[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 42 (Friday, March 3, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 13329-13357]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-04102]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 88 , No. 42 / Friday, March 3, 2023 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 13329]]
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
10 CFR Part 51
[NRC-2018-0296]
RIN 3150-AK32
Renewing Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses--Environmental
Review
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is proposing to
amend its environmental protection regulations by updating the
Commission's 2013 findings on the environmental effect of renewing the
operating license of a nuclear power plant. The NRC proposes to
redefine the number and scope of the environmental issues that must be
addressed during the review of each application for license renewal. As
part of this update, the NRC has prepared draft Revision 2 to NUREG-
1437, ``Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of
Nuclear Plants'' (LR GEIS), to account for new information and to
address the impacts of initial license renewals, which the previous
versions considered, as well as first subsequent license renewals. The
draft revised LR GEIS provides the technical basis for this proposed
rule. The NRC is providing an opportunity for interested parties to
submit comments on this proposed rule, the draft revised LR GEIS, and
associated draft guidance.
DATES: Submit comments by May 2, 2023. Comments received after this
date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the NRC is
able to ensure consideration only for comments received on or before
this date.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods
(unless this document describes a different method for submitting
comments on a specific subject):
Federal rulemaking website: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0296. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Dawn Forder; telephone: 301-415-3407;
email: [email protected]. For technical questions contact the
individuals listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this document.
Email comments to: [email protected]. If you do
not receive an automatic email reply confirming receipt, then contact
us at 301-415-1677.
Mail comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, ATTN: Rulemakings and
Adjudications Staff.
For additional direction on obtaining information and submitting
comments, see ``Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments'' in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Yanely Malave-Velez, Office of Nuclear
Material Safety and Safeguards, telephone: 301-415-1519, email:
[email protected], Jennifer Davis, Office of Nuclear Material
Safety and Safeguards, telephone: 301-415-3835, email:
[email protected], or Kevin Folk, Office of Nuclear Material
Safety and Safeguards, telephone 301-415-6944, email:
[email protected]. All are staff of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Executive Summary
A. Purpose of the Regulatory Action
The Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (AEA) authorizes the NRC
to issue licenses to operate commercial nuclear power plants for up to
40 years. The AEA and the NRC's regulations allow for the renewal of
these licenses for up to an additional 20 years for each renewal term,
which could either be an initial license renewal (initial LR) or
subsequent license renewal (SLR). There are no limitations in the AEA
or the NRC's regulations restricting the number of times a license may
be renewed. The NRC's review of a license renewal application proceeds
along two independent regulatory tracks: one for safety issues and
another for environmental issues. The NRC's regulations for the license
renewal safety review are set forth in part 54 of title 10 of the Code
of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), ``Requirements for Renewal of
Operating Licenses for Nuclear Power Plants.'' The NRC's environmental
protection regulations are set forth in 10 CFR part 51, ``Environmental
Protection Regulations for Domestic Licensing and Related Regulatory
Functions.''
The license renewal application includes both general and technical
information that demonstrates that an applicant is in compliance with
the NRC's regulations in 10 CFR part 54. During the safety review, the
license renewal applicant must demonstrate that the effects of aging
will be adequately managed so that the intended function(s) will be
maintained consistent with the current licensing basis for the period
of extended operation. Information in the application must be
sufficiently detailed to permit the NRC staff to complete its review
and develop the safety finding.
Separate from the safety analysis, the applicant prepares an
evaluation of the potential impacts to the environment of facility
operation for an additional 20 years, which the NRC uses to inform its
environmental analysis. Under the NRC's environmental protection
regulations in 10 CFR part 51, which implements the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), renewal of a nuclear power plant
operating license requires the preparation of an environmental impact
statement (EIS). To support the preparation of these EISs, the NRC
issued a rule in 1996 (61 FR 28467) and a supporting analysis in NUREG-
1437, ``Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of
Nuclear Plants'' (LR GEIS). The LR GEIS defines which impacts would
essentially be the same at all nuclear power plants or a subset of
plants (i.e., generic or Category 1 issues) and which impacts could be
different at different plants and would require a plant-specific
analysis to determine the impacts (Category 2 issues). The
determinations are codified in Table B-1, ``Summary of Findings on NEPA
Issues for License Renewal of Nuclear Power Plants,'' of appendix B to
subpart A of 10 CFR part 51 (hereafter referred to as ``Table B-
1'').\1\ For each license
[[Page 13330]]
renewal application, those impacts that require a plant-specific
analysis must be analyzed by the applicant in its environmental report
and by the NRC in a supplemental environmental impact statement (SEIS)
to NUREG-1437. The 1996 rule was amended in 2013 (78 FR 37281) by the
issuance of an updated rule and publication of LR GEIS, Revision 1. In
2014, the NRC issued a final rule that addressed the generic
determination of the environmental impacts of continued storage of
spent nuclear fuel beyond a reactor's licensed life for operation (79
FR 56238). That rule amended 10 CFR part 51 by revising the findings of
two environmental issues listed in Table B-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ As stated in the introductory paragraph of appendix B to
subpart A of 10 CFR part 51, the Commission has assessed the
environmental impacts associated with granting a renewed operating
license for a nuclear power plant to a licensee who holds either an
operating license or construction permit as of June 30, 1995.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This proposed rule would further redefine the number and scope of
the environmental issues that must be addressed by the NRC and
applicants during license renewal environmental reviews. These changes
are based primarily on the lessons learned and knowledge gained from
initial LR and SLR reviews performed by the NRC since development of
the 2013 LR GEIS. The changes also address Commission direction in
Staff Requirements Memorandum (SRM)-SECY-22-0024, ``Rulemaking Plan for
Renewing Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses--Environmental Review
(RIN 3150-AK32, NRC-2018-0296),'' by thoroughly evaluating SLR in this
review and update. In addition, new scientific research, public
comments, changes in environmental regulations and impacts methodology,
and other new information were considered in evaluating the
significance of impacts associated with license renewal.
B. Major Provisions
In the 2013 rule, there were 78 environmental issues, 17 of which
required a plant-specific analysis (Category 2 issues) during license
renewal environmental reviews. In this proposed rule, there are 80
environmental issues, 20 of which require a plant-specific analysis.
The following points summarize the primary proposed changes to the
NRC's requirements in part 51:
1. Several issues were consolidated, including some issues that
were combined with other related Category 1 or Category 2 issues.
2. One new Category 1 issue was added: ``Greenhouse gas impacts on
climate change.''
3. One issue was changed from Category 2 to Category 1: ``Severe
accidents.''
4. Two new Category 2 issues were added: ``Climate change impacts
on environmental resources'' and ``National Marine Sanctuaries Act:
sanctuary resources.''
5. One Category 2 issue was divided into three separate Category 2
issues: ``Endangered Species Act: federally listed species and critical
habitats under U.S. Fish and Wildlife jurisdiction,'' ``Endangered
Species Act: federally listed species and critical habitats under
National Marine Fisheries Service jurisdiction,'' and ``Magnuson-
Stevens Act: essential fish habitat.''
C. Costs and Benefits
The NRC prepared a draft regulatory analysis to determine the
expected quantitative and qualitative costs and benefits of the
proposed rule and associated guidance. The draft regulatory analysis
concluded that the proposed rule and associated guidance would result
in undiscounted total net savings of $91.4 million to the industry and
$31.7 million to the NRC.
The draft regulatory analysis also reflected qualitative factors to
be considered in the NRC's rulemaking decision. Qualitative factors
include regulatory stability, predictability, and clarity in the
licensing process. The proposed rule would reduce the cost to the
industry of preparing environmental reports for license renewal
applications by focusing resources on plant-specific analyses. The NRC
would also recognize similar reductions in cost and be able to better
focus its resources on plant-specific environmental issues during
reviews of reactor license renewal applications.
For more information, see the draft regulatory analysis (available
as indicated in Section XV, Availability of Documents, of this
document).
Table of Contents
I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments
A. Obtaining Information
B. Submitting Comments
II. Background
A. Environmental Review--Current 10 CFR Part 51 Regulations
B. Rulemaking History
III. Discussion
A. Proposed Amendments
B. Environmental Impacts To Be Reviewed
C. Draft Revised Generic Environmental Impact Statement for
License Renewal of Nuclear Power Plants
D. Proposed Actions and Basis for Changes to 10 CFR Part 51
IV. Availability of Guidance for Comment and Specific Request for
Comment
A. Guidance Documents
B. Applicability of License Renewal Terms
V. Section-by-Section Analysis
VI. Regulatory Flexibility Certification
VII. Regulatory Analysis
VIII. Backfitting and Issue Finality
IX. Cumulative Effects of Regulation
X. Plain Writing
XI. National Environmental Policy Act
XII. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement
XIII. Voluntary Consensus Standards
XIV. Public Meetings
XV. Availability of Documents
I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments
A. Obtaining Information
Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2018-0296 when contacting the NRC
about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain
publicly available information related to this action by any of the
following methods:
Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0296.
NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System
(ADAMS): You may obtain publicly available documents online in the
ADAMS Public Documents collection at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select ``Begin Web-based ADAMS
Search.'' For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's Public
Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, at 301-415-4737,
or by email to [email protected]. For the convenience of the reader,
instructions about obtaining materials referenced in this document are
provided in the ``Availability of Documents'' section.
NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public
documents, by appointment, at the NRC's PDR, Room P1 B35, One White
Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. To make
an appointment to visit the PDR, please send an email to
[email protected] or call 1-800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737, between
8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. eastern time (ET), Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
Technical Library: The Technical Library, which is located
at Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland
20852, is open by appointment only. Interested parties may make
appointments to examine documents by contacting the NRC Technical
Library by email at [email protected] between 8:00 a.m. and 4:00
p.m. ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
B. Submitting Comments
The NRC encourages electronic comment submission through the
Federal rulemaking website (https://
[[Page 13331]]
www.regulations.gov). Please include Docket ID NRC-2018-0296 in your
comment submission.
The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact
information that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your
comment submission. The NRC will post all comment submissions at
https://www.regulations.gov as well as enter the comment submissions
into ADAMS. The NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to
remove identifying or contact information.
If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons
for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to
include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be
publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should
state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to
remove such information before making the comment submissions available
to the public or entering the comment into ADAMS.
II. Background
NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License
Renewal of Nuclear Plants,'' (LR GEIS) is intended to streamline the
NRC's license renewal environmental review by documenting a systematic
approach that the NRC uses to evaluate the environmental impacts of
renewing the operating licenses of commercial nuclear power plants. The
LR GEIS also provides the technical basis for Table B-1, in appendix B
to subpart A, and the Commission's other license renewal regulations in
10 CFR part 51, ``Environmental Protection Regulations for Domestic
Licensing and Related Regulatory Functions.'' This Background section
provides an overview of the environmental review process and the
rulemaking history related to the license renewal process under which a
power reactor licensee may apply for a renewal of its operating
license.
A. Environmental Review--Current 10 CFR Part 51 Regulations
As a Federal agency, the NRC must comply with the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) by assessing the potential
environmental effects of a proposed agency action before approving or
disapproving that proposed action. The regulations implementing the
NRC's NEPA review are found in 10 CFR part 51.
Under NEPA, Federal agencies prepare an environmental impact
statement (EIS) for any major Federal action significantly affecting
the quality of the human environment. In addition, the Commission has
identified at Sec. 51.20 certain categories of NRC proposed actions
that require the preparation of an EIS, including the renewal of a
license to operate a nuclear power reactor.\2\ For each plant-specific
review, the NRC prepares a supplemental environmental impact statement
(SEIS) to the LR GEIS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The term Nuclear reactor is defined in Sec. 50.2,
``Definitions.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The NRC's provisions at Sec. 51.53(c) require an applicant for
renewal of a nuclear power plant license to submit with its application
a separate document entitled ``Applicant's Environmental Report--
Operating License Renewal Stage'' that describes in detail the affected
environment around the plant, the modifications directly affecting the
environment or any plant effluents and any planned refurbishment
activities. In addition, the report must address the environmental
impacts of alternatives and any other matters described in Sec. 51.45,
which include the following: (1) the impact of the proposed action on
the environment, (2) any adverse environmental impacts that cannot be
avoided, (3) alternatives to the proposed action, (4) the relationship
between local short-term uses of the environment and maintenance and
enhancement of long-term productivity, and (5) any irreversible or
irretrievable commitments of resources. Within its environmental
report, the applicant is required to include analyses of the
environmental impacts of the proposed action, including the impacts of
refurbishment activities, if any, associated with license renewal and
the impacts of operation during the renewal term, for those issues
identified as Category 2 issues in appendix B to subpart A of 10 CFR
part 51. Additionally, the applicant is required to provide any new and
significant information of which it is aware in its environmental
report. If there is no new and significant information for a Category 1
issue, the applicant can rely on that Category 1 generic finding and
analyses in the LR GEIS. The applicant's environmental report informs
the NRC's independent evaluation.
Before making a decision on a renewed license application for a
nuclear power plant, the NRC is required to prepare and distribute, for
public comment, a draft SEIS. The draft SEIS assesses the potential
environmental impacts that may result from continued nuclear power
plant operation and any proposed refurbishment activities during the
renewal term (initial license renewal (initial LR) or subsequent
license renewal (SLR). In preparing the draft SEIS, the NRC staff will
rely on the findings in Table B-1 for Category 1 issues and analyze the
potential environmental impacts of the proposed action (license
renewal) on the affected environment and specific environmental
resources (e.g., groundwater) for Category 2 issues. Additionally, the
NRC will consider any potentially new and significant information for
Category 1 issues and for uncategorized issues. An environmental issue
may remain uncategorized where the impact level remains unknown or
uncertain, such as any activity or aspect associated with the nuclear
power plant operations that can act upon the environment in a manner or
an intensity not previously recognized or quantified. Within each
environmental resource area, the NRC staff will analyze issues that
correspond to specific, potential environmental impacts at the specific
site (e.g., within the groundwater resource area, groundwater quality
degradation resulting from water withdrawals). In the draft SEIS, the
NRC staff also will evaluate alternatives to the proposed action.
After analyzing the potential environmental impacts for each issue,
the NRC assigns one of the following three significance levels to
describe its evaluation of those impacts on that issue in either the LR
GEIS or a plant-specific SEIS:
SMALL--The environmental effects are not detectable or are so minor
that they will neither destabilize nor noticeably alter any important
attribute of the resource. For the purposes of assessing radiological
impacts, the Commission has concluded that those impacts that do not
exceed permissible levels in the Commission's regulations are
considered SMALL.
MODERATE--The environmental effects are sufficient to alter
noticeably, but not to destabilize, important attributes of the
resource.
LARGE--The environmental effects are clearly noticeable and are
sufficient to destabilize important attributes of the resource.
