of potential ly injurious work practice.


The NRC staff does not intend or approve any imposition or backfitting of the guidance in this regulatory guide.  The NRC staff does not expect any existing licensee to use or commit to using the guidance in this regulatory guide, unless the licensee makes a change to its licensing basis.  The NRC staff does not expect or plan to request licensees to voluntarily adopt this regulatory guide to resolve a generic regulatory issue. The NRC staff does not expect or plan to initiate NRC regulatory action which
Systematic inspection dur ing construction at the site, along corridors, and in adjacent areas should be used to detect injurious or unauthorized activities.


1  In this section, "licensees" refers to licensees of nuclear power plants under 10 CFR Parts 50 and 52; and the term "applicants," refers to applicants for licenses and permits for (or relating to) nuclear power plants under 10 CFR Parts 50 and 52, and applicants for standard design approvals and standard design certifications under 10 CFR Part 52.
Examples of items that may be checked are: a. Traffic Control -Vehicles should be confined to authorized roadways and stream crossings.


2  In this section, "voluntary" and "voluntarily" means that the licensee is seeking the action of its own accord, without the force of a legally binding requirement or an NRC representation of further licensing or enforcement action.
b. Dust Control -Dust should be controlled by such means as watering, graveling, or paving. Areas subject to wind erosion should be controlled by mul ching, seeding, or the equivalent.


Rev. 2 of RG 4.11, Page 23 would require the use of this regulatory guide.  Examples of such unplanned NRC regulatory actions include issuance of an order requiring the use of the regulatory guide, requests for information under 10 CFR 50.54(f) as to whether a licensee intends to commit to use of this regulatory guide, generic communication, or promulgation of a rule requiring the use of this regulatory guide without further backfit consideration.
c. Noise Control -Noise should be monitored at site boundaries.


Additionally, an existing applicant may be required to adhere to new rules, orders, or guidance if 10 CFR 50.109(a)(3) applies.
d. Smoke Control -Open slash burning of plant material should be conducted in accordance with local and State regulations.


Conclusion This regulatory guide is not being imposed upon current licensees and may be voluntarily used by existing licensees. In addition, this regulatory guide is issued in conformance with all applicable internal NRC policies and procedures governing backfitting.  Accordingly, the NRC staff issuance of this regulatory guide is not considered backfitting, as defined in 10 CFR 50.109(a)(1), nor is it deemed to be in conflict with any of the issue finality provisions in 10 CFR Part 52.
e. Chemical and Solid Waste Control -Cement, chemicals, fuels, sanitary wastes, lubricants, bitumens, flushing solutions, or other potentially hazardous materials should be salvaged or dis charged safely in accordance with existing regula tions. Spills should be cleaned up before they become a hazard.4.11-9 f. Soil Erosion and Sediment Control -Erosion should be controlled by piped drainage, diversion dikes, flumes, sediment control structures, ground covers, or other appropriate means.


If a licensee believes that the NRC is either using this regulatory guide or requesting or requiring the licensee to implement the methods or processes in this regulatory guide in a manner inconsistent with the discussion in this Implementation section, then the licensee may file a backfit appeal with the NRC in accordance with the guidance in NUREG-1409 and NRC Management Directive 8.
====g. Dewatering ====
-Dewatering should be confined to the area needed for construction;
test wells or preexisting wells should be monitored for changes in the water table.  If, after analysis of the inventory of species and consideration of potential effects of the nuclear power station, a conclusion is warranted that there will be no adverse impact on biota, there may be no need to carry out biological monitoring programs at the construction and operational stages.  Special studies could be necessary if adverse effects on biota are detected and there is no obvious ex plapation or remedy for the effect. In the usual case, however, if habitat loss or alteration, chemical emis sions, or direct destruction of organisms do not con stitute a threat to a population of an important species, the effect need not be studied further.


===4.     ===
==D. IMPLEMENTATION==
 
The purpose of this section is to provide informa tion to applicants regarding the NRC staff's plans for using this regulatory guide.  This guide reflects current NRC staff practice.
Rev. 2 of RG 4.11, Page 24 The purpose of this section is to provide information to applicants for nuclear power reactor construction permits, early site permits and combined licenses on how applicants may use this regulatory guide.  It also provides information for construction permit and early site permit holders regarding the NRC staff's plans for using this regulatory guide. The methods described in this regulatory guide will be used in evaluating applications for construction permits, early site permits, combined licenses, and limited work authorizations, which includes information under 10 CFR 51.49(b) or (f), with respect to compliance with applicable regulations governing the siting of new nuclear power plants.  Methods or solutions that differ from those described in this regulatory guide may be deemed acceptable if they provide sufficient basis and information for the NRC staff to verify that the proposed alternative demonstrates compliance with the appropriate NRC regulations.
 
The NRC's consideration of the information provided by (i) the applicant for, or the holder of, an operating license, (ii) the holder of an early site permit who subsequently seeks, under 10 CFR 52.27, a limited work authorization under 10 CFR 50.10, and (iii) the holder of a combined license, is not a "siting" determination.  Therefore, such NRC consideration is neither backfitting nor an action inconsistent with the applicable issue finality requirements in 10 CFR Part 52.
 
REFERENCES
3  1. 10 CFR Part 52, "Licenses, Certifications, and Approvals for Nuclear Power Plants," U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC.
 
2. 10 CFR Part 50, "Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities," U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC.
 
3. 10 CFR Part 54, "Requirements for Renewal of Operating Licenses for Nuclear Power Plants," U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC.
 