In assessing the significance of environmental impacts for some
environmental resources (e.g., federally protected ecological resources
and historic properties that require interagency consultation with
Federal agencies or Indian Tribes \3\), the NRC
[[Page 13332]]
assigns the appropriate impact level (other than SMALL, MODERATE, or
LARGE) in accordance with the terminology used in the relevant statutes
and their implementing regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Per 36 CFR 800.2(c)(2)(ii), the agency official will consult
with any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization that attaches
religious and cultural significance to historic properties that may
be affected by an undertaking. The term ``Indian Tribes'' refers to
Federally recognized Tribes as acknowledged by the Secretary of the
Interior pursuant to the Federally Recognized Indian Tribe List Act
of 1994 (25 U.S.C. 479a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The NRC will document its environmental review and analysis through
the preparation of a draft SEIS that will be published for public
comment in the Federal Register, with a minimum 45-day comment period,
in accordance with Sec. 51.73. Further, as provided in Sec. 51.74,
the NRC will distribute the draft SEIS to the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), other Federal agencies that have a special
expertise or jurisdiction with respect to any potential environmental
impact that may be relevant to the proposed action, the applicant, and
appropriate State, Tribal, and local agencies and clearinghouses.
Following the public comment period, the NRC will analyze any
comments received, revise its environmental analyses as appropriate,
and then prepare the final
SEIS in accordance with the requirements of Sec. 51.91. Under
Sec. 51.93, the NRC will distribute the final SEIS to many of the same
entities as the draft SEIS and to each commenter. The NRC also will
publish a notice of availability for the final SEIS in the Federal
Register. As set forth in Sec. 51.102 and following the preparation
and distribution of the final SEIS, the NRC will prepare and issue the
record of decision, which is a concise, publicly available statement
that documents the agency's decision, as informed by the final SEIS and
final safety evaluation report. The requirements for a record of
decision are described in Sec. 51.103, and include stating the NRC's
decision (e.g., the approval or disapproval of the license renewal
application), identifying the alternatives (including the proposed
action) considered by the agency, and a statement as to whether the NRC
has taken all practicable measures within its jurisdiction to avoid or
minimize environmental harm from the alternative selected and if not,
to explain why those measures were not adopted. Further, the record of
the decision will include a determination by the NRC as to whether or
not the adverse environmental impacts of license renewal are so great
that preserving the option of license renewal for energy planning
decisionmakers would be unreasonable, which is the purpose and need of
license renewal.
B. Rulemaking History
In 1986, the NRC initiated a program to develop license renewal
regulations and associated regulatory guidance in anticipation of
receiving applications for the renewal of nuclear power plant operating
licenses. In 1996, the NRC published a final rule that amended the
environmental protection regulations in 10 CFR part 51 to include
provisions for applicants seeking to renew an operating license for up
to an additional 20 years (61 FR 28467; June 5, 1996). The 1996 final
rule was based upon the analyses and findings of a May 1996 NRC
environmental impact statement, ``Generic Environmental Impact
Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants,'' NUREG-1437 (the
``1996 LR GEIS'').
Based upon the findings of the 1996 LR GEIS, the 1996 final rule
identified those license renewal environmental issues for which a
generic analysis had been determined to be appropriate (Category 1
issues). Similarly, based upon the findings of the 1996 LR GEIS, the
1996 final rule identified those environmental impacts for which a
site- or plant-specific analysis was required, both by the applicant in
its environmental report and by the NRC in its SEIS (Category 2
issues). The 1996 final rule, among other amendments to 10 CFR part 51,
added appendix B to subpart A of 10 CFR part 51, ``Environmental Effect
of Renewing the Operating License of a Nuclear Power Plant.'' Appendix
B included Table B-1 which summarized and codified the findings of the
1996 LR GEIS.
In preparing the 1996 LR GEIS, the Commission based its generic
assessment on the following factors:
(1) License renewal will involve nuclear power plants for which the
environmental impacts of operation are well understood as a result of
lessons learned and knowledge gained from operating experience and
completed license renewals.
(2) Activities associated with license renewal are expected to be
within this range of operating experience; thus, environmental impacts
can be reasonably predicted.
(3) Changes in the environment around nuclear power plants are
gradual and predictable.
The 1996 LR GEIS improved the efficiency of the license renewal
process in the following ways: (1) providing an evaluation of the types
of environmental impacts that may occur from renewing commercial
nuclear power plant operating licenses, (2) identifying and assessing
impacts that are expected to be generic (i.e., the same or similar) at
all nuclear power plants or plants with specified plant or site
characteristics, and (3) defining the number and scope of environmental
impacts that need to be addressed in plant-specific SEISs to the 1996
LR GEIS.
As identified in the 1996 final rule, a Category 1 issue is an
issue that meets the following criteria: (1) the environmental impacts
associated with the issue have been determined to apply either to all
plants or, for some issues, to plants having a specific type of cooling
system or other specified plant or site characteristic; (2) a single
significance level (i.e., small, moderate, or large) has been assigned
to the impacts (except for certain issues discussed below in more
detail); and (3) mitigation of adverse impacts associated with the
issue has been considered in the analysis, and it has been determined
that additional plant-specific mitigation measures are not likely to be
sufficiently beneficial to warrant implementation. A Category 2 issue
is defined as an issue where one or more of Category 1 criteria cannot
be met, and therefore, additional plant-specific review is required.
As stated in the 1996 final rule, the NRC recognized that
environmental issues might change over time and that additional issues
may need to be considered. As further stated in the introductory text
to Table B-1, the NRC indicated that it intended to review the material
in Table B-1 on a 10-year basis.
On December 18, 1996 (61 FR 66537), the NRC amended the 1996 final
rule to incorporate minor clarifying and conforming changes and to add
language omitted from Table B-1.
In 1999, the NRC amended 10 CFR part 51, including Table B-1, to
expand the generic findings pertaining to the environmental impacts
resulting from transportation of fuel and waste to and from a single
nuclear power plant (64 FR 48496; September 3, 1999). This final rule
also incorporated rule text consistent with the 1996 LR GEIS to address
local traffic impacts attributable to the continued operations of a
nuclear power plant during the license renewal term.
In 2013, the NRC completed the first 10-year review and update of
the 1996 LR GEIS and published a final rule (78 FR 37281; June 20,
2013) that amended Table B-1 by updating the Commission's 1996 findings
on the environmental impacts related to the renewal of nuclear power
plant operating licenses and other NRC environmental protection
regulations (e.g., 10 CFR 51.53, which sets forth the
[[Page 13333]]
contents of the applicant's environmental report, 10 CFR 51.75, and 10
CFR 51.95). The 2013 final rule redefined the number and scope of the
environmental issues that must be addressed by the NRC and applicants
during license renewal environmental reviews. These changes were
primarily based on lessons learned and knowledge gained from license
renewal environmental reviews conducted by the NRC since 1996. Together
with the final rule, the NRC issued a revised LR GEIS, NUREG-1437
Revision 1 (the ``2013 LR GEIS''), as well as Revision 1 of Regulatory
Guide (RG) 4.2, Supplement 1, ``Preparation of Environmental Reports
for Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal Applications,'' and Revision 1
to NUREG-1555, Supplement 1, ``Standard Review Plans for Environmental
Reviews for Nuclear Power Plants: Operating License Renewal.''
On July 31, 2013 (78 FR 46255), the NRC amended the 2013 final rule
to incorporate minor clarifying and conforming changes and revise the
statutory authority that was cited in the authority citation for the
final rule.
In 2014, the NRC published a final rule titled ``Continued Storage
of Spent Nuclear Fuel'' that revised the generic determination
regarding the environmental impacts of the continued storage of spent
nuclear fuel beyond a reactor's licensed life for operation and prior
to ultimate disposal (79 FR 56238; September 14, 2014). The continued
storage final rule also made conforming amendments to the
determinations of environmental effects of renewing the operating
license of a nuclear power plant. These changes addressed issues
related to the onsite storage of spent nuclear fuel, both for the
license renewal term and for the period after the licensed life for
reactor operations, and offsite radiological impacts of spent nuclear
fuel and high-level waste disposal. Specifically, the continued storage
final rule revised two environmental issues in Table B-1: (1) ``Onsite
storage of spent fuel'' and (2) ``Offsite radiological impacts of spent
nuclear fuel and high-level waste disposal.''
In August 2020, the NRC issued a notice of intent to review and
potentially update the 2013 LR GEIS \4\ (i.e., the scoping notice) in
the Federal Register (85 FR 47252; August 4, 2020). The comment period
began in August 2020 and ended in November 2020. The scoping notice
provided the public with an opportunity to submit comments and
participate in the environmental scoping process, as defined in Sec.
51.26. Specifically, the NRC invited the public to review the results
of the NRC staff's preliminary review of the LR GEIS, including a
proposal to address SLR in the LR GEIS, and asked the public to provide
comments and suggestions for other areas that should be updated. The
NRC conducted four webinars where the staff received comments from the
public. All comments provided during the 2020 scoping period were
considered in preparing the draft revised LR GEIS and are publicly
available. The official transcripts and the scoping summary report are
available as indicated in the ``Availability of Documents'' section of
this proposed rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Unless stated otherwise, references to the 2013 LR GEIS
include the changes made to two environmental issues in Table B-1 as
a part of the 2014 Continued Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel final
rule. These changes are discussed in Section 1.7.2 of the draft
revised LR GEIS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In July 2021, the staff submitted SECY-21-0066, ``Rulemaking Plan
for Renewing Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses--Environmental
Review (RIN 3150-AK32; NRC-2018-0296),'' to request Commission approval
to initiate a rulemaking to amend Table B-1 and update the 2013 LR GEIS
and associated guidance. The rulemaking plan also proposed to remove
the word ``initial'' from Sec. 51.53(c)(3), which, as described above,
governs license renewal applicant's environmental reports; this change
would have included applicants for SLR in the section's scope. The plan
would have also made corresponding changes to the LR GEIS and the
associated guidance.
In February 2022, the Commission issued SRM-SECY-21-0066,
``Rulemaking Plan for Renewing Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses--
Environmental Review (RIN 3150-AK32; NRC-2018-0296).'' The Commission
disapproved the staff's recommendation and directed the staff to
develop a rulemaking plan that aligned with the Commission Order CLI-
22-03, and recent decisions in Turkey Point, CLI-22-02, and Peach
Bottom, CLI-22-04, regarding the NEPA analysis of SLR applications.
These orders concluded that the staff did not conduct an adequate NEPA
analysis for the SLR period and further stated that the staff cannot
exclusively rely on the LR GEIS for Category 1 issues in SLR
environmental reviews. The SRM also directed the staff to include in
the rulemaking plan a proposal to remove the word ``initial'' from
Sec. 51.53(c)(3) and to revise the LR GEIS and Table B-1 and
associated guidance to fully account for one term of SLR. The SRM also
directed the staff to provide options for a future rulemaking effort
regarding the 10-year regulatory update.
In March 2022, the staff submitted SECY-22-0024, ``Rulemaking Plan
for Renewing Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses--Environmental
Review (RIN 3150-AK32; NRC-2018-0296),'' to request Commission approval
to initiate a rulemaking that would align with the Commission Order
CLI-22-03 and recent decisions in Orders CLI-22-02 and CLI-22-04
regarding the NEPA analysis of SLR applications, as well as to remove
the word ``initial'' from Sec. 51.53(c)(3) and to revise the LR GEIS
and Table B-1 and associated guidance to fully account for one term of
SLR. The staff also proposed to update the LR GEIS to consider new
technical data from completed environmental reviews, changes to
environmental laws and regulations, and other information.
In April 2022, the Commission issued SRM-SECY-22-0024, ``Rulemaking
Plan for Renewing Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses--Environmental
Review (RIN 3150-AK32; NRC-2018-0296),'' approving the staff's
recommendation to proceed with rulemaking.
In April 2022, the staff submitted SECY-22-0036, ``Rulemaking Plan
for Renewing Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses--10-Year
Environmental Regulatory Update (NRC-2022-0087)'' that provided options
for a future rulemaking effort to incorporate further changes to the LR
GEIS as part of the 10-year regulatory update to amend Table B-1.
Because the current rulemaking would address all necessary issues, the
staff recommended that a future rulemaking for updating the LR GEIS and
Table B-1 be deferred, to begin no sooner than FY 2031. The staff
further recommended that the current update to the LR GEIS constitute
the update for this review cycle.
In June 2022, the Commission issued SRM-SECY-22-0036 approving the
staff's recommendation.
III. Discussion
A. Proposed Amendments
The proposed amendments to 10 CFR part 51 would revise the existing
requirements for environmental reviews of applications for a license
renewal of operating nuclear power plants. The proposed amendments
would codify the updated generic conclusions of the draft revised LR
GEIS for those issues for which a generic conclusion regarding the
potential environmental impacts of issuing an initial or subsequent
renewed license for a nuclear power plant can be reached. These
conclusions have been updated to specifically account for one
[[Page 13334]]
term of SLR as well as initial LR and other new information since the
last LR GEIS update. These issues are identified as Category 1 issues
in the draft revised LR GEIS. The Category 1 issues identified and
described in the draft revised LR GEIS may be applied to any initial LR
or SLR application for operating nuclear power plants covered by the LR
GEIS and have been determined to have a SMALL impact for all plants or
a subset of plants. Table B-1 in appendix B to subpart A of 10 CFR part
51 summarizes and codifies the Commission's findings for all Category 1
issues. The revisions to Table B-1 account for one term of SLR; reflect
lessons learned, knowledge gained, and experience from license renewal
environmental reviews performed since development of the 2013 LR GEIS;
consider changes to applicable laws and regulations; and factor in new
scientific data and methodology with respect to the assessment of
potential environmental impacts of nuclear power plant license renewal.
In addition, the proposed amendments include conforming changes to the
provisions of Sec. 51.53(c)(3) and Sec. 51.95. These proposed changes
are intended to maintain the accuracy of the LR GEIS and ensure that
future environmental reviews meet the ``hard look'' standard to fully
account for the environmental impacts of initial LR and SLR, as
documented in the draft revised LR GEIS.
B. Environmental Impacts To Be Reviewed
In the draft revised LR GEIS, the NRC reevaluated the Category 1
generic findings and determined that many of the environmental impacts
of continued nuclear power plant operations and refurbishment during
the renewal term (initial LR or SLR) would be SMALL. However, license
renewal applicants in their environmental reports and the NRC staff in
the SEIS would still need to evaluate whether new and significant
information exists that would require a plant-specific analysis for
that issue. See Section III.C of this document for a more detailed
discussion of the process used in the draft revised LR GEIS.