4. Regulatory Guide 4.2, "Preparation of Environmental Reports for Nuclear Power Stations, Revision 2, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, July 1976.
 
5. Regulatory Guide 4.7, "General Site Suitability Criteria for Nuclear Power Stations, Revision 2, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, April 1998.
 
6. 10 CFR Part 51, "Environmental Protection Regulations for Domestic Licensing and Related Regulatory Functions," U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC.
 
7. EPRI Report No. 1006878, "Siting Guide:  Site Selection and Evaluation Criteria for an Early Site Permit Application
," Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA, 2002.
 
4                                                     
3  Publicly available NRC published documents are available electronically through the NRC Library on the NRC's public Web site at: http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/.  The documents can also be viewed on-line or printed for a fee in the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD; the mailing address is USNRC PDR, Washington, DC 20555; telephone 301-415-4737 or (800) 397-4209; fax (301) 415-3548; and e-mail pdr.resource@nrc.gov.  4  Copies of the listed Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) standards and reports may be purchased from EPRI, 3420 Hillview Ave., Palo Alto, CA 94304; telephone (800) 313-3774; fax (925) 609-1310.
 
Rev. 2 of RG 4.11, Page 25
8. Clean Water Act of 1977, 33 USC 1251 et seq.
 
9. 40 CFR Part 230, "Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines for Specification of Disposal Sites for Dredged or Fill Material," U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC.
 
10. 33 CFR Part 325, "Processing of Department of the Army Permits," U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, DC.
 
11. Matthews, L., and D. Davis, "The National Agricultural Imagery Program (NAIP):  Options and Challenges," 2007 Environmental Systems Research Institute International User's Conference , San Diego, CA, Aerial Photography Field Office, Salt Lake City, UT, June 18-22, 2007.
 
12. Yang, L., "Development of the United States National Land Cover Database-Experience from 1992 and 2001 Implementation," International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing, and Spatial Information Sciences, XXXVII, Part B4:  International Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, pp. 1461-1465, 2008.
 
13. Anderson, J.R., et al., "A Land Use and Land Cover Classification System for Use with Remote Sensor Data," U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 964, U.S. Geological Survey, Washington, DC, 1976.
 
14. Grossman, D.H., et al., "International Classification of Ecological Communities:  Terrestrial Vegetation of the United States.  Volume I.  The National Vegetation Classification System: Development, Status, and Applications," The Nature Conservancy, Arlington, VA, 1998.
 
15. Eyre, F.H., "Forest Cover Types of the United States and Canada,"
Society of American Foresters, Washington, DC, 1980.
 
16. U.S. Geological Survey, GAP Analysis Program Homepage, access date August 19, 2010.  (Available at http://www.nbii.gov/portal/server.pt/community/gap_home/1482.)  17. "Florida Land Use, Cover, and Forms Classification System," Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Tallahassee, FL, 1995 (3 rd edition, January 1999).
 
18. Harrison, J.W., "Classification of Vegetation Communities of Maryland:  First Iteration," NatureServe and Maryland Natural Heritage Program, Wildlife and Heritage Service, Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis, MD, 2004.
 
19. "Clarification and Interpretation of the 1987 Manual," U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, memorandum dated March 6, 1992.
 
20. "Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands," Cooperative Technical Publication issued by the Federal Interagency Committee for Wetland Delineation:  U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service, Washington, DC, 1989.
 
21. Mueller-Dombois, D., and H. Ellenberg, "Aims and Methods of Vegetation Ecology," John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, NY, 1974.
 
22. Executive Order 13112, "Invasive Species," February 3, 1999, as amended by Executive Order 13286, February 28, 2003.
 
Rev. 2 of RG 4.11, Page 26
23. 33 CFR Part 328, "Definition of Waters of the United States," U.S. Department of Defense, Department of the Army, Washington, DC.
 
24. Technical Report Y-87-1, "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual," U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory, Vicksburg, MS, January 1987.
 
25. "Use of NRCS Field Indicators of Hydric Soils," U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, memorandum dated March 21, 1997.
 
26. Cowardin, L.M., et al., "Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States,"
FWS/OBS-79/31, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Biological Services, Washington, DC, 1979.
 
27. Adamus, P.R., et al., "Wetland Evaluation Technique (WET), Volume II:  Methodology," National Technical Information Service No. ADA 189968, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS, 1987.
 
28. "The Highway Methodology Workbook:  Supplement to Wetland Functions and Values:  A Descriptive Approach," U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New England Division, Concord, MA, 1995. 29. Clairain, E.J., Jr., "Hydrogeomorphic Approach To Assessing Wetland Functions:  Guidelines for Developing Regional Guidebooks," ERDC/EL TR-02-3, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS, 2002.
 
30. Florida Administrative Code, Chapter 62-345, "Uniform Mitigation Assessment Method."
31. Bartoldus, C.C., "A Comprehensive Review of Wetland Assessment Procedures:  A Guide for Wetland Practitioners," Environmental Concern, Inc., St. Michaels, MD, 1999.
 
32. NUREG-1555,  "Standard Review Plans for Environmental Reviews for Nuclear Power Plants: Environmental Standard Review Plan,"  U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, October 1999.
 
33. Endangered Species Act of 1973, 7 USC 136 et seq.
 
34. 50 CFR Part 17, "Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants," U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC.
 
35. Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940, 16 USC 668 et seq.
 