In the draft revised LR GEIS, the NRC identified a total of 80
environmental issues that may be associated with operation and
refurbishment during the renewal term. Chapter 4 of the draft revised
LR GEIS describes the impact findings and impact significance level of
SMALL, MODERATE, or LARGE, or a range where applicable, for each
Category 1 and Category 2 issue. Of the 80 issues, the NRC identified
59 environmental issues as Category 1 issues. Applicants and the NRC
staff would be required to rely on the generic finding for each
Category 1 issue as supported by the analysis in the draft revised LR
GEIS, which would be codified in the proposed Table B-1.
The draft revised LR GEIS identifies 20 environmental issues as
Category 2 issues. These issues cannot be evaluated generically and
must be evaluated by the applicant, in its environmental report, and
the NRC staff, in the draft SEIS, using plant-specific information. For
example, for the issue, ``Surface water use conflicts (plants with
cooling ponds or cooling towers using makeup water from a river),'' the
staff found in the draft revised LR GEIS that impacts could be of small
or moderate significance based on site-specific factors that exacerbate
consumptive water use by a nuclear power plant. The factors include
increased water demand due to population growth; changes in water
demand by industrial, agricultural, or other users of the same water
source; drought and river low-flow conditions, and reduced water
availability over time due to climate change. Therefore, the potential
for water use conflicts must be addressed on a plant-specific basis.
For one environmental issue, ``Electromagnetic fields (EMF),'' the
draft revised LR GEIS identified the category as ``N/A'' (not
applicable). Studies of 60-Hz EMFs have not uncovered consistent
evidence linking harmful effects with field exposures. Because the
state of the science is currently inadequate, no generic conclusion on
human health impacts is possible. If, in the future, the Commission
finds that a general agreement has been reached by appropriate Federal
health agencies that there are adverse health effects from EMFs, the
Commission will then treat this issue in a manner similar to a Category
2 issue and require applicants to submit plant-specific reviews of
these health effects in their environmental report. Until such time,
applicants are not required to submit information on this issue.
C. Draft Revised Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License
Renewal of Nuclear Power Plants
This revision evaluates the environmental issues and findings of
the 2013 LR GEIS and updates the analysis and assumptions to fully
account for both initial LR and SLR. Lessons learned, knowledge gained,
and experience from license renewal environmental reviews performed by
the NRC since development of the 2013 LR GEIS provided a significant
source of new information for this assessment. This review included an
examination of previous site-specific considerations of potential new
and significant information for Category 1 issues. In addition, new
scientific research, changes in environmental regulations and impact
methodology, and other new information were considered in evaluating
the significance of impacts associated with initial LR and SLR. Public
comments on previous plant-specific license renewal reviews were
analyzed to assess the existing environmental issues and identify new
ones. The purpose of this evaluation was to review the findings
presented in the 2013 LR GEIS and to ensure that the analysis and
assumptions support SLR environmental reviews. In doing so, the NRC
considered the need to modify, add to, or delete any of the 78
environmental issues in the 2013 LR GEIS and codified in Table B-1.
After this evaluation, the staff identified 80 impact issues for
detailed consideration in this draft LR GEIS revision. No environmental
issues identified in Table B-1 and evaluated in the 2013 LR GEIS were
eliminated, but certain issues were consolidated, and one issue was
subdivided into three separate issues. Two new Category 2 issues and
one new Category 1 issue were added.
Environmental issues in the draft revised LR GEIS are arranged by
resource area in the same manner as the 2013 LR GEIS. In the draft
revised LR GEIS, the environmental impacts of continued nuclear power
plant operations during the license renewal term (initial LR or SLR)
and associated refurbishment activities are addressed in each resource
area. This analysis provides the technical basis for the 80 identified
environmental issues. Additionally, the NRC staff also considered a
range of replacement energy alternatives to the proposed action
(license renewal) as described in the draft revised LR GEIS. This
discussion of potential alternatives will inform the site-specific
alternatives analyses in the SEISs. The draft revised LR GEIS considers
and evaluates the 80 environmental issues within the context of the
following environmental resource (i.e., subject matter) areas: (1) land
use and visual resources, (2) air quality and noise, (3) geologic
environment, (4) water resources (surface water and groundwater
resources), (5) ecological resources (terrestrial resources, aquatic
resources, and federally protected ecological resources), (6) historic
and cultural resources, (7) socioeconomics, (8) human health
(radiological and nonradiological hazards and postulated
[[Page 13335]]
accidents), (9) environmental justice, (10) waste management and
pollution prevention (radioactive and nonradioactive waste and spent
nuclear fuel), (11) greenhouse gas emissions and climate change, (12)
cumulative effects, and (13) impacts common to all alternatives
(uranium fuel cycle and termination of nuclear power plant operations
and decommissioning). The proposed rule revises Table B-1 in appendix B
to subpart A of 10 CFR part 51 to reflect the changes in the draft
revised LR GEIS.
In the draft revised LR GEIS, the general analytical approach used
by the NRC staff to evaluate potential environmental impacts was to:
(1) describe the nuclear power plant activity or aspect of plant
operations or refurbishment that could affect a resource; (2) identify
the resource that is affected; (3) evaluate past license renewal
reviews and other available information; (4) assess the nature and
magnitude of the potential environmental impact on the affected
resource for both initial LR and SLR; (5) characterize the significance
of the effects; (6) determine whether the results of the analysis apply
to all nuclear power plants or to a specific subset of plants, or
whether a plant-specific analysis is required--i.e., whether the impact
issue is Category 1 (generic) or Category 2 (plant-specific); and (7)
consider additional mitigation measures for adverse impacts.
Identification of environmental impacts (or issues) was conducted in an
iterative rather than a stepwise manner. For example, after information
was collected and level of significance was reviewed, the staff
reexamined impacts to determine if any issues should be removed, added,
consolidated, or divided.
The Commission would like to emphasize that in complying with the
NRC's environmental regulations under Sec. 51.53(c)(3)(iv), as
required by NEPA, applicants are required to provide any new and
significant information regarding the environmental impacts of license
renewal of which the applicant is aware, including for Category 1
issues and for uncategorized issues. The proposed amendments would not
change this requirement.
The draft revised LR GEIS retains the 2013 LR GEIS definitions for
Category 1 and Category 2 issues. The draft revised LR GEIS discusses
six major types of changes to the categorization of issues:
(1) New Category 1 Issue: This would be a Category 1 issue not
previously listed in the 2013 LR GEIS. The applicant would not need to
assess this issue in its environmental report. Under Sec.
51.53(c)(3)(iv), however, the applicant is responsible for disclosing
in the environmental report any ``new and significant information'' of
which the applicant is aware. The NRC has addressed the environmental
impacts of these Category 1 issues generically for all plants in the
draft revised LR GEIS.
(2) New Category 2 Issue: This would be a Category 2 issue not
previously listed in the 2013 LR GEIS. For the new Category 2 issue,
the applicant would have to conduct an analysis of the potential
environmental impacts related to that issue and include it in the
environmental report. The analysis must include a discussion of (i) the
possible actions to mitigate any adverse impacts associated with
license renewal and (ii) the environmental impacts of alternatives to
license renewal.
(3) Existing Issue Category Change from Category 2 to Category 1:
This would be an issue that was considered as Category 2 in the 2013 LR
GEIS and would now be considered as Category 1 in the draft revised LR
GEIS. An applicant would no longer be required to conduct a plant-
specific analysis on the environmental impacts associated with this
issue. Consistent with the requirements of Sec. 51.53(c)(3)(iv), an
applicant would only be required to describe in its environmental
report any ``new and significant information'' of which it is aware.
(4) Consolidation of an Existing Category 1 Issue into an Existing
Category 2 issue: This would be an issue where an existing Category 1
issue in the 2013 LR GEIS has a similar scope as an existing Category 2
issue and has been consolidated into the Category 2 issue. Therefore,
for the new, consolidated Category 2 issue, the applicant would have to
conduct a plant-specific analysis of the potential environmental
impacts related to that issue and include it in the environmental
report. The analysis must include a discussion of (i) the possible
actions to mitigate any adverse impacts associated with license renewal
and (ii) the environmental impacts of alternatives to license renewal.
(5) Consolidation of One or More Existing Category 1 Issues into an
Existing Category 1 Issue: This would be an issue that was considered
Category 1 in the 2013 LR GEIS and would remain so. The issue has been
revised by consolidating similar aspects of one or more Category 1
issues, in whole or in part, into the existing Category 1 issue and
which affect the same environmental resources. Consistent with the
requirements of Sec. 51.53(c)(3)(iv), an applicant would only be
required to describe in its environmental report any ``new and
significant information'' of which it is aware.
(6) Subdividing an Existing Category 2 Issue into Multiple Category
2 Issues: This would be an existing Category 2 issue in the 2013 LR
GEIS that has been divided into multiple, new Category 2 issues in
order to more clearly address specific categories of environmental
resource impacts. For the new, separate Category 2 issues, the
applicant would have to conduct analyses of the potential environmental
impacts related to each separate issue, as applicable, and include it
in the environmental report. The analyses must include a discussion of
(i) the possible actions to mitigate any adverse impacts associated
with license renewal and (ii) the environmental impacts of alternatives
to license renewal.
D. Proposed Actions and Basis for Changes to 10 CFR Part 51
Appendix B to Subpart A of 10 CFR Part 51
This proposed rule revises the introductory paragraph in appendix B
to subpart A of 10 CFR part 51, to indicate the applicability to
initial LR and one term of SLR and to update the findings on
environmental issues with the data supported by the analyses in the
proposed NUREG-1437, Revision 2.
The proposed rule would also modify the language of the
introductory paragraph to clarify that Table B-1 is applicable to
nuclear power plant licensees holding an operating license,
construction permit, or combined license as of June 30, 1995
The proposed rule renames the title of Table B-1, ``Summary of NEPA
Issues for License Renewal of Nuclear Power Plants,'' as ``Summary of
Findings on Environmental Issues for Initial and One Term of Subsequent
License Renewal of Nuclear Power Plants,'' to spell out the
applicability to initial LR and SLR environmental reviews.
The draft revised LR GEIS, which is being concurrently issued for
public comment, provides a summary change table comparing the 78
environmental issues in the 2013 LR GEIS with the 80 environmental
issues in the draft revised LR GEIS. The proposed rule amends Table B-1
to reflect the changes made in the draft revised LR GEIS. As documented
in the draft revised LR GEIS, for each of the 80 environmental issues,
the scope has been expanded to fully account for the impacts of
continued nuclear power plant operations and any refurbishment
encompassing the initial LR or SLR
[[Page 13336]]
term. The changes to Table B-1 are described below:
(i) Land Use
(1) Onsite Land Use, (2) Offsite Land Use, and (3) Offsite Land Use
in Transmission Line Right-of-Ways (ROWs)--``Onsite land use,''
``Offsite land use,'' and ``Offsite Land Use in Transmission Line
Right-of-Ways (ROWs)'' are Category 1 issues. There are no changes to
the finding column of Table B-1 for these issues.
(ii) Visual Resources
(4) Aesthetic Impacts--``Aesthetic impacts'' is a Category 1 issue.
There are no changes to the finding column of Table B-1 for this issue.
(iii) Air Quality
(5) Air Quality Impacts--The proposed rule would rename ``Air
quality impacts (all plants)'' as ``Air quality impacts''; it is a
Category 1 issue. The proposed rule makes minor clarifying changes and
revisions to the order of the topics discussed in the finding column of
Table B-1 for this issue.
(6) Air Quality Effects of Transmission Lines--``Air Quality
Effects of Transmission Lines'' is a Category 1 issue. The proposed
rule would make minor clarifying changes to the finding column of Table
B-1 for this issue.
(iv) Noise
(7) Noise Impacts--``Noise impacts'' is a Category 1 issue. There
are no changes to the finding column of Table B-1 for this issue.
(v) Geologic Environment
(8) Geology and Soils--``Geology and Soils'' is a Category 1 issue.
The proposed rule would make minor clarifying changes to the finding
column of Table B-1 for this issue.
(vi) Surface Water Resources
(9) Surface Water Use and Quality (Non-Cooling System Impacts),
(10) Altered Current Patterns at Intake and Discharge Structures, (11)
Altered Salinity Gradients, (12) Altered Thermal Stratification of
Lakes, (13) Scouring Caused by Discharged Cooling Water, (14) Discharge
of Metals in Cooling System Effluent, (15) Discharge of Biocides,
Sanitary Wastes, and Minor Chemical Spills, and (16) Surface Water Use
Conflicts (Plants with Once-Through Cooling Systems)--``Surface water
use and quality (non-cooling system impacts),'' ``Altered current
patterns at intake and discharge structures,'' ``Altered salinity
gradients,'' ``Altered thermal stratification of lakes,'' ``Scouring
caused by discharged cooling water,'' ``Discharge of metals in cooling
system effluent,'' Discharge of biocides, sanitary wastes, and minor
chemical spills,'' and ``Surface water use conflicts (plants with once-
through cooling systems)'' are Category 1 issues. There are no changes
to the finding column of Table B-1 for these issues.
(17) Surface Water Use Conflicts (Plants with Cooling Ponds or
Cooling Towers Using Makeup Water from a River)--``Surface water use
conflicts (plants with cooling ponds or cooling towers using makeup
water from a river)'' is a Category 2 issue. There are no changes to
the finding column of Table B-1 for this issue.
(18) Effects of Dredging on Surface Water Quality--``Effects of
dredging on surface water quality'' is a Category 1 issue. There are no
changes to the finding column of Table B-1 for this issue.
(19) Temperature Effects on Sediment Transport Capacity--
``Temperature effects on sediment transport capacity'' is a Category 1
issue. The proposed rule would make minor clarifying changes to the
finding column of Table B-1 for this issue.
(vii) Groundwater Resources
(20) Groundwater Contamination and Use (Non-Cooling System
Impacts)--``Groundwater contamination and use (non-cooling system
impacts)'' is a Category 1 issue. The proposed rule would make minor
clarifying changes to the finding column of Table B-1 for this issue.
(21) Groundwater Use Conflicts (Plants That Withdraw Less than 100
Gallons per Minute [gpm])--``Groundwater use conflicts (plants that
withdraw less than 100 gallons per minute [gpm])'' is a Category 1
issue. There are no changes to the finding column of Table B-1 for this
issue.
(22) Groundwater Use Conflicts (Plants That Withdraw More than 100
Gallons per Minute [gpm]) and (23) Groundwater Use Conflicts (Plants
with Closed-Cycle Cooling Systems That Withdraw Makeup Water from a
River)--``Groundwater use conflicts (plants that withdraw more than 100
gallons per minute [gpm])'' and ``Groundwater use conflicts (plants
with closed-cycle cooling systems that withdraw makeup water from a
river)'' are Category 2 issues. There are no changes to the finding
column of Table B-1 for these issues.
(24) Groundwater Quality Degradation Resulting from Water
Withdrawals--``Groundwater quality degradation resulting from water
withdrawals'' is a Category 1 issue. There are no changes to the
finding column of Table B-1 for this issue.
(25) Groundwater Quality Degradation (Plants with Cooling Ponds)--
The proposed rule would combine a Category 1 issue, ``Groundwater
quality degradation (cooling ponds in salt marshes),'' and a Category 2
issue, ``Groundwater quality degradation (cooling ponds at inland
sites),'' and name it ``Groundwater quality degradation (plants with
cooling ponds).'' The combined issue is a Category 2 issue. The two
issues are combined because both issues consider the possibility of
groundwater quality and beneficial use becoming degraded as a result of
the migration of contaminants discharged to cooling ponds. Also, for
the first issue, ``Groundwater quality degradation (cooling ponds in
salt marshes),'' the NRC staff found that the issue was relevant to
only two nuclear power plants. The combined issue reflects lessons
learned and knowledge gained and new and significant information from
the Turkey Point SLR review that showed that cooling ponds can impact
groundwater and surface water in ways not previously considered. This
combined issue also considers the environmental effects of saltwater
intrusion and encroachment on adjacent surface water and groundwater
quality.
As described in the draft revised LR GEIS, the NRC staff had
previously determined that plants relying on cooling ponds in salt
marsh settings were expected to have a small impact on groundwater
quality. However, new information indicates that the impacts of
groundwater quality degradation for plants using cooling ponds in
either coastal (salt marsh) settings or at inland sites could be
greater than small (i.e., small or moderate), depending on site-
specific differences in the cooling pond's construction and operation;
water quality; site hydrogeologic conditions (including the interaction
of surface water and groundwater); and the location, depth, and pump
rate of any water supply wells contributing to or impacted by outflow
or seepage from a cooling pond. Therefore, the combined issue is a
Category 2 issue. The proposed rule revises the finding column of Table
B-1 accordingly.
(26) Radionuclides Released to Groundwater--``Radionuclides
released to groundwater'' is a Category 2 issue. There are no changes
to the finding column of Table B-1 for this issue.
(viii) Terrestrial Resources
(27) Non-Cooling System Impacts on Terrestrial Resources--The
proposed
[[Page 13337]]
rule would rename ``Effects on terrestrial resources (non-cooling
system impacts)'' as ``Non-cooling system impacts on terrestrial
resources.'' The issue is a Category 2 issue. The proposed rule makes
clarifying changes to the finding column of Table B-1 for this issue to
more precisely describe the scope of issues and resources considered
and for consistency with other ecological resources (e.g., aquatic and
terrestrial) issues.
(28) Exposure of Terrestrial Organisms to Radionuclides--``Exposure
of terrestrial organisms to radionuclides'' is a Category 1 issue. The
proposed rule would make minor clarifying changes to the finding column
of Table B-1 for this issue.
(29) Cooling System Impacts on Terrestrial Resources (Plants with
Once-Through Cooling Systems or Cooling Ponds)--``Cooling system
impacts on terrestrial resources (plants with once-through cooling
systems or cooling ponds)'' is a Category 1 issue. This issue concerns
the potential impacts of once-through cooling systems and cooling ponds
at nuclear power plants on terrestrial resources during the license
renewal term (initial LR or SLR). Cooling system operation can alter
the ecological environment in a manner that affects terrestrial
resources. Such alterations may include thermal effluent additions to
receiving water bodies; chemical effluent additions to surface water or
groundwater; impingement of waterfowl; disturbance of terrestrial
plants and wetlands associated with maintenance dredging; disposal of
dredged material; and erosion of shoreline habitat.
Thermal effluents discharged from once-through cooling systems and
cooling ponds can contribute to localized elevated water temperatures
in receiving bodies that may affect the distributions of some
terrestrial plants and animals in adjacent riparian or wetland
habitats. Thermal effluents to waters of the United States are
regulated through National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) permits to limit the effects of such discharges on the
ecological environment. In addition, wetland and riparian plant
communities present near nuclear power plants have been influenced by
many years of facility operation, and these communities have acclimated
to local conditions.
Along with thermal effluents, nonradiological chemical contaminants
may be present in cooling system discharges. The NPDES permits also
limit the allowable concentrations of contaminants in liquid effluent
to minimize impacts on the ecological environment.
Groundwater quality can be degraded by nonradiological contaminants
present in cooling ponds and cooling canals. The NRC staff found that
this issue was identified only at one operating nuclear power plant,
where the movement of hypersaline water did not have discernable
ecological impacts.
The impingement of waterfowl at cooling water intakes has been
observed at some nuclear power plants. These plants have changed
operational procedures, such as periodically cleaning zebra mussels off
intake structures, or have changed intake structure designs to minimize
impacts on waterfowl.
Maintenance dredging near cooling system intakes or outfalls
physically disturb or alter wetland or riparian habitats. Dredging and
disposal of dredged material would likely require the nuclear power
plant operator to obtain a Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404 permit
from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; best management practices and
conditions associated with these permits would minimize impacts on the
ecological environment.
The NRC determined that the effects of once-through cooling systems
and cooling ponds on terrestrial resources would be minor and would
neither destabilize nor noticeably alter any important attribute of
populations of plants or animals during the initial LR or SLR term. The
proposed rule would revise the finding column of Table B-1 for this
issue to more clearly describe the scope of issues and resources
considered and for consistency with other ecological resource issues.
(30) Cooling Tower Impacts on Terrestrial Plants--The proposed rule
would rename ``Cooling tower impacts on vegetation (plants with cooling
towers)'' as ``Cooling tower impacts on terrestrial plants''; it is a
Category 1 issue. This issue concerns the potential impacts of cooling
tower operation on terrestrial plants during the license renewal term.
Terrestrial habitats near cooling towers can be exposed to
particulates, such as salt, and can experience increased humidity,
which can deposit water droplets or ice on vegetation; these effects
can lead to structural damage and changes in plant communities.
The NRC determined that the effects of cooling towers on
terrestrial plants would be minor and would neither destabilize nor
noticeably alter any important attribute of plant populations during
the license renewal term (initial LR or SLR). The proposed rule would
revise the finding column of Table B-1 for this issue to more clearly
describe the scope of issues and resources considered and for
consistency with other ecological resource issues.
(31) Bird Collisions with Plant Structures and Transmission Lines--
``Bird collisions with plant structures and transmission lines'' is a
Category 1 issue. This issue concerns the risk of birds colliding with
plant structures and transmission lines during the license renewal
term. Tall structures on nuclear power plant sites, such as cooling
towers, meteorological towers, and transmission lines, create collision
hazards for birds that can result in injury or death.
The NRC determined that the risk of bird collisions with site
structures would remain the same for a given nuclear power plant during
the license renewal term (initial LR or SLR). Because the number of
associated bird mortalities is small for any species, it is unlikely
that losses would threaten the stability of local or migratory bird
populations or result in a noticeable impairment of the function of a
species within the ecosystem. The proposed rule would revise the
finding column of Table B-1 for this issue to more clearly describe the
scope of issues and resources considered and for consistency with other
ecological resource issues.
(32) Water Use Conflicts with Terrestrial Resources (Plants with
Cooling Ponds or Cooling Towers Using Makeup Water from a River)--
``Water use conflicts with terrestrial resources (plants with cooling
ponds or cooling towers using makeup water from a river)'' is a
Category 2 issue. This issue concerns water use conflicts that may
arise at nuclear power plants with cooling ponds or cooling towers that
withdraw makeup water from a river and how those conflicts could affect
terrestrial resources during the license renewal term.
Nuclear power plant cooling systems may compete with other users
relying on surface water resources, including downstream municipal,
agricultural, or industrial users. For plants using cooling towers,
while the volume of surface water withdrawn is substantially less than
once-through systems for a similarly sized nuclear power plant, the
makeup water needed to replenish the consumptive loss of water to
evaporation can be significant. Cooling ponds also require makeup
water. Water use conflicts with terrestrial resources, especially
riparian communities, could occur when water that supports these
resources is diminished by a combination of anthropogenic uses.
[[Page 13338]]
The NRC identified water use conflicts with terrestrial resources
at only one nuclear power plant. That nuclear power plant operator
developed and implemented a water level management plan, which
effectively mitigated the effects that downstream riparian communities
might experience from the plant's cooling water withdrawals.
The NRC determined that water use conflicts during the license
renewal term (initial LR or SLR) depend on numerous site-specific
factors, including the ecological setting of the plant; the consumptive
use of other municipal, agricultural, or industrial water users; and
the plants and animals present in the area. Water use conflicts with
terrestrial resources would be small at most nuclear power plants with
cooling ponds or cooling towers that withdraw makeup from a river but
may be moderate or large at some plants.
The proposed rule would revise the finding column of Table B-1 for
this issue to more clearly describe the scope of issues and resources
considered and for consistency with other ecological resource issues.
(33) Transmission Line Right-Of-Way (ROW) Management Impacts on
Terrestrial Resources--``Transmission line right-of-way (ROW)
management impacts on terrestrial resources'' is a Category 1 issue.
This issue concerns the effects of transmission line ROW management on
terrestrial plants and animals during the license renewal term (initial
LR or SLR).
Utilities maintain transmission line ROWs so that the ground cover
is composed of low-growing herbaceous or shrubby vegetation and
grasses. Noise and general human disturbance during ROW management can
temporarily disturb wildlife and affect their behaviors. Most nuclear
power plants maintain procedures to minimize or mitigate the potential
impacts of ROW management. The scope of transmission lines relevant to
license renewal include only the lines that connect the nuclear power
plant to the first substation that feeds into the regional power
distribution system. Typically, the first substation is located on the
nuclear power plant property within the primary industrial-use area or
other developed portion of the plant site. Therefore, effects on
terrestrial plants and animals are generally negligible.
The proposed rule would revise the finding column of Table B-1 for
this issue to more clearly describe the scope of issues and resources
considered and for consistency with other ecological resource issues.
(34) Electromagnetic Field Effects on Terrestrial Plants and
Animals--The proposed rule would rename ``Electromagnetic fields on
flora and fauna (plants, agricultural crops, honeybees, wildlife,
livestock)'' as ``Electromagnetic field effects on terrestrial plants
and animals'' for clarity; it is a Category 1 issue. This issue
concerns the effects of electromagnetic fields (EMFs) generated by
electric transmission lines at nuclear power plants on terrestrial
plants and animals, including agricultural crops, honeybees, wildlife,
and livestock, during the license renewal term (initial LR or SLR).
Studies investigating the effects of EMFs produced by operating
transmission lines up to 1,100 kV have generally not detected any
ecologically significant impact on terrestrial plants and animals.
Plants and animals near transmission lines have been exposed to many
years of transmission line operation and associated EMFs. The scope of
transmission lines relevant to license renewal include only the lines
that connect the nuclear power plant to the first substation that feeds
into the regional power distribution system. Therefore, the effects of
EMFs on terrestrial plants and animals are generally negligible.
The proposed rule would revise the finding column of Table B-1 for
this issue to more clearly describe the scope of issues and resources
considered and for consistency with other ecological resource issues.
(ix) Aquatic Resources
(35) Impingement Mortality and Entrainment of Aquatic Organisms
(Plants with Once-Through Cooling Systems or Cooling Ponds)--The
proposed rule would combine a Category 2 issue, ``Impingement and
entrainment of aquatic organisms (plants with once-through cooling
systems or cooling ponds)'' and the impingement component of a Category
1 issue, ``Losses from predation, parasitism, and disease among
organisms exposed to sublethal stresses,'' into one Category 2 issue,
``Impingement mortality and entrainment of aquatic organisms (plants
with once-through cooling systems or cooling ponds).'' This issue
pertains to impingement mortality and entrainment of finfish and
shellfish at nuclear power plants with once-through cooling systems and
cooling ponds during the license renewal term (initial LR or SLR). This
includes plants with helper cooling towers that are seasonally operated
to reduce thermal load to the receiving water body, reduce entrainment
during peak spawning periods, or reduce consumptive water use during
periods of low river flow.
In the draft revised LR GEIS, the NRC renamed the issue to include
impingement mortality, rather than simply impingement. This change is
consistent with the EPA's 2014 CWA Section 316(b) regulations and the
EPA's assessment that impingement reduction technology is available,
feasible, and has been demonstrated to be effective. Additionally, the
EPA's 2014 CWA Section 316(b) regulations establish best technology
available (BTA) standards for impingement mortality based on the fact
that survival is a more appropriate metric for determining
environmental impact than simply looking at total impingement.
Therefore, the draft revised LR GEIS also consolidates the impingement
component of the ``Losses from predation, parasitism, and disease among
organisms exposed to sublethal stresses'' issue, for plants with once-
through cooling systems or cooling ponds, into this issue.
As a result of the 2014 CWA Section 316(b) regulations, nuclear
power plants must submit detailed information about their cooling water
intake systems as part of NPDES permit renewal applications to inform
the permitting authority's BTA determination. Some nuclear power plants
have received final BTA determinations under the 2013 CWA Section
316(b) regulations. Many others have submitted the required information
and are awaiting final determinations. The NRC expects that most
operating nuclear power plants will have final BTA determinations
within the next several years.
When available, the NRC relies on the expertise and authority of
the NPDES permitting authority with respect to the impacts of
impingement mortality and entrainment. Therefore, if the NPDES
permitting authority has made BTA determinations for a nuclear power
plant pursuant to CWA Section 316(b) and that plant has implemented any
associated requirements or those requirements would be implemented
before the license renewal period, then the NRC assumes that adverse
impacts on the aquatic environment would be minimized. In such cases,
the NRC concludes that the impacts of either impingement mortality,
entrainment, or both would generally be small over the course of the
initial LR or SLR term. In cases where the NPDES permitting authority
has not made BTA determinations, the NRC analyzes the potential impacts
of impingement mortality, entrainment, or both using a weight-of-
evidence approach and
[[Page 13339]]
determines the level of impact (small, moderate, or large) that the
aquatic environment is likely to experience over the course of the
license renewal term.
The potential effects of impingement mortality and entrainment
during the license renewal term depend on numerous plant-specific
factors, including the ecological setting of the plant; the
characteristics of the cooling system; and the characteristics of the
fish, shellfish, and other aquatic organisms present in the area (e.g.,
life history, distribution, population trends, management objectives,
etc.). Additionally, whether the NPDES permitting authority has made
BTA determinations pursuant to CWA Section 316(b) and whether the
nuclear power plant operator has implemented any associated
requirements is also a relevant factor.