36. Executive Order 11990, "Protection of Wetlands," May 24, 1977.
 
37. Executive Order 11988, "Floodplain Management," May 24, 1977, as amended by Executive Order 12148, July 20, 1979.
 
38. Bayne, E.M., L. Habib, and S. Boutin, "Impacts of Chronic Anthropogenic Noise from Energy-Sector Activity on Abundance of Songbirds in the Boreal Forest," Conservation Biology , 22(5):1186-1193, 2008.
 
Rev. 2 of RG 4.11, Page 27
39. Dufour, P.A., "Effects of Noise on Wildlife and Other Animals-Review of Research Since 1971," EPA 550/9-80-100, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Noise Abatement and Control, Washington, DC, 1980.
 
40. Radle, A.L., "The Effect of Noise on Wildlife:  A Literature Review," 1998.  (Available at http://interact.uoregon.edu/MediaLit/wfae/library/articles/radle_effect_noise_wildlife.pdf.  Retrieved and updated December 2007.)
41. Manville, A.M. II, "The ABCs of Avoiding Bird Collisions at Communication Towers:  The Next Steps," Proceedings of the Avian Interactions Workshop, December 2, 1999, Charleston, SC, Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA, 2000.
 
41. NUREG-1437, Rev 0, , "Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants," U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, May 1996.
 
42. "Suggested Practices for Avian Protection on Power Lines:  The State of the Art in 2006,"
Edison Electric Institute, Avian Power Line Interaction Committee, and the California Energy Commission, Washington, DC, and Sacramento, CA, 2006.


43. NUREG-0586, "Generic Environmental Impact Statement for Decommissioning of Nuclear Facilities," Supplement 1, "Regarding the Decommissioning of Nuclear Power Reactors," U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, November 2002.}}
Therefore, except in those cases in which the appli cant proposes an acceptable alternative method for complying with specified portions of the Commis sion's regulations, the method described herein is be ing and will continue to be used in the evaluation of submittals for operating license or construction per mit applications until this guide is revised as a result of suggestions from the public or additional staff review.4.11-10
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 OFFICIAL BUSINESS PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE, $300 POSTAGE AND FEES PAID UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION}}


{{RG-Nav}}
{{RG-Nav}}

Revision as of 10:39, 14 July 2019

Terrestrial Environmental Studies for Nuclear Power Stations
ML003739930
Person / Time
Issue date: 08/31/1977
From:
Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research
To:
References
RG-4.11
Download: ML003739930 (11)
v • d • e


Revision 1 August 1977 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

REGULATORY

GUIDE OFFICE OF STANDARDS

DEVELOPMENT

REGULATORY

GUIDE 4.11 TERRESTRIAL

ENVIRONMENTAL

STUDIES .FOR NUCLEAR POWER STATIONS

A. INTRODUCTION

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission's policy and procedures for preparing and processing en vironmental impact statements and related docu ments pursuant to Section 102(2)(C)

of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (Public Law 91 190, 83 Stat. 852) are set forth in 10 CFR Part 51, "Licensing and Regulatory Policy and Procedures for Environmental Protection." Regulatory Guide 4.2, "Preparation of Environmental Reports for Nuclear Power Stations," identifies the information needed by the NRC staff in its assessment of the potential en vironmental effects of a proposed nuclear facility.

This regulatory guide provides technical information for the design and execution of terrestrial en vironmental studies for nuclear power stations.

The information resulting from the studies, as they relate to ecological aspects of site selection, assessment of terrestrial effects of station construction and opera tion, and formulation of related monitoring ac tivities, may be appropriate for inclusion in the appli cant's environmental report.This guide is intended to reflect current practice, i.e., the siting of up to several power plants at a single site. Prior consultation with the staff is recommended if larger-scale "Energy Centers" are contemplated.

Although there is a need for a thorough evaluation of environmental impacts, it is important that effort not be needlessly dissipated on programs of limited value. The need for accurate evaluation and timely review of the environmental report makes it essential to focus quickly on meaningful issues and to avoid exhaustive analyses not directly related to station im pacts. This guide recommends site selection assess ments, resource management, source control, and control of effects as means for protecting the ter*Lines indicate substantive changes from previous issue.restrial ecology. The approach recommended for ter restrial surveys begins with broadly based land-use and biotic inventories and then focuses on a limited number of significant environmental issues.

B. DISCUSSION

It is important that environmental assessments provide the information needed to estimate and limit potential environmental impacts of nuclear power station construction and operation.

If important en vironmental impacts are identified prior to site preparation and station construction, these impacts can be reduced to acceptable levels by selecting an ap propriate site, revising the station design, or modify ing operating procedures.

In this guide, environmental studies are divided into five phases: site selection, baseline studies, decommissioning studies, construction monitoring, and operational monitoring.

Table 1 shows the organization for terrestrial studies and identifies ma jor tasks and their approximate time schedules.

Adverse impacts on terrestrial organisms or ecological systems have historically resulted from loss or modification of habitat, release of minerals or tox ic chemicals into the environment, and direct destruc tion of biota. A biological effect may be expressed at the level of the individual organisms or through the collective response of organisms at the system level. Examples of effects on individual organisms include death, reduction of health or vitality, accumulation of toxic substances, and alteration of reproductive success. Examples of ecological system effects include changes in birth or death rates; changes of toxic ele ment concentrations throughout entire food webs; and changes in population size, habitat, or com munity structure.

USNRC REGULATORY

GUIDES Comments should be sent to the Secretary of the Commission, US. Nuclear Regu latory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555, Attention:

Docketing and Service Regulatory Guides are issued to describe and make available to the public methods Branch. acceptable to the NRC staff of implementing specific parts of the Commission's regulations, to delineate techniques used by the staff in evaluating specific problems The guides are issued in the following ten broad divisions or postulated accidents.

or to provide guidance to applicants.

Regulatory Guides are not substitutes

[or regulations, and compliance with them is not required.

1. Power Reactors 6. Products Methods and solutinons different from those set out in the guides will be accept- 2. Research and Test Reactors 7. Transportation able if they provide a basis for the findings requisite to the issuance or continuance

3. Fuels and Materials Facilities

8. Occupational Health of a permit or license by the Commissaon.

4. Environmental and Siting 9. Antitrust Review 5. Materials and Plant Protection

10. General Comments and suggestions for improvements in these guides are encouraged at all Requests flor single copies of issued guides (which may be reproduced)

or for place times, and guides will be revised, as appropriate, to accommodate comments and ment on an automatic distribuation list for single copies of future guides in specific to reflect new information or experience.

This guide was revised as a result of divisions should be made in writing to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, substantive comments received from the public and additional staff review. Washington.

D.C. 20555, Attention:

Director, Division of Document Control.*I

TABLE 1 OPERATION, TERRESTRIAL

ENVIRONMENTAL

STUDIES RELATED TO THE SITING, CONSTRUCTION, AND DECOMMISSIONING

OF NUCLEAR POWER STATIONS Phase Site selection Baseline studies at the proposed site Decommissioning studies Construction monitoring at the approved site Operational monitoring at the approved site MajorTask Regional land-use analysis Ecological analysis Local land-use analysis Ecological analysis Biological inventories Planning station design and construction prac tices to reduce impacts Reclamation analysis Planning station design and construction prac tices to reduce impacts Monitoring of construc tion practices Problem-oriented monitor ing (short-term and con tinuing programs)Time When Task Performed*

Prior to application for CP when candidate areas are being selected Prior to application for CP when preferred site is being selected Prior to application for CP when ER is being pre pared; may continue into construction period. Prior to application for CP when ER is being prepared During period between CP issuance and OL issuance After OL is issued* CP = construction permit ER = environmental report OL = operating license (

Most plant and animal populations have sufficient reproductive capacity to make up for losses of a few individuals without changes in average population sizes or community structure.

When the loss of in dividuals becomes sufficiently great, however, the population as a whole may cease to function as a self sustaining, renewable resource.

The population may then be overstressed, and species extinction or un desirable shifts in community structure may become possible.

Excessive population stresses have resulted from natural phenomena, hunting, trapping, draining of wetlands, harvesting forests, plowing prairies, widespread dispersion of toxic substances, and other activities.

This does not imply that these activities are always incompatible with the well-being of natural systems. Experience has shown that good manage ment often permits the coexistence of desired ecological systems with various human enterprises.

Site Selection The results of site selection surveys are useful in identifying potential impacts of station siting, con struction, and operation on terrestrial ecological systems and permit evaluation of alternatives that could reduce adverse effects. In this guide, the sug gested site selection procedures'

are limited to ter restrial environmental considerations.

Site selection surveys may be descriptive in nature. In describing biota, emphasis is generally placed on ecologically significant, groupings of organisms and management of resources rather than on ecological detail. It is important, however, that the investiga tions rapidly focus on matters of special sensitivity, rather than retaining a broad and diffuse approach.

Site selection surveys can be conducted in two phases: regional land-use analysis and local land-use analysis.

Regional land-use analysis is used in con junction with engineering surveys to select candidate areas for the nuclear station. Local land-use analysis is directed to candidate sites and is used in conjunc tion with engineering considerations to select a preferred site. Site selection surveys of terrestrial ecology are coordinated with preliminary engineering studies. The information needed could be obtained from such sources as aerial photographs, topographic maps, reconnaissance, literature, and regional or local zoning and planning data. Site selection surveys are performed with. the objective of providing data for resource analysis, rather than for detailed func tional analysis of ecosystems.

'See also Regulatory Guide 4.7, "General Site Suitability Criteria for Nuclear Power Stations." Terrestrial criteria at the regional level that are needed in the selection of candidate areas include the extent of prime and unique farmland 2 in the region and the alternatives available for siting on land of lower utility; the occurrence and extent of critical wildlife habitat' in the region and alternatives to its use; and the extent of valuable forests, prairies, wetlands, and deserts in the region and alternatives to their use. Also needed is information on the current status of land-use and zoning plans within the region. This may be done through the use of maps, aerial photographs, and tabulations within the region. Identification of major categories such as agricultural land, forest land, urban areas, parklands, highways, and airports is useful.The selection process examines reasonable oppor tunities for using sites that have minimal impact on the diversity of regional land use, present and future. Preservation of a range of options for land use is im portant for the consideration of biologically rare or unique areas. A unique or critical wildlife habitat may be undesirable for a site since to use it could foreclose opportunities for propagation of wildlife, scientific study, natural history study, recreation, and public enjoyment of wildlife.

Federal, State, regional, and local planning authorities are logical sources to be consulted to determine the existence and location of areas within the region that have been dedicated to the public in terest or areas in which siting would be in conflict with preexisting zoning'plans.

Examples of such areas include dedicated parks and forests; productive farmland;

places where specialty crops are produced;

unique but as yet undedicated forests and wildlife habitats;

scenic areas; wetlands;

and unique mineralogical, paeleontological, or geological areas. More specific land-use classes are needed in the local surveys than in the regional surveys, but they should be based on information obtained by recon naissance rather than detailed biological inventory.

Land-use categories may include farms; fields; secon dary successional areas (indicating dominant species);

forests; and residential, industrial, and com mercial areas. If aerial photographs are used for local land-use analysis, it is important that their scale is sufficient to present views of the candidate sites and their immediate environs.