(36) Impingement Mortality and Entrainment of Aquatic Organisms
(Plants with Cooling Towers)--The proposed rule would combine a
Category 1 issue, ``Impingement and entrainment of aquatic organisms
(plants with cooling towers),'' and the impingement component of a
Category 1 issue, ``Losses from predation, parasitism, and disease
among organisms exposed to sublethal stresses,'' into one Category 1
issue, ``Impingement mortality and entrainment of aquatic organisms
(plants with cooling towers).'' The issue pertains to impingement
mortality and entrainment of finfish and shellfish at nuclear power
plants with cooling towers that operate on a fully closed-cycle mode.
In the draft revised LR GEIS, the NRC changed the title of this
issue to include impingement mortality, rather than simply impingement.
This change is consistent with the EPA's 2014 CWA Section 316(b)
regulations and because assessing survival of impinged organisms is a
more appropriate metric for determining environmental impact than
simply looking at total impingement. Therefore, this draft revised LR
GEIS also consolidates into this issue the impingement component of the
issue of ``Losses from predation, parasitism, and disease among
organisms exposed to sublethal stresses,'' for plants with cooling
towers.
In the 2013 LR GEIS, the NRC found that that impingement and
entrainment of finfish and shellfish at plants with cooling towers
operated in a fully closed-cycle mode did not result in noticeable
effects on finfish or shellfish populations within source water bodies,
and this impact was not expected to be an issue during the license
renewal term. This finding is further supported by the EPA's 2014 CWA
Section 316(b) regulations for existing facilities, which state that
the operation of a closed-cycle recirculating system is an essentially
preapproved technology for achieving impingement mortality BTA.
The 2013 LR GEIS considered that impingement may result in
sublethal effects that could increase the susceptibility of fish or
finfish to predation, disease, or parasitism. However, only once-
through cooling systems were anticipated to be of concern for this
issue as the lower volume of water required by nuclear power plants
with cooling towers that operate in a fully closed-cycle mode would
minimize this potential effect. The NRC does not expect secondary
effects of impingement to be of concern during the license renewal term
(initial LR or SLR) at nuclear power plants with cooling towers, and
sublethal effects of entrainment do not apply.
In considering the effects of impingement mortality and entrainment
of closed-cycle cooling systems on aquatic ecology, the NRC evaluated
the same issues that were evaluated for nuclear power plants with once-
through cooling systems or cooling ponds. No significant impacts on
aquatic populations have been reported at any existing nuclear power
plants with cooling towers operating in a closed-cycle mode. As part of
obtaining BTA determinations under CWA 316(b), permitting authorities
may require some nuclear power plant licensees to implement additional
plant-specific controls to reduce impingement mortality and
entrainment. Implementation of such controls would further reduce or
mitigate impingement mortality and entrainment during the license
renewal term. The NRC determined that the impacts of impingement
mortality and entrainment on aquatic organisms during the license
renewal term (initial LR or SLR) would be small for nuclear power
plants with cooling towers operated in a fully closed-cycle mode.
Therefore, the combined issue is a Category 1 issue. The proposed rule
would revise the finding column of Table B-1 accordingly.
(37) Entrainment of Phytoplankton and Zooplankton--The proposed
rule would rename ``Entrainment of phytoplankton and zooplankton (all
plants)'' as ``Entrainment of phytoplankton and zooplankton''; it is a
Category 1 issue. The NRC found that the effects of entrainment of
phytoplankton and zooplankton would be minor and would neither
destabilize nor noticeably alter any important attribute of populations
of these organisms in source water bodies during the license renewal
term (initial LR or SLR) of any nuclear power plants. As part of
obtaining the BTA entrainment determinations under Section 316(b) of
the CWA (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), permitting authorities may require
some nuclear power plants to implement additional site-specific
controls to reduce entrainment. Implementation of such controls would
further reduce or mitigate entrainment of phytoplankton and
zooplankton.
The proposed rule would revise the finding column of Table B-1 for
this issue to clarify the scope of issues and resources considered and
indicate that the entrainment of phytoplankton and zooplankton would be
mitigated through adherence to NPDES permit conditions established
pursuant to CWA Section 316(b).
(38) Effects of Thermal Effluents on Aquatic Organisms (Plants with
Once-Through Cooling Systems or Cooling Ponds)--The proposed rule would
rename ``Thermal impacts on aquatic organisms (plants with once-through
cooling systems or cooling ponds)'' as ``Effects of thermal effluents
on aquatic organisms (plants with once-through cooling systems or
cooling ponds)'' for clarity and consistency with other ecological
resource titles; it is a Category 2 issue.
This issue pertains to acute, sublethal, and community-level
effects of thermal effluents on finfish and shellfish from operation of
nuclear power plants with once-through cooling systems and cooling
ponds during the license renewal term (initial LR or SLR). The NRC
determined that the effects of thermal effluents on aquatic organisms
would be small at many nuclear power plants with once-through cooling
systems or ponds, but that these impacts could be moderate or large at
some plants. The potential effects of thermal effluent discharges
depend on numerous site-specific factors, including the ecological
setting of the plant, the characteristics of the cooling system and
effluent discharges, and the characteristics of the fish, shellfish,
and other aquatic organisms present in the area. Additionally, whether
the NPDES permitting authority has granted a CWA Section 316(a)
variance is also a relevant factor.
The proposed rule would revise the finding column of Table B-1 for
this issue to clarify the scope of issues and resources considered and
for consistency with other ecological resources issues.
(39) Effects of Thermal Effluents on Aquatic Organisms (Plants with
Cooling Towers)--The proposed rule would
[[Page 13340]]
rename ``Thermal impacts on aquatic organisms (plants with cooling
towers)'' as ``Effects of thermal effluents on aquatic organisms
(plants with cooling towers)'' for clarity and consistency with other
ecological resource issue titles; it is a Category 1 issue.
This issue pertains to acute, sublethal, and community-level
effects of thermal effluents on finfish and shellfish from operation of
nuclear power plants with cooling towers operated in a fully closed-
cycle mode. The NRC found that the effects of thermal effluents on
aquatic organisms at plants with cooling towers would be minor and
would neither destabilize nor noticeably alter any important attributes
of aquatic populations in receiving water bodies. As part of obtaining
a variance under CWA Section 316(a), permitting authorities may impose
conditions concerning thermal effluent discharges at some nuclear power
plants. Implementation of such conditions would further reduce or
mitigate thermal impacts during the license renewal term (initial LR or
SLR).
The proposed rule would revise the finding column of Table B-1 for
this issue to clarify the scope of issues and resources considered and
for consistency with other ecological resources issues.
(40) Infrequently Reported Effects of Thermal Effluents--The
proposed rule would combine two Category 1 issues, ``Infrequently
reported thermal impacts (all plants)'' and ``Effects of cooling water
discharge on dissolved oxygen, gas supersaturation, and
eutrophication,'' with the thermal effluent component of a Category 1
issue, ``Losses from predation, parasitism, and disease among organisms
exposed to sublethal stresses,'' into one Category 1 issue,
``Infrequently reported effects of thermal effluents.'' This issue
pertains to interrelated and infrequently reported effects of thermal
effluents, to include cold shock, thermal migration barriers,
accelerated maturation of aquatic insects, and proliferated growth of
aquatic nuisance species, as well as the effects of thermal effluents
on dissolved oxygen, gas supersaturation, and eutrophication. This
issue also considers sublethal stresses associated with thermal
effluents that can increase the susceptibility of exposed organisms to
predation, parasitism, or disease. As discussed below, these effects
are not a concern for license renewal (initial LR or SLR).
At nuclear power plants, cold shock can occur during refueling
outages, reductions in power generation level, or other situations that
would quickly reduce the amount of cooling capacity required at the
plant. The 1996 LR GEIS reported that cold shock events have only
rarely occurred at nuclear power plants. No cold shock events have been
reported since the events described in the 1996 LR GEIS occurred, and
no noticeable or detectable impacts on aquatic populations have been
reported at any existing nuclear power plants.
Thermal effluents have the potential to create migration barriers
if the thermal plume covers an extensive cross-sectional area of a
river and temperatures within the plume exceed a species' physiological
tolerance limit. This impact has been examined at several nuclear power
plants, but it has not been determined to result in observable effects.
The 1996 and 2013 LR GEISs determined that the heated effluents of
nuclear power plants could accelerate the maturation of aquatic insects
in freshwater systems and cause premature emergence. The maturation and
emergence of aquatic insects are often closely associated with water
temperature regimes. To date, thermal effluents of nuclear power plants
have resulted in no noticeable or detectable impacts on the life cycles
of aquatic insects.
The 1996 and 2013 LR GEISs also determined that heated effluents
could proliferate the growth of aquatic nuisance organisms. Aquatic
nuisance species are organisms that disrupt the ecological stability of
infested inland (e.g., rivers and lakes), estuarine, or marine waters.
No noticeable or detectable impacts on aquatic populations have been
reported at any existing nuclear power plants related to this issue.
The NRC has identified no other concerns about nuisance aquatic
organisms associated with nuclear power plant thermal effluents.
Aerobic organisms, such as fish, require oxygen, and the
concentration of dissolved oxygen in a water body is one of the most
important ecological water quality parameters. The thermal effluent
discharges of nuclear power plants have the potential to stress aquatic
organisms by simultaneously increasing these organisms' need for oxygen
and decreasing oxygen availability. Although the thermal effluents of
nuclear power plants may contribute to reduced dissolved oxygen in the
immediate vicinity of the discharge point, as the effluent disperses,
diffusion and aeration from turbulent movement introduces additional
oxygen into the water. No noticeable or detectable impacts on aquatic
populations have been reported at any existing nuclear power plants
related to oxygen availability.
Rapid heating of cooling water can also affect the solubility and
saturation point of other dissolved gases, including nitrogen,
resulting in a state where condenser cooling water becomes
supersaturated with gases. Once the supersaturated water is discharged
in the receiving water body, dissolved gas levels equilibrate as the
effluent cools and mixes with ambient water. This process is of concern
if aquatic organisms remain in the supersaturated effluent for a long
enough period to become equilibrated to the increased pressure
associated with the effluent. If these organisms then move into water
of lower pressure too quickly when, for example, swimming out of the
thermal effluent or diving to depths, the dissolved gases within the
affected tissues may come out of solution and form embolisms (bubbles).
The resulting condition is known as gas bubble disease, and fish
mortality from gas bubble disease has been observed at one nuclear
power plant. That nuclear power plant operator installed a barrier net
to prevent fish from entering the discharge canal, and no such events
occurred again following implementation of this mitigation. No
noticeable or detectable impacts on aquatic populations have been
reported at any other nuclear power plants related to gas
supersaturation.
An early concern about nuclear power plant discharges was that
thermal effluents would cause or speed eutrophication by stimulating
biological productivity in receiving water bodies. Several nuclear
power plants that conducted long-term monitoring to investigate this
potential effect did not detect any evidence of eutrophication.
Fish and shellfish that are exposed to the thermal effluent of a
nuclear power plant may experience stunning, disorientation, or injury.
These sublethal effects can subsequently affect an organism's
susceptibility to predation, parasitism, or disease. Since the
publication of the 2013 LR GEIS, the NRC has determined that thermal
effects on aquatic organisms at four nuclear power plants could be
small to moderate during the license renewal term. At three of the four
plants (i.e., Braidwood, LaSalle, and Turkey Point), these impacts were
limited to species confined to cooling pond environments. In the fourth
example (Peach Bottom), the adverse effects were found to be confined
to a narrow band of shallow water habitat downstream of the discharge
canal during the summer months. However, increased susceptibility to
predation, parasitism,
[[Page 13341]]
or disease or predation resulting from exposure to thermal effluent was
not found to be responsible for these small to moderate findings.
Rather, these effects were attributed to other acute (i.e., heat shock)
or community-level effects (i.e., reduced habitat availability or
quality and reduced species diversity over time) of thermal effluents
evaluated as part of the former Category 2 issue, ``Thermal impacts on
aquatic organisms (plants with once-through cooling systems or cooling
ponds),'' which would be renamed in this proposed rule.
As described in the draft revised LR GEIS, the NRC determined that
the infrequently reported effects of thermal effluents would be minor
and would neither destabilize nor noticeably alter any important
attribute of aquatic populations in receiving water bodies of any
nuclear power plants during the license renewal term (initial LR or
SLR). As part of obtaining a variance under CWA Section 316(a),
permitting authorities may impose conditions through the NPDES permit
process concerning thermal effluent discharges at some nuclear power
plants. Implementation of such conditions would further reduce or
mitigate thermal impacts during the license renewal term. The NRC
concluded that infrequently reported effects of thermal effluents
during the license renewal term would be small for all nuclear power
plants. Therefore, the combined issue is a Category 1 issue. The
proposed rule would revise the finding column of Table B-1 accordingly.
(41) Effects of Nonradiological Contaminants on Aquatic Organisms--
``Effects of nonradiological contaminants on aquatic organisms'' is a
Category 1 issue. This issue concerns the potential effects of
nonradiological contaminants on aquatic organisms that could occur as a
result of nuclear power plant operations during the license renewal
term (initial LR or SLR). This issue was originally of concern because
some nuclear power plants used heavy metals in condenser tubing that
could leach from the tubing and expose aquatic organisms to these
contaminants. Heavy metals have not been found to be of concern other
than a few instances of copper contamination, and in all cases, the
nuclear power plants eliminated leaching by replacing the affected
piping.
In addition to heavy metals, nuclear power plants often add
biocides to cooling water to kill algae, bacteria, macroinvertebrates,
and other organisms that could cause buildup in plant systems and
structures. Nuclear power plants typically maintain site procedures
that specify when and how to treat the cooling water system with such
chemicals and best management practices to minimize impacts on the
ecological environment. The NPDES permits mitigate potential effects of
chemical effluents by limiting the allowable concentrations in effluent
discharges to ensure the protection of the aquatic community within the
receiving water body.
The NRC determined that the effects of nonradiological contaminants
on aquatic organisms would be minor and would neither destabilize nor
noticeably alter any important attribute of populations of these
organisms in source water bodies during license renewal terms of any
nuclear power plants. Continued adherence of nuclear power plants to
chemical effluent limitations established in NPDES permits would
minimize the potential impacts of nonradiological contaminants on the
aquatic environment. The proposed rule would revise the finding column
of Table B-1 for this issue, to more clearly describe the scope of
issues and resources considered and for consistency with other
ecological resources issues.
(42) Exposure of Aquatic Organisms to Radionuclides--``Exposure of
aquatic organisms to radionuclides'' is a Category 1 issue. The
proposed rule would make minor clarifying changes to the finding column
of Table B-1 for this issue.