Soil association data for each site being considered should be supplied.

Soil Conservation Service offices :The terms unique and prime farmland, as used in this guide, are discussed in "Land Inventory and Monitoring Memorandum-3," Soil Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture, October 15, 1975. 'The terms critical habitat and endangered species, as used in this guide, are defined in the "Endangered Species Act of 1973" (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543, 87 Stat. 884).4.11-3 I

are usually able to supply sufficient information.

In formation may be furnished as a soil association map that is keyed to a table of descriptive information which includes a listing of soil management capabilities.

The selection of a cooling method for the proposed plant is an important consideration in site selection.

Cooling reservoirs may require loss of land, which may be unacceptable compared to the uges of cooling towers in some regions. However, cooling towers could be objectionable in scenic areas where a cooling lake could be an asset. Visible plumes from cooling towers could be more objectionable environmentally at some sites than at others because of ground fogs or icing. Table 2 is an example matrix that could be used in balancing the above factors.

TABLE 2 FACTORS CONSIDERED

IN THE SELECTION

OF SITES AND COOLING METHODS Environmental Once-Through Variable Cooling Cooling Lake Cooling Spray Tower Canals Table 3 is an example matrix that could be used in weighing and balancing alternative sites. Site selec tion is dependent on a wide range of factors other than those relating to terrestrial ecology. In some cases, the weighing and balancing of all factors may result in a selection that is less than optimum by ter restrial ecological criteria.

In these cases, the need for subsequent monitoring programs may be greater than in the case of more nearly optimum choices.

However, the candidate sites should not be located in critical, unique, or highly valuable habitat areas if it can be avoided.

The goal of the regional and local land-use surveys is the selection of a preferred site the use of which has minimal environmental impact and does not conflict with other societal uses. Any site selected, of course, will result in the loss of some habitat and its as sociated residents.

This loss is assessed through an in ventory of species present. Societal uses are balanced by consultation with planning bodies and by reference to pertinent statutes and regulations.

TABLE 3 Farmland Woodland Wasteland Coastland Wetland Special Wildlife Habitats Preserves and Parks Esthetic Impacts For the local studies, it is important to establish whether there are obvious differences among sites with respect to endangered species, game animals, or other impQrtant species or habitats.

The assessment for each site should include consideration of the areas of preferred habitat of important species (see Section 2.2 of Regulatory Guide 4.2) that would be adversely affected.

Information required for transmission corridors is similar in nature to that for candidate site selection.

4 Detailed corridor routes will not be known at this stage. Nevertheless, consideration needs to be given to probable corridor length, natural barriers, impact on land use, opportunities for combining new trans mission lines with preexisting routes, and esthetic ef fects in the selection of candidate sites. 'The Commission has under review a petition for rulemaking filed on September

15, 1975, requesting that the Commission amend its regulations to clarify the extent of the Commission's regulatory authority over the construction and routing of transmission lines, and to clarify the extent to which the environmental impact of such lines and equipment must be considered in the environmental im pact of the licensing of a particular nuclear facilit

y. Factor SELECTION

OF SITES: TERRESTRIAL

FACTORS6 Site A Site B SiteC Land Use Farmland Woodland Wildlife Habitat Unique or Rare Habitats Area of Site Transmission Corridors Terrestrial Ecology Important Species Present Endangered and Threatened Species Present Baseline Studies Baseline studies of the preferred site, including transmission corridors, are needed to fully describe the site and to establish a basis for predicting the im pact of construction or operation.

Baseline studies may be used for comparison with later construction or operational studies as well as during decommis sioning of the station.

Biological studies of the proposed site are made in advance of station construction or operation.

The 'Units should be quantitative whenever appropriate:

however, judgmental entries are acceptable if needed.4.11-4 qualitative notations of plant and animal abundance included in the baseline inventory are normally suf ficient. Quantitative measurement of population den sity is not usually needed as part of the species inven tory unless qualified professional judgment based on -' field study leads to a reasonable conclusion that one or more populations of important species could be adversely affected by station construction or opera tion. This judgment should be based on examination of each species using the criteria cited here and on professional biological interpretation.

Considera tions include the biological reason for importance and the link between the nuclear station and the organism.

The species considered important are those that meet the definition in Regulatory Guide 4.2 and that are linked adversely to the station in some reasonable way. These may require further quan titative effort in the baseline studies and in the con struction and operational monitoring surveys.

It is important that judgment be exercised in selecting the time for initiating quantitative popula tion studies if they are needed. Where construction effects are anticipated, quantitative studies should begin in the baseline phase. Where an effect of station operation is expected, it would be best to defer quan titative studies until some time prior to operation to ensure reasonable compatibility with the operational studies. It will usually be adequate to bracket the period of anticipated impact within I or 2 years of prior studies and an appropriate term of following studies that would be determined in consultation with the staff. Properly designed studies will avoid placing undue emphasis on certain easily accessible groups of organisms.

Most species of insects, for example, are ecologically important in local food webs. However, species that cannot reasonably be judged threatened by the nuclear station or that are not likely to become of economic or public health significance because of station construction or operation need not be studied quantitatively beyond the initial inventories.

Rodents are also ecologically important food web organisms.

However, quantitative population measurements are not needed as long as there is no reason to believe that station construction or operation will have an ef fiect on their populations beyond that caused by the loss of habitat.