(43) Effects of Dredging on Aquatic Resources--The proposed rule
would rename ``Effects of dredging on aquatic organisms'' as ``Effects
of dredging on aquatic resources''; it is a Category 1 issue. This
issue concerns the effects of dredging on aquatic resources conducted
to maintain the function or reliability of plant cooling systems during
the license renewal term (initial LR or SLR).
Any dredging performed would be infrequent and would require the
nuclear power plant operators to obtain permits from the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers under CWA Section 404. Best management practices and
conditions associated with these permits would minimize impacts on the
ecological environment.
The NRC determined that the effects of dredging on aquatic
resources would be minor and would neither destabilize nor noticeably
alter any important attribute of the aquatic environment during license
renewal term at any nuclear power plant. The NRC assumes that nuclear
power plant operators would continue to implement site environmental
procedures and would obtain any necessary permits for dredging
activities. Implementation of such controls would further reduce or
mitigate potential effects. The proposed rule would revise the finding
column of Table B-1 for this issue, to more clearly describe the scope
of issues and resources considered and for consistency with other
ecological resources issues.
(44) Water Use Conflicts with Aquatic Resources (Plants with
Cooling Ponds or Cooling Towers Using Makeup Water from a River)--
``Water use conflicts with aquatic resources (plants with cooling ponds
or cooling towers using makeup water from a river)'' is a Category 2
issue. This issue concerns water use conflicts that may arise at
nuclear power plants with cooling ponds or cooling towers that use
makeup water from a river and how those conflicts could affect aquatic
resources during the license renewal term (initial LR or SLR). This
issue also applies to nuclear power plants with hybrid cooling systems.
Nuclear power plant cooling systems may compete with other users
relying on surface water resources, including downstream municipal,
agricultural, or industrial users. Water use conflicts with aquatic
resources could occur when water that supports these resources is
diminished by a combination of anthropogenic uses. To date, the NRC has
identified water use conflicts with aquatic resources at only one
nuclear power plant. The NRC concluded that water use conflicts would
be small to moderate for this nuclear power plant. The plant operator
developed and implemented a water level management plan which
successfully mitigated water use conflicts. The NRC has identified no
concerns about water use conflicts with aquatic resources at any other
nuclear power plant with cooling ponds or cooling towers. The NRC
concluded that water use conflicts with aquatic resources would be
small at most nuclear power plants with cooling ponds or cooling towers
that withdraw makeup water from a river but may be moderate at some
plants.
Water use conflicts during the license renewal term (initial LR or
SLR) would depend on numerous site-specific factors including the
ecological setting of the nuclear power plant; the consumptive use of
other municipal, agricultural, or industrial water users; and the
aquatic resources present in the area. The proposed rule would revise
the finding column of Table B-1 for this issue, to more clearly
describe the scope of issues and resources considered and
[[Page 13342]]
for consistency with other ecological resources issues.
(45) Non-Cooling System Impacts on Aquatic Resources--The proposed
rule would rename ``Effects on aquatic resources (non-cooling system
impacts)'' as ``Non-cooling system impacts on aquatic resources''; it
is a Category 1 issue. This issue concerns the effects of nuclear power
plant operations on aquatic resources that are unrelated to the
operation of the cooling system. Such activities include landscape and
grounds maintenance, stormwater management, and ground-disturbing
activities that could directly disturb aquatic habitat or cause runoff
or sedimentation.
Many nuclear power plant operators have developed site or fleet-
wide environmental review procedures that help workers identify and
avoid impacts on the ecological environment when performing site
activities. These procedures generally include checklists to help
identify potential effects and required permits and best management
practices to minimize the affected area. Proper implementation of
environmental procedures and BMPs would minimize or mitigate potential
effects on aquatic resources during the license renewal term. Many
activities that could affect aquatic habitats would also require
nuclear power plants to obtain Federal permits under CWA Section 404,
which would include conditions to minimize or mitigate impacts on
affected waterways.
The NRC determined that the effects of site activities unrelated to
cooling system operation would be minor and would neither destabilize
nor noticeably alter any important attribute of the aquatic environment
during the license renewal term of any nuclear power plants. The NRC
assumes that nuclear power plants would continue to implement site
environmental procedures and would obtain any necessary permits for
activities that could affect waterways or aquatic features. The
proposed rule would revise the finding column of Table B-1 for this
issue, to more clearly describe the scope of issues and resources
considered and for consistency with other ecological resources issues.
(46) Impacts of Transmission Line Right-Of-Way (ROW) Management on
Aquatic Resources--``Impacts of transmission line right-of-way (ROW)
management on aquatic resources'' is a Category 1 issue. This issue
concerns the effects of transmission line ROW management on aquatic
plants and animals during the license renewal term.
The transmission lines relevant to license renewal include only the
lines that connect the nuclear power plant to the first substation that
feeds into the regional power distribution system. Typically, the first
substation is located on the nuclear power plant property within the
primary industrial-use area and the in-scope transmission lines for
license renewal tend to occupy only industrial-use or other developed
portions of nuclear power plant sites. Therefore, effects on aquatic
plants and animals are generally negligible.
Most nuclear power plants maintain procedures to minimize or
mitigate the potential impacts of ROW management. The NRC determined
that the transmission line ROW maintenance impacts on aquatic resources
during the license renewal term (initial LR or SLR) would be small for
all nuclear power plants. The proposed rule would revise the finding
column of Table B-1 for this issue, to more clearly describe the scope
of issues and resources considered and for consistency with other
ecological resources issues.
(x) Federally Protected Ecological Resources
(47) Endangered Species Act: Federally Listed Species and Critical
Habitats Under U.S. Fish and Wildlife Jurisdiction--The proposed rule
would divide a Category 2 issue, ``Threatened, endangered, and
protected species, critical habitat and essential fish habitat,'' into
three separate Category 2 issues, for clarity and consistency with the
separate Federal statues and interagency consultation requirements that
the NRC must consider with respect to Federally protected ecological
resources. When combined, the scope of the three issues is the same as
the scope of the former ``Threatened, endangered, and protected
species, critical habitat and essential fish habitat'' issue discussed
in the 2013 LR GEIS.
The first of the three issues, ``Endangered Species Act: federally
listed species and critical habitats under U.S. Fish and Wildlife
jurisdiction,'' concerns the potential effects of continued nuclear
power plant operation and any refurbishment during the license renewal
term on federally listed species and critical habitats protected under
the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and under the jurisdiction of the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS).
Under the ESA, the FWS is responsible for listing and managing
terrestrial and freshwater species and designating critical habitat for
these species. Continued operation of a nuclear power plant during the
license renewal term could affect these species and their habitat.
Listed species are likely to occur near all operating nuclear power
plants. However, the potential for a given species to occur in the
action area of a specific nuclear power plant depends on the life
history, habitat requirements, and distribution of the species and the
ecological environment present on or near the plant site.
The NRC may be required to consult with FWS under ESA Section
7(a)(2); such consultations are required for license renewal actions
that ``may affect'' federally listed species and critical habitats and
to ensure that the actions do not jeopardize the continued existence of
those species or destroy or adversely modify those habitats.
The potential effects of continued nuclear power plant operation
and any refurbishment during the license renewal term depends upon
numerous site-specific factors, including the ecological setting of the
plant; the listed species and critical habitats present in the action
area; and the plant-specific factors related to operations, including
water withdrawal, effluent discharges, and refurbishment and other
ground-disturbing activities. Listing status is not static, and FWS
frequently issues new rules to list or delist species and designate or
remove critical habitats. Therefore, a generic determination of
potential impacts on listed species and critical habitats under FWS
jurisdiction during a nuclear power plant's license renewal term
(initial LR or SLR) is not possible. The NRC would perform a plant-
specific impact assessment for each license renewal environmental
review to determine the potential effects on these resources and
consult with the FWS, as appropriate. Consequently, this is a Category
2 issue.
(48) Endangered Species Act: Federally Listed Species and Critical
Habitats Under National Marine Fisheries Service Jurisdiction--The
second of the three issues from the prior Category 2 issue on federally
protected species, ``Endangered Species Act: federally listed specifies
and critical habitats under National Marine Fisheries Service
jurisdiction,'' concerns the potential effects of continued nuclear
power plant operation and any refurbishment during the license renewal
term on federally listed species and critical habitats protected under
the ESA and under the jurisdiction of the National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS).
Under the ESA, NMFS is responsible for listing and managing marine
and anadromous species and designating critical habitat of these
species. Continued operation of a nuclear power
[[Page 13343]]
plant and any refurbishment during the license renewal term could
affect these species and their habitat. The potential for a given
species to occur in the action area of a specific nuclear power plant
depends on the life history, habitat requirements, and distribution of
that species and the ecological environment present on or near the
power plant site. In general, listed species and critical habitats
under NMFS jurisdiction are only of concern at nuclear power plants
that withdraw or discharge from estuarine or marine waters. However,
anadromous listed species under NMFS jurisdiction may be seasonally
present in the action area of plants located within freshwater reaches
of rivers well upstream of the saltwater interface.
The potential effects of continued nuclear power plant operation
and any refurbishment during the license renewal term depend on
numerous site-specific factors, including the ecological setting of the
plant; the listed species and critical habitats present in the action
area; and plant-specific factors related to operations, including water
withdrawal, effluent discharges, and refurbishment and other ground-
disturbing activities. Section 7(a)(2) of the ESA requires that Federal
agencies consult with NMFS for actions that ``may affect'' federally
listed species and critical habitats. Additionally, listing status is
not static, and NMFS frequently issue new rules to list or delist
species and designate or remove critical habitats. Therefore, a generic
determination of potential impacts on listed species and critical
habitats under NMFS jurisdiction during a nuclear power plant's license
renewal term (initial LR or SLR) is not possible. The NRC would perform
a plant-specific impact assessment for each license renewal
environmental review to determine the potential effects on these
resources and consult with NMFS, as appropriate. Consequently, this is
a Category 2 issue.
(49) Magnuson-Stevens Act: Essential Fish Habitat--The last of the
three issues from the prior Category 2 issue on federally protected
species, ``Magnuson-Stevens Act: essential fish habitat,'' concerns the
potential effects of continued nuclear power plant operation and any
refurbishment during the license renewal term on essential fish habitat
(EFH) protected under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act (i.e., Magnuson-Stevens Act (MSA)).
Under the MSA, the Fishery Management Councils, in conjunction with
NMFS, designate areas of EFH and manage marine resources within those
areas. Within EFH, habitat areas of particular concern (HAPCs) may be
designated if the area meets certain additional criteria. Continued
operation of a nuclear power plant and any refurbishment during the
license renewal term could affect EFH, including HAPCs. The NRC may be
required to consult with NMFS under MSA Section 305(b). In cases where
adverse effects on EFH are possible, the NRC has engaged NMFS in EFH
consultation as part of the plant-specific license renewal
environmental review and obtained EFH conservation recommendations.
The potential effects of continued nuclear power plant operation
and any refurbishment during the license renewal term depends upon
numerous site-specific factors, including the ecological setting of the
plant; the EFH present in the action area, including HAPCs; and plant-
specific factors related to operations, including water withdrawal,
effluent discharges, and any other activities that may affect aquatic
habitats during the license renewal term. Section 305(b) of the MSA
requires that Federal agencies consult with NMFS for actions that may
adversely affect EFH. Additionally, EFH status is not static. The NMFS
and the Fishery Management Councils frequently update management plans
for EFH species and issue new rules to designate or modify EFH and
HAPCs. Therefore, a generic determination of potential impacts on EFH
during a nuclear power plant's license renewal term (initial LR or SLR)
is not possible. The NRC would perform a plant-specific impact
assessment as part of each license renewal environmental review to
determine the potential effects on these resources and consult with
NMFS, as appropriate. Consequently, this is a Category 2 issue.
(50) National Marine Sanctuaries Act: Sanctuary Resources--The
proposed rule would add this as a new Category 2 issue, ``National
Marine Sanctuaries Act: sanctuary resources,'' to evaluate the concerns
of the potential effects of continued nuclear power plant operation and
any refurbishment during the license renewal term on sanctuary
resources protected under the National Marine Sanctuaries Act (NMSA).
Under the NMSA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration's (NOAA) Office of National Marine Sanctuaries (ONMS)
designates and manages the National Marine Sanctuary System. Marine
sanctuaries may occur near nuclear power plants located on or near
marine waters as well as the Great Lakes. Currently, five operating
nuclear power plants are located near designated or proposed national
marine sanctuaries.
The potential impacts on marine sanctuaries are broad-ranging
because such resources include any living or nonliving resource of a
national marine sanctuary. With respect to ecological sanctuary
resources, potential effects of particular concern include the
following: (1) impingement (including entrapment) and entrainment, (2)
thermal effects, (3) exposure to radionuclides and other contaminants,
(4) reduction in available food resources due to impingement mortality
and entrainment or thermal effects on prey species, and (5) effects
associated with maintenance dredging. Additionally, the magnitude and
significance of such impacts can be greater for sanctuary resources
because--by virtue of being part of a national marine sanctuary--these
resources are more sensitive to environmental stressors. Based on the
foregoing, a generic determination of potential impacts on sanctuary
resources during a nuclear power plant's license renewal term (initial
LR or SLR) is not possible.
Depending on the NRC's effect determinations, the NRC may be
required to consult with ONMS under NMSA Section 304(d). The NMSA
consultation is required when a Federal agency determines that an
action ``is likely to destroy, cause the loss of, or injure'' a
sanctuary resource. Federal actions subject to consultation may be
inside or outside the boundary of a national marine sanctuary.
In summary, the potential effects of continued nuclear power plant
operation during the license renewal term depends upon numerous site-
specific factors, including the ecological setting of the plant; the
sanctuary resources present in the action area; and plant-specific
factors related to operations, including water withdrawal, effluent
discharges, and any other activities that may affect sanctuary
resources during the license renewal term. Section 304(d) of the NMSA
requires that Federal agencies consult with the ONMS for actions that
may injure sanctuary resources. Additionally, national marine sanctuary
status is not static. The geographic extent of existing sanctuaries may
change or expand in the future, and NOAA is likely to designate new
sanctuaries as additional areas of conservation need are identified and
assessed. Therefore, a generic determination of potential impacts on
sanctuary resources during a nuclear power plant's license renewal term
(initial LR or SLR) is not possible. The NRC would perform a site-
specific
[[Page 13344]]
impact assessment as part of each license renewal environmental review
to determine the potential effects on these resources and consult with
NMFS, as appropriate. Consequently, this new issue is being established
as a plant-specific, or Category 2, issue.
(xi) Historic and Cultural Resources
(51) Historic and Cultural Resources--``Historic and cultural
resources'' is a Category 2 issue. The proposed rule would revise the
finding column of Table B-1 for this issue to make clarifying changes
and include a discussion of impacts on cultural resources that are not
eligible for or listed in the National Register of Historic Places that
would also need to be considered during plant-specific license renewal
environmental reviews.