Certain station sites and designs have required special environmental assessment effort. These in clude sites with large cooling lakes or reservoirs and plants having cooling towers, particularly if the water source is seawater or brackish water. These are dis cussed in n;ore detail in the following sections.

It is important that the baseline studies of power stations having proposed man-made cooling lakes consider physical and chemical relationships between the watershed and lake; use of a new habitat by birds, insects, and other animals of both beneficial and adverse aspects; and the potential for successful rehabilitation of the lake basin if the station is decommissioned.

Both beneficial and adverse effects of the lake on the environment should be considered.

Water quality of the artificial lake may be in fluenced not only by source water quality but also by relationships with soils and the surrounding land scape. Development of a watershed management plan is needed as well as an estimate of the amount of runoff of dissolved substances and soil into the lake from the surrounding landscape.

A new reservoir forms a new habitat for plants and animals and results in a loss of existing habitat.

Waterfowl may be attracted in substantial numbers during their normal migration, and their migration habits may be altered, e.g., by overwintering in a northern climate on a warm-water lake. Waterfowl attracted to a lake may cause economic loss to agriculture by their feeding activities, degradation of water quality, and other adverse effects. In addition, the birds themselves may suffer adversely from such effects as disruption of migrational patterns.

These and other factors need to be discussed.

Evaporative cooling towers affect ecosystems by deposition of drift containing dissolved minerals on the landscape or by production of fog. Drift may be beneficial or adverse depending on the chemical com pounds and elements being deposited and the amounts of deposition.

The baseline program is designed to evaluate the potential effects of drift and to establish reference measurements for comparison with later operational monitoring observations by determining the amounts and kinds of airborne chemicals being deposited on the site prior to cooling tower operation.

Acceptable data could be obtained from existing sources of information or from monthly sampling of collectors that collect both dry and wet fallout. If a monitoring program is used, it is normally continued for at least 1 year. Table 4 sug gests chemicals that are usually considered in plan ning the program.

Drift from saltwater or brackish-water cooling towers contains NaCI and other salts. The baseline chemical measurements establish the Na and C I con tent of soils and plants in the expected drift field of cooling towers that use seawater or brackish water. Baseline soil measurements normally include the con ductivity of saturated extracts and pH of samples ob tained from the expected drift field. If the drift from either freshwater or saltwater towers is likely to contain toxic substances, their con centrations are measured unless it is clear that the amounts and concentrations are sufficiently low to 4.11-5 TABLE 4 ELEMENTS AND COMPOUNDS

OF POSSIBLE CONCERN IN CHEMICAL MONITORING

PROGRAMS FOR TERRESTRIAL

SYSTEMS Group Macronutrient Micronutrient Chemicals commonly found in environ ment, some required by animals Toxic Biocides added to. cooling waters Chemical Substances

+ -.3 .2 NH 4 , NO ,PO 4 SO 4 , Ca, Mg, K Cu,Zn,B,Mo,V,Mn,Fe-I -2 Na.C,F,HCO ,CO 3 ,Co,I Pb,Hg,Cd,Cr,As,Ni All Relative Biological Hazard Minor or no risk except in extremely large quantities.

No hazards within the range of concentrations found in nature. Toxicity possible if concentrations are moderate.

Minor risk at ordinary concen tration. Risk from halogens dependent on chemical form. Carbonates usually innocuous.

Sodium salts have high-risk osmotic effects on plants at high concentration.

Presumed high biological risk at all concentrations above those normally found in nature. Presumed high biological risk if present in cooling-tower drift.(I (i preclude both short-term and cumulative adverse ef fects. Adverse biological effects can usually be ruled out with reasonable certainty for most elements and compounds found in nature when the expected addi tions combined with preexisting levels would not raise the concentration of the toxic substance outside the range of variation normally found in the biota or soils of the region. Chemical analyses of soils, plants, and animals in the drift field of freshwater cooling towers are not usually needed when all of the following apply: (1) the dominant salts are harmless mixtures of biological nutrients as shown in Table 4, (2) the ex pected peak deposition beyond the site boundary is less than 20 kg/ha-yr (no more than 50% in any 30 day period during the growing season) of mixed salts, 6 and (3) the drift does not contain toxic ele ments or compounds in amounts that could be hazar dous to plants or animals either by direct or indirect exposure over the expected lifetime of the facility.

Usually, reference specimens of soils, plants, and animals for possible future analysis are retained in cases where it is determined that drift presents a chemical hazard to the environment.

The specimens may consist of subsamples of materials that were col lected prior to tower operation and analyzed for baseline data. Such stored samples should be ade quately protected for analytical purposes.

Construction Monitoring If unavoidable construction practices cause a threat to some natural population or ecosystem that could extend beyond the bounds of the area actually dedicated to construction or associated activities, conscientious construction practice control coupled with systematic inspection is usually sufficient but sometimes biological monitoring of important species is necessary.

In such cases, it is reasonable that studies be designed to document the impact and develop possible corrective actions.

Decommissioning Consideration should be given to the potential for reclamation of the plant site, impoundment basins, and transmission corridors upon decommissioning of the station (see Regulatory Guide 4.2). Operational Monitoring Monitoring after commencement of station opera tion is intended to determine whether or not there are adverse biological effects attributable to operation.

This monitoring program is outlined in detail in the technical specifications that are issued in connection with the station operating license. The scope of these 'Interim value based on staff experience to date.studies is determined by the degree of direct linkage between the proposed station and the terrestrial ecosystem.

It is not necessary to hypothesize vague effects or to undertake a program to measure a phenomenon that has no reasonable relationship to station operation.

However, when an adverse relationship between station operation and a ter restrial community is reasonably thought to exist, a thorough evaluation is necessary.

This evaluation should begin I to 2 years prior to station operation.

Consultation with the NRC staff is recommended to determine the appropriate scope and term of any fol lowup studies.

There may be cases in which no important impact on the terrestrial ecological community is an ticipated.

When such cases are adequately supported, there may be no necessity for terrestrial monitoring during operation.

There also may be cases in which no significant impacts are detected by the required monitoring programs.

In such cases, after review and approval by the staff, these programs may be eliminated.

It should be noted that some minimal effort programs may be designed for detection of long-term impacts or unanticipated changes and thus should not be- eliminated.

C. REGULATORY

POSITION 1. It is important to coordinate all the programs discussed in Regulatory Guides 4.1, "Programs for Monitoring Radioactivity in the Environs of Nuclear Power Plants," and 4.2, "Preparation of En vironmental Reports for Nuclear Power Stations." Since precise predictions and assessments of impacts on terrestrial ecological systems are not always possi ble, reasonable professional interpretations should be made when quantitative prediction is impossible.

2. Adequate assessment of current land-use status should show (by a table, for example) major land-use categories and areas devoted to each category along with aerial photographs showing the same categories.

When data are not available from existing records, an acceptable means of acquiring them would be through the use of aerial photographs in conjunction with ground reconnaissance.

The scale of photographs should be appropriate to the degree of detail required.

Federal, State, regional, and local planning authorities should be consulted to deter mine the existence of present or planned areas dedicated to the public interest or in which siting would be in conflict with preexisting zoning plans. Such contacts should be documented.

3. Discussion of soils should include association names, capability classes, 7 and percentage of site coverage by each association.

When numerous as sociations of minor extent are present, it is acceptable

'U.S. Department of Agriculture I-VIII System should be used.4.11-7 to account for 10 to 15% of the total area in a miscel laneous category, except for areas of unique value. Detailed consideration of soils and their production potential is necessary for sites located in areas that are especially productive of agricultural or forestry products.

4. Biological monitoring programs should be in itially devised to be screening procedures to detect undesirable effects. If adverse biological effects are detected, detailed quantitative biological and ecological analyses may be required to determine causes and to devise remedies.

If adverse effects are not detected, quantitative studies are not needed. The species inventory of the site should include im portant habitats and normal seasonal variations.

Locally prominent or important vascular plants, mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, insects, and other plants and animals should be included.

The in ventory should be reasonably complete but may be terminated when additional field effort no longer yields significant numbers of previously unobserved species.

Insect surveys should provide information on im portant species such as disease vectors, pests, and pollinating insects. Interpretation of insect data should include consideration of the possibility of adverse consequences to animals, vegetation, or humans that might be caused by construction or operation of the station. Adverse consequences can usually be determined by consultation with State agricultural authorities.

Normally, detailed field sur veys of insect populations are not needed. Protection of terrestrial systems is usually adequate when it can be shown that (I) habitat losses or altera tions of important species' are small with respect to the amount available within the regional or local con text, (2) chemical emissions from the station are suf ficiently small to permit reasonable assurance that no adverse effect will occur, and (3) no mechanism ex ists for causing unintended destruction of organisms, or its occurrence is infrequent enough to give reasonable assurance that whole populations will not be adversely affected.

Environmental protection should be achieved by control of common sources of environmental effects.

These include soil erosion, siltation, use of herbicides, dust and noise during construction, and others. Biological consequences can usually be prevented or reduced to acceptable levels through proper manage ment. If cooling towers are being considered, the mineral content of the cooling water supply should be deter"The term important species, as used in this guide, is defined in Regulatory Guide 4.2.mined in the baseline studies. An estimate should be made of the amounts and dispersion of salts expected to be deposited from the towers. The estimate should be based on the cooling water quality, manufacturer's specifications for drift release from the towers, con centration factors, and prevailing meteorological conditions at the site. Meteorological dispersion models are useful to obtain estimates of drift deposi tion. Estimated drift deposition from cooling towers may be plotted on a base map or graph centered on the towers and showing isopleths of salt deposition.

The maps should have a radius sufficient to show the points at which the amounts of drift from the tower fall within the normal range of annual variation of background deposition from other sources. They should also show the vegetation types that occur in the drift field. Reconnaissance and inspection of biota in the drift field before and after cooling tower operation is a means recommended for detection of possible adverse effects of drift. The baseline inspection should be carried out by specialists in biology work ing systematically from checklists of possible adverse effects in the community.

Seasonal aerial and ground-level photographs in color or infrared false color of permanent vegetation plots are often useful aids. Quantitative chemical analysis of plants, animals, and soils are needed if chemical deposits are expected to exceed toxic or injurious thresholds.

Population monitoring of selected species could also be needed in such cases. The assessment of cooling lakes and transmission and access corridors should include detailed con sideration of the effects of land diversion on local, regional, and State agricultural production, forest production, or recreational uses. The assessment should include both adverse and beneficial aspects.

Where a cooling lake is proposed, the baseline studies should include a preliminary assessment of the poten tial for reclamation of the lake bottom for agricultural, ecological, or forestry use after decom missioning.

It is not necessary, however, to prejudge future use of the lake site. It is sufficient to establish whether the option exists to reclaim the site for other productive uses or whether the creation of the lake constitutes an irretrievable change in land use. The assessment should also include a report of the number of hectares of the lake site that will remain undisturbed during construction, the number of hec tares and vegetation that will be disturbed, the source of "borrow" material for dike construction, and the management of topsoil removed during construction.