(xii) Socioeconomics
(52) Employment and Income, Recreation and Tourism--``Employment
and income, recreation and tourism'' is a Category 1 issue. There are
no changes to the finding column of Table B-1 for this issue.
(53) Tax Revenue--The proposed rule would rename ``Tax revenues''
as ``Tax revenue''; it is a Category 1 issue. There are no changes to
the finding column of Table B-1 for this issue.
(54) Community Services and Education, (55) Population and Housing,
and (56) Transportation--``Community services and education,''
``Population and housing,'' and ``Transportation'' are Category 1
issues. There are no changes to the finding column of Table B-1 for
these issues.
(xiii) Human Health
(57) Radiation Exposures to Plant Workers and (58) Radiation
Exposures to the Public--``Radiation exposures to plant workers'' and
``Radiation exposures to the public'' are Category 1 issues. There are
no changes to the finding column of Table B-1 for these issues.
(59) Chemical Hazards--The proposed rule would rename ``Human
health impact from chemicals'' as ``Chemical hazards'' for clarity and
to reflect the fact that chemicals can have environmental effects
beyond human health. Chemical hazards can have immediate human health
effects as well as potential environmental impacts from nuclear power
plant discharges and chemical spills. This issue is a Category 1 issue.
There are no changes to the finding column of Table B-1 for this issue.
(60) Microbiological Hazards to Plant Workers--``Microbiological
hazards to plant workers'' is a Category 1 issue. There are no changes
to the finding column of Table B-1 for this issue.
(61) Microbiological Hazards to the Public--The proposed rule would
rename ``Microbiological hazards to the public (plants with cooling
ponds or canals or cooling towers that discharge to a river)'' as
``Microbiological hazards to the public'' because this issue is a
concern wherever receiving waters are accessible to the public and as
changes in microbial populations and in the public use of water bodies
might occur over time. Specifically, members of the public could be
exposed to microorganisms in thermal effluents at nuclear power plants
that use cooling ponds, lakes, or canals and discharge to any waters of
the United States accessible to the public. This issue is a Category 2
issue. The proposed rule would revise the finding column of Table B-1
for this issue for clarity and to indicate that thermophilic
microorganisms are a concern wherever waters receiving thermal
effluents are accessible to the public.
(62) Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs)--The proposed rule would rename
``Chronic effects of electromagnetic fields (EMFs)'' as
``Electromagnetic fields (EMFs)'' for clarity because this issue
considers effects beyond those that are chronic in nature. This issue
is an uncategorized issue. There are no changes to the finding column
of Table B-1 for this issue.
(63) Physical Occupational Hazards--``Physical occupational
hazards'' is a Category 1 issue. There are no changes to the finding
column of Table B-1 for this issue.
(64) Electric Shock Hazards--``Electric shock hazards'' is a
Category 2 issue. There are no changes to the finding column of Table
B-1 for this issue.
(xiv) Postulated Accidents
(65) Design-Basis Accidents--``Design-basis accidents'' is a
Category 1 issue. There are no changes to the finding column of Table
B-1 for this issue.
(66) Severe Accidents--The proposed rule would reclassify the
Category 2 ``Severe accidents'' issue as a Category 1 issue. In the
2013 LR GEIS, the issue of severe accidents was classified as a
Category 2 issue to the extent that only alternatives to mitigate
severe accidents must be considered for all nuclear power plants where
the licensee had not previously performed a severe accident mitigation
alternatives (SAMA) analysis for the plant. In the draft revised LR
GEIS, the NRC notes that this issue will be resolved generically for
the vast majority, if not all, expected license renewal applicants
because the applicants who will likely reference the LR GEIS have
previously completed a SAMA analysis. The NRC provides a technical
basis further supporting this conclusion in Appendix E of the draft
revised LR GEIS. Although the NRC does not anticipate any license
renewal applications for nuclear power plants for which a previous
severe accident mitigation design alternative or SAMA analysis has not
been performed, alternatives to mitigate severe accidents must be
considered for all plants that have not considered such alternatives
and would be the functional equivalent of a Category 2 issue requiring
site-specific analysis.
In license renewal applications, both internal and external events
were considered for impacts from reactor accidents at full power when
assessing SAMAs. The impacts of all new information in the draft
revised LR GEIS were found to not contribute sufficiently to the
environmental impacts to warrant further SAMA analysis because the
likelihood of finding cost-effective significant plant improvements is
small. This further analysis confirms the Commission's expectation that
further SAMA analysis would not be necessary for plants that have
already completed one.
With regard to the severe accident impact finding, the NRC reviewed
information from SEISs for both initial LR and SLR reviews completed
since development of the 2013 LR GEIS and identified no new information
or situations that would result in different impacts for this issue.
The NRC's review of new information determined that the overall risk
posed by severe accidents is less than originally stated in the 1996 LR
GEIS by a significant margin. Therefore, the NRC concluded that the
probability-weighted consequences of severe accidents during the
initial LR or SLR terms are small. The proposed rule revises the
finding column in Table B-1 for this issue to reflect the fact that the
probability-weighted consequences of severe accidents remain small.
(xv) Environmental Justice
(67) Impacts on Minority Populations, Low-Income Populations, and
Indian Tribes--The proposed rule would rename ``Minority and low-income
populations'' as ``Impacts on minority populations, low-income
populations, and Indian Tribes'' \5\ to reflect the scope
[[Page 13345]]
of environmental justice concerns addressed in this issue. Continued
reactor operations during the license renewal term and refurbishment
activities at a nuclear power plant could affect land, air, water, and
ecological resources, which could result in human health or
environmental effects. Consequently, minority and low-income
populations and Indian Tribes could be disproportionately affected. The
environmental justice impact analysis determines whether human health
or environmental effects from continued reactor operations and
refurbishment activities at a nuclear power plant would
disproportionately affect a minority population, low-income population,
or Indian Tribe and whether these effects may be high and adverse.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ The term ``Indian Tribes'' refers to Federally recognized
Tribes as acknowledged by the Secretary of the Interior pursuant to
the Federally Recognized Indian Tribe List Act of 1994 (25 U.S.C.
479a). Environmental justice communities can also include State-
recognized Tribes, those that self-identify as Indian Tribes, and
tribal members. Tribal members can be part of an environmental
justice community that has different interests and concerns than a
Tribal government.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The NRC determined that environmental justice impacts during the
license renewal term (initial LR or SLR) are unique to each nuclear
power plant. Therefore, the issue is a Category 2 issue. The proposed
rule would revise the finding column of Table B-1 for this issue to add
Indian Tribes and subsistence consumption to the scope of the finding
and to make other minor clarifications.
(xvi) Waste Management
(68) Low-Level Waste Storage and Disposal, (69) Onsite Storage of
Spent Nuclear Fuel, (70) Offsite Radiological Impacts of Spent Nuclear
Fuel and High-Level Waste Disposal, (71) Mixed-Waste Storage and
Disposal, and (72) Nonradioactive Waste Storage and Disposal--``Low-
level waste storage and disposal,'' ``Onsite storage of spent nuclear
fuel,'' ``Offsite radiological impacts of spent nuclear fuel and high-
level waste disposal,'' ``Mixed-waste storage and disposal,'' and
``Nonradioactive waste storage and disposal'' are Category 1 issues.
There are no changes to the finding column of Table B-1 for these
issues.
(xvii) Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change
(73) Greenhouse Gas Impacts on Climate Change--The proposed rule
would add a new Category 1 issue, ``Greenhouse gas impacts on climate
change,'' that evaluates the greenhouse gas (GHG) impacts on climate
change associated with continued operation and refurbishment. The issue
of greenhouse gas emissions on climate change was not considered in the
2013 LR GEIS and is not listed in the current Table B-1. At the time of
publication of the 2013 LR GEIS, insufficient data existed to support a
classification of the contribution of nuclear power plant GHG emissions
on climate change, either as a generic or site-specific issue. The 2013
LR GEIS, however, included a discussion summarizing the life cycle
impacts of nuclear power plant GHG emissions and climate change.
Furthermore, following the issuance of Commission Order CLI-09-21, the
NRC began to evaluate the direct and cumulative effects of GHG
emissions and their contribution to climate change in environmental
reviews for license renewal applications.
Nuclear power plants, by their very nature, do not combust fossil
fuels to generate electricity and, therefore, have inherently low GHG
emissions. However, nuclear power plant operations do have some GHG
emission sources including diesel generators, pumps, diesel engines,
boilers, refrigeration systems, electrical transmission and
distribution systems, as well as mobile sources (e.g., worker vehicles
and delivery vehicles). Any refurbishment activities undertaken at the
nuclear power plant site could also produce GHGs due to emissions from
motorized equipment, construction vehicles, and worker vehicles.
Collectively, these GHG emissions when compared to different GHG
emission inventories for other facilities, are minor.
The NRC concluded that the impacts of GHG emissions on climate
change from continued operation during the license renewal term
(initial LR or SLR) and any refurbishment activities would be small for
all nuclear power plants. Therefore, this is a new Category 1 issue.
(74) Climate Change Impacts on Environmental Resources--The
proposed rule would add this new Category 2 issue, ``Climate change
impacts on environmental resources,'' that evaluates the impacts of
climate change on environmental resources that are affected by
continued nuclear power plant operations and any refurbishment during
the license renewal term. Climate change is an environmental trend
(i.e., reflected in changes in climate indicators, such as
precipitation, air and water temperature, sea level rise over time)
that could result in changes in the affected environment, irrespective
of license renewal. The issue of climate change impacts was not
identified as either a generic or site-specific issue in the 2013 LR
GEIS. However, the 2013 LR GEIS briefly described the environmental
impacts that could occur on resources areas (land use, air quality,
water resources, etc.) that may also be affected by license renewal. In
site-specific initial LR and SLR SEISs prepared since development of
the 2013 LR GEIS, the NRC considered climate change impacts for those
resources that could be incrementally affected by license renewal as
part of the cumulative impact analysis.
As part of a comprehensive environmental review to meet its
obligations under NEPA, the NRC must consider the impacts of climate
change on environmental resource conditions that could also be affected
by continued nuclear power plant operation and any refurbishment as a
result of the proposed action (license renewal). License renewal
environmental reviews conducted by the NRC have found that climate
change effects on affected resources (e.g., water availability, sea
level rise) can be equal to or greater than any direct effects
associated with continued nuclear power plant operations during the
license renewal term. Observed climate change has not been uniform
across the United States. The accrued effects of climate change on
environmental resource conditions can vary greatly based on site-
specific conditions and thus are plant-specific rather than generic in
nature. In support of safe plant operation and in conformance with
environmental permitting requirements, nuclear power plant licensees
maintain systems and collect meteorological, water temperature, and
other data that can inform the NRC's environmental review with respect
to the impacts of climate change on environmental resource conditions.
The impacts of climate change on environmental resources that are
affected by continued nuclear power plant operations and refurbishment
during the license renewal term (initial LR or SLR) are location-
specific and cannot be evaluated generically. The effects of climate
change can vary regionally and climate change information at the
regional and local scale is necessary to assess the impacts on the
human environment for a specific location. The NRC would need to
perform a site-specific impact assessment as part of each license
renewal environmental review. Therefore, this is a new Category 2 issue
that cuts across multiple resource areas, similar to the cumulative
effects issue, which is currently in Table B-1.
(xviii) Cumulative Effects
(75) Cumulative Effects--The proposed rule would rename
``Cumulative impacts'' as ``Cumulative effects''; it is a Category 2
issue. The
[[Page 13346]]
proposed rule would make minor editorial and clarification changes to
the finding column of Table B-1 for this issue to be consistent with
the definition of cumulative effects as provided in the Council on
Environmental Quality's revised regulation at 40 CFR 1508.1(g)(3).
(xix) Uranium Fuel Cycle
(76) Offsite Radiological Impacts--Individual Impacts from Other
than the Disposal of Spent Fuel and High-Level Waste, (77) Offsite
Radiological Impacts--Collective Impacts from Other than the Disposal
of Spent Fuel and High-Level Waste, (78) Nonradiological Impacts of the
Uranium Fuel Cycle, and (79) Transportation--``Offsite radiological
impacts--individual impacts from other than the disposal of spent fuel
and high-level waste,'' ``Offsite radiological impacts--collective
impacts from other than the disposal of spent fuel and high-level
waste,'' ``Nonradiological impacts of the uranium fuel cycle,'' and
``Transportation'' are Category 1 issues. There are no changes to the
finding column of Table B-1 for these issues.
(xx) Termination of Nuclear Power Plant Operations and Decommissioning
(80) Termination of Plant Operations and Decommissioning--
``Termination of plant operations and decommissioning'' is a Category 1
issue. There are no changes to the finding column of Table B-1 for this
issue.
The proposed rule would also revise the footnotes to Table B-1 as
follows:
Footnote 1 would be revised to update the reference to the current
revision of the LR GEIS.
Footnote 2 would be revised to indicate that for the ``Offsite
radiological impacts of spent nuclear fuel and high-level waste
disposal'' issue, there is no single significance level to the impact.
Footnote 7 would be added to indicate that for the ``Severe
accidents'' issue, alternatives to mitigate severe accidents must be
considered for all plants that have not already considered such
alternatives and would be the functional equivalent of a Category 2
issue.
Section 51.53(c)(3), ``Postconstruction Environmental Reports
The proposed rule would revise the introductory paragraph of
Section 51.53(c)(3) to replace the words ``an initial renewed license''
with the words ``a license renewal covered by Table B-1'' to reflect
that the regulation governing postconstruction environmental reports
for license renewal applies to applicants seeking either an initial or
subsequent renewed license following this update to the LR GEIS.
Additionally, the proposed rule would revise the phrase ``and holding
an operating license, construction permit, or combined license as of
June 30, 1995'' to read ``for a nuclear power plant for which an
operating license, construction permit, or combined license was issued
as of June 30, 1995,'' in order to clarify that Watts Bar Nuclear Units
1 and 2, for which construction permits were issued by that date but
are no longer held by the licensee, are within the scope of the LR GEIS
and Table B-1. The revised phrasing more clearly indicates that holders
of renewed licenses for nuclear power plants that previously held
operating licenses, construction permits, or combined licenses within
the scope of the LR GEIS remain within its scope during the license
renewal term.
The proposed rule would revise Section 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(B) for
clarity and consistency with the methodology in CWA Sections 316(a) and
(b), including the 2014 CWA Section 316(b) regulations which establish
the BTA criteria based on impingement mortality, rather than total
impingement.