Use of topsoil stripped from the lake bottom for vegetative stabilization of dikes and for ultimate replacement on the lake bottom for rehabilitation should be considered.

4.11-8 When soil disruption during construction at the site or in transmission corridors is expected to expose substrates or a proposed lake is to be built on sub strates having a potential for affecting water quality, chemical analyses of the substrates should be per formed. The elements to be measured depend on the nature of the substrate.

If the substrate is formerly fertilized farmland, analysis for elements common to chemical fertilizers is needed. If the substrate is land of some special history, such as strip-mine land, ap propriate chemical assessment of the water-soluble and exchangeable components of the substrate should be made to obtain an estimate of chemical in put to water bodies. Special attention is given those elements that could reach toxic concentrations in water, accumulate to toxic levels in food webs, or af fect the pH of water bodies. The chemical analyses should be performed on appropriate chemical ex tracts of the soil material.

The characterization of soil material should also include determination of ex change capacity, organic matter, pH, and textural class. When a reservoir is proposed, the baseline studies should include reasonable predictions of the number of birds (especially waterfowl)

expected to use the lake on an annual basis, their expected residence time, the expected impact on farmlands, and all other impacts either on the birds themselves or on the sur rounding area due to their presence.

The estimates should be the best obtainable based on known flyways, estimates of farm acreages nearby, literature, or local evidence of bird utilization of other reser voirs under similar conditions.

5. Information needed for transmission and access corridor assessment is generally similnr to that for sites; however, certain considerations apply specifically to corridors.

Detailed land-use informa tion along corridors is needed. The description should include the distance transversed and locations of principal land-use types such as forests, permanent pastures, cultivated crops, parks, preserves, water bodies, recreation areas, and housing areas. Special features such as historic sites; monuments;

archaeological sites; caves; mineralogical, paleon tological, or geological areas of special interest;

stream crossings;

and road crossings should be iden tified and their locations specified.

Information may be presented in the form of land-use maps that are keyed to descriptive text. It is often useful to sub divide long corridors into convenient segments con taining similar land-use types for descriptive pur poses. It is usually adequate to describe biotic com munities in terms of principal vegetative associations such as oak-hickory forest. The animals most likely to be found along corridors may be determined from literature studies, local experts, or field reconnais sance. Emphasis should be placed on "important" species as defined in Regulatory Guide 4.2. Comprehensive field inventories of biota along tran smission corridors are not usually needed. The potential occurrence of threatened or en dangered plants and animals or their critical habitat adjacent to or within the proposed corridors should be .investigated.

Local, State, and Federal authorities (e.g., the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and State wildlife agencies)

should be consulted to determine protected species that reasonably

'could be expected to occur and the locations of possible occurrences along corridors.

If potential areas are identified, field inspection of these areas may be necessary to verify, the presence or absence of the protected organisms.

If proposed transmission corridors could add to the further endangerment of a protected species, realign ment in the critical areas might be required.

6. When adverse effects of construction or opera tion can be reasonably inferred from information ob tained during the baseline phase, quantitative studies that can be compared with later studies during con struction or operational phases should be initiated.

Such studies include measurements of population densities of endangered species, chemical measure ments of soils and biota within the potential drift field of a cooling tower, or annual aerial photography, for example.

The preferred method of biological protection on many construction sites is direct control of potential ly injurious work practice.

Systematic inspection dur ing construction at the site, along corridors, and in adjacent areas should be used to detect injurious or unauthorized activities.

Examples of items that may be checked are: a. Traffic Control -Vehicles should be confined to authorized roadways and stream crossings.

b. Dust Control -Dust should be controlled by such means as watering, graveling, or paving. Areas subject to wind erosion should be controlled by mul ching, seeding, or the equivalent.

c. Noise Control -Noise should be monitored at site boundaries.

d. Smoke Control -Open slash burning of plant material should be conducted in accordance with local and State regulations.

e. Chemical and Solid Waste Control -Cement, chemicals, fuels, sanitary wastes, lubricants, bitumens, flushing solutions, or other potentially hazardous materials should be salvaged or dis charged safely in accordance with existing regula tions. Spills should be cleaned up before they become a hazard.4.11-9 f. Soil Erosion and Sediment Control -Erosion should be controlled by piped drainage, diversion dikes, flumes, sediment control structures, ground covers, or other appropriate means.

g. Dewatering

-Dewatering should be confined to the area needed for construction;

test wells or preexisting wells should be monitored for changes in the water table. If, after analysis of the inventory of species and consideration of potential effects of the nuclear power station, a conclusion is warranted that there will be no adverse impact on biota, there may be no need to carry out biological monitoring programs at the construction and operational stages. Special studies could be necessary if adverse effects on biota are detected and there is no obvious ex plapation or remedy for the effect. In the usual case, however, if habitat loss or alteration, chemical emis sions, or direct destruction of organisms do not con stitute a threat to a population of an important species, the effect need not be studied further.

D. IMPLEMENTATION

The purpose of this section is to provide informa tion to applicants regarding the NRC staff's plans for using this regulatory guide. This guide reflects current NRC staff practice.

Therefore, except in those cases in which the appli cant proposes an acceptable alternative method for complying with specified portions of the Commis sion's regulations, the method described herein is be ing and will continue to be used in the evaluation of submittals for operating license or construction per mit applications until this guide is revised as a result of suggestions from the public or additional staff review.4.11-10

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 OFFICIAL BUSINESS PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE, $300 POSTAGE AND FEES PAID UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION


Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=Regulatory_Guide_4.11&oldid=1856886"