The proposed rule would revise Section 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(D) to delete
the words ``is located at an inland site and,'' to reflect the
consolidation of two issues from the 2013 LR GEIS: ``Groundwater
quality degradation (plants with cooling ponds in salt marshes),'' a
Category 1 issue, and ``Groundwater quality degradation (plants with
cooling ponds at inland sites),'' a Category 2 issue. The consolidated
Category 2 issue in the draft revised LR GEIS, ``Groundwater quality
degradation (plants with cooling ponds)'' reflects new information that
cooling ponds can impact water quality at both inland and at coastal
sites as a result of the migration of contaminants discharged to
cooling ponds.
The proposed rule would revise Section 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(E) for
clarity and consistency with the proposed changes related to Federally
protected ecological resources in Table B-1 and the draft revised LR
GEIS. The changes in this paragraph correspond to the changes in Table
B-1 where a Category 2 issue, ``Threatened, endangered, and protected
species, critical habitat and essential fish habitat'' was divided into
three issues, for clarity and consistency with the separate Federal
statues and interagency consultation requirements that the NRC must
consider with respect to Federally protected ecological resources. Also
included is a change reflecting the addition of a new Category 2 issue,
``National Marine Sanctuaries Act: sanctuary resources,'' which
addresses the NRC consultation requirements under the Act.
The proposed rule would revise Section 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(G) for
consistency with proposed changes to the Category 2 issue,
``Microbiological hazards to the public.'' The updated finding for this
issue states that public health is a concern wherever receiving waters
associated with nuclear power plant thermal effluents are accessible to
the public.
The proposed rule would revise Section 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(K) for
clarity and consistency with the specific requirements of Section 106
of the NHPA, including the reference to NEPA, to reflect the
requirement that Federal agencies must consider the potential effects
of their actions on the affected human environment, which includes
aesthetic, historic, and cultural resources.
The proposed rule would revise Section 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(N) for
clarity and consistency with the proposed changes in Table B-1 and the
draft revised LR GEIS by adding consideration of Indian Tribes and
revises the terminology to refine the scope of environmental justice
concerns.
The proposed rule would revise Section 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(O) for
consistency with the revised terminology for ``cumulative effects''
provided by the Council on Environmental Quality.
The proposed rule would add a new Section 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(Q), for
consistency with the proposed changes in Table B-1 and the draft
revised LR GEIS which includes the addition of a new Category 2 issue,
``Climate change impacts on environmental resources.'' The proposed
change addresses the assessment of the effects of changes in climate on
environmental resources areas and any mitigation measures implemented
by the nuclear power plant operator to address climate change impacts.
The new issue was identified to improve the efficiency of reviews,
address lessons learned from plant-specific reviews and information
provided in public comments, and to reflect analyses already being
performed by the NRC staff in environmental reviews, consistent with
the Commission direction provided in CLI-09-21.
Section 51.95, ``Postconstruction Environmental Impact Statements''
The proposed rule would revise Section 51.95(c), ``Operating
license renewal stage,'' to remove the date of issuance of NUREG-1437.
This change is made for clarity and to ensure that the
[[Page 13347]]
regulation refers to the latest revision of the LR GEIS.
IV. Availability of Guidance for Comment and Specific Request for
Comment
The NRC is seeking advice and recommendations from the public on
this proposed rule. We are particularly interested in comments and
supporting rationale from the public on the following:
A. Guidance Documents
The NRC is issuing for comment two revised draft guidance
documents, draft regulatory guide (DG), DG-4027, ``Preparation of
Environmental Reports for Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal
Applications,'' \6\ and draft NUREG-1555, Supplement 1, Revision 2,
``Standard Review Plans for Environmental Reviews for Nuclear Power
Plants, Supplement 1: Operating License Renewal,'' to support
implementation of the requirements in this proposed rule. The guidance
documents are available as indicated in the ``Availability of
Documents'' section of this document. You may submit comments on the
draft regulatory guidance by the methods outlined in the ADDRESSES
section of this document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Unless stated otherwise, references to RG 4.2, Supplement 1,
refer to DG-4027, the draft revision to RG 4.2, Supplement 1, which
is being published at the same time as this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The DG-4027 has been prepared as a revision to Regulatory Guide
(RG) 4.2, Supplement 1, ``Preparation of Environmental Reports for
Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal Applications.'' The DG-4027
provides general procedures for the preparation of environmental
reports that are submitted as part of an application for the renewal of
a nuclear power plant operating license, including SLR, in accordance
with 10 CFR part 54, ``Requirements for Renewal of Operating Licenses
for Nuclear Power Plants,'' including subsequent license renewals. The
revision updates the content for environmental reports. The revision
also updates the regulatory and technical bases and the criteria for
required plant-specific analyses for Category 2 issues and other
matters to be addressed in the environmental report, as specified in
the proposed amendments to Sec. 51.53(c)(3).
The draft revision of NUREG-1555, Supplement 1, Revision 2,
provides guidance for the NRC staff when performing a 10 CFR part 51
environmental review of an application for the renewal of a nuclear
power plant operating license, including SLR. The changes in the draft
revision to the Standard Review Plan parallel the revisions in DG-4027.
The primary purpose of the Standard Review Plan is to ensure that these
reviews are focused on the significant environmental concerns
associated with license renewal as described in 10 CFR part 51.
Specifically, the Standard Review Plan provides guidance to the NRC
staff about environmental issues that should be reviewed and provides
acceptance criteria to help the reviewer evaluate the information
submitted as part of the license renewal application. It is also the
intent of this draft Standard Review Plan to make information about the
regulatory process available and to improve communication between the
NRC, interested members of the public, and the nuclear industry,
thereby increasing understanding of the review process.
B. Applicability of License Renewal Terms
The proposed rule would extend the applicability of the LR GEIS to
one term of SLR. The NRC is seeking comment on whether the proposed
rule should be expanded beyond two license renewal terms. Please
provide the rationale for your response.
V. Section-by-Section Analysis
The following paragraphs describe the specific changes proposed by
this rulemaking.
10 CFR 51.53, Postconstruction Environmental Reports
In Sec. 51.53(c)(3), this proposed rule would remove the words
``an initial renewed license'' and add in its place the words ``a
license renewal covered by Table B-1'', to indicate applicability to
initial LR and SLR. Additionally, the proposed rule would revise the
phrase ``and holding an operating license, construction permit, or
combined license as of June 30, 1995'' to read ``for a nuclear power
plant for which an operating license, construction permit, or combined
license was issued as of June 30, 1995,'' in order to clarify that
Watts Bar Nuclear Units 1 and 2, for which construction permits were
issued by that date but are no longer held by the licensee, are within
the scope of the LR GEIS and Table B-1. The revised phrasing more
clearly indicates that holders of renewed licenses for nuclear power
plants that previously held operating licenses, construction permits,
or combined licenses within the scope of the LR GEIS remain within its
scope during the license renewal term.
This proposed rule would revise paragraph (c)(3)(ii)(B) for clarity
and consistency with the methodology in Clean Water Act (CWA) Sections
316(a) and (b).
This proposed rule would revise paragraph (c)(3)(ii)(D) to remove
the words ``is located at an inland site and'', for consistency with
proposed consolidation of two issues related to groundwater quality
degradation and corresponding updates in Table B-1.
This proposed rule would revise paragraph (c)(3)(ii)(E) for clarity
and consistency with proposed revisions to Table B-1.
This proposed rule would revise paragraph (c)(3)(ii)(G) for
consistency with proposed revisions to Table B-1 related to the
``Microbiological hazards to the public'' issue.
This proposed rule would revise paragraph (c)(3)(ii)(K) for clarity
and consistency with the requirements of Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act and NEPA.
This proposed rule would revise paragraph (c)(3)(ii)(N) for clarity
and consistency with proposed revisions to Table B-1 related to the
scope of environmental justice concerns.
This proposed rule would revise paragraph (c)(3)(ii)(O) for
consistency with the revised terminology for ``cumulative effects''
provided by the Council on Environmental Quality.
This proposed rule would add new paragraph (c)(3)(ii)(Q) to include
an assessment of the effects of climate change in postconstruction
environmental reports.
Section 51.95, Postconstruction Environmental Impact Statements
This proposed rule would revise paragraph (c) to remove the date
``(June 2013)'', to clarify the reference to the current revision of
NUREG-1437.
Appendix B to Subpart A--Environmental Effect of Renewing the Operating
License of a Nuclear Power Plant
This proposed rule would revise appendix B to subpart A of 10 CFR
part 51, to indicate the applicability to initial LR and one term of
SLR and to update the findings on environmental issues with the data
supported by the analyses in the proposed NUREG-1437, Revision 2.
VI. Regulatory Flexibility Certification
As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C.
605(b), the Commission certifies that this rule, if adopted, will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. This proposed rule would only affect nuclear power plant
licensees filing for license renewal applications. The companies that
own
[[Page 13348]]
these plants do not fall within the scope of the definition of ``small
entities'' set forth in the Regulatory Flexibility Act or the size
standards established by the NRC (10 CFR 2.810).
VII. Regulatory Analysis
The NRC has prepared a draft regulatory analysis on this proposed
regulation. The analysis examines the costs and benefits of the
alternatives considered by the NRC. The NRC requests public comment on
the draft regulatory analysis. The regulatory analysis is available as
indicated in the ``Availability of Documents'' section of this
document. Comments on the draft analysis may be submitted to the NRC as
indicated under the ADDRESSES caption of this document.
VIII. Backfitting and Issue Finality
The proposed rule would codify in 10 CFR part 51 certain
environmental issues identified in the draft revised LR GEIS. The
proposed rule would also revise Sec. 51.53(c)(3) to remove the word
``initial.'' The NRC has determined that the backfitting rule in Sec.
50.109 and the issue finality provisions in 10 CFR part 52 do not apply
to this proposed rule because this amendment does not involve any
provision that would either constitute backfitting as that term is
defined in 10 CFR chapter I or affect the issue finality of any
approval issued under 10 CFR part 52.
IX. Cumulative Effects of Regulation
The NRC is following its cumulative effects of regulation (CER)
process by engaging with external stakeholders throughout the
rulemaking and related regulatory activities. Public involvement has
included (1) the publication of notice announcing information gathering
through the public scoping process to support the review to determine
whether to update the LR GEIS on August 4, 2020 (85 FR 47252); and (2)
four public meetings conducted on August 19, 2020, and August 27, 2020
(two meetings on each day), to receive comments on the scope of the LR
GEIS.
The NRC is issuing draft guidance along with this proposed rule to
support more informed external stakeholder understanding and feedback.
The draft guidance is available as indicated in the ``Availability of
Documents'' section of this document. Further, the NRC will continue to
hold public meetings throughout the rulemaking process.
In addition to the question on the implementation of this proposed
rule presented in the ``Availability of Guidance for Comment and
Specific Requests for Comment'' section of this document, the NRC is
requesting CER feedback on the following questions:
1. If CER challenges currently exist or are expected, what should
be done to address them? Please explain your response.
2. Do other (NRC or other agency) regulatory actions (e.g., orders,
generic communications, license amendment requests, inspection findings
of a generic nature) influence the implementation of the proposed
rule's requirements? Please explain your response.
3. Are there unintended consequences? Does the proposed rule create
conditions that would be contrary to the proposed rule's purpose and
objectives? If so, what are the unintended consequences, and how should
they be addressed? Please explain your response.
4. Please comment on the NRC's cost and benefit estimates in the
draft regulatory analysis that supports the proposed rule. The
regulatory analysis is available as indicated in the ``Availability of
Documents'' section of this document.
X. Plain Writing
The Plain Writing Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111-274) requires Federal
agencies to write documents in a clear, concise, and well-organized
manner. The NRC has written this document to be consistent with the
Plain Writing Act as well as the Presidential Memorandum, ``Plain
Language in Government Writing,'' published June 10, 1998 (63 FR
31883). The NRC requests comment on this document with respect to the
clarity and effectiveness of the language used.
XI. National Environmental Policy Act
In support of the proposed revisions to 10 CFR part 51 concerning
initial LR and SLRs, the NRC prepared draft Revision 2 to NUREG-1437,
which is published for comment concurrent with this proposed rule. With
regard to the corresponding changes in requirements for applications
for initial LR or SLR, the NRC has determined that this is the type of
action described in Sec. 51.22(c)(3), an NRC categorical exclusion.
Therefore, neither an environmental assessment nor an environmental
impact statement has been prepared for this aspect of the proposed
rule, as it is procedural in nature and pertains to the type of
environmental information to be reviewed.
XII. Paperwork Reduction Act
This proposed rule contains new or amended collections of
information subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C
3501 et seq). This proposed rule has been submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget for review and approval of the information
collections.
Type of submission: Revision.
The title of the information collection: 10 CFR part 51, Renewing
Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses--Environmental Review.
The form number if applicable: Not applicable.
How often the information is required or requestion: On occasion.
Environmental Reports are required upon submittal of an application for
an operating license renewal.
Who will be required or asked to respond: Applicants for renewal of
nuclear power plant operating licenses.
An estimate of the number of annual responses: 8.3.
An estimated number of annual respondents: 8.3 (5 applicants for
future subsequent license renewals and 3.3 applicants for near-term and
submitted applications, and issued subsequent license renewals).
An estimate of the total number of hours needed annually to comply
with the information collection requirement or request: 71,067 hours.
Abstract: The NRC is proposing to amend the regulations that govern
the NRC's environmental reviews of operating license renewal
applications. The NRC's regulations in Sec. 51.53(c) require each
applicant for renewal of a license to operate a nuclear power plant
under 10 CFR part 54 to submit an environmental report which includes,
among other things, a description of the proposed action, including the
applicant's plans to modify the facility or its administrative
controls. This proposed rulemaking would codify the generic findings of
the LR GEIS, which presents impact analyses for the environmental
issues common to many or most of license renewal applications that can
be addressed generically, thereby eliminating the need to repeatedly
reproduce the same analyses each time a license renewal application is
submitted. The NRC's regulations in Sec. 51.53(c) require each
applicant to prepare and submit a report entitled ``Applicant's
Environmental Report--Operating License Renewal Stage,'' with the
applicant's license renewal application. The information provided by
the applicant in the environmental report helps the NRC meet its
regulatory obligations consistent with Section 102(2) of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended. The proposed rule would
increase burden on an applicant because several proposed changes to
Table B-1 (e.g., new Category 1 and 2 issues, consolidation of
[[Page 13349]]
Category 1 issues into Category 2 issues, and dividing an existing
Category 2 issue into multiple Category 2 issues) would require the
applicant to evaluate such issues on a site-specific basis and provide
this information in the environmental report.
The NRC is seeking public comment on the potential impact of the
information collection contained in this proposed rule and on the
following issues:
1. Is the proposed information collection necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the NRC, including whether the
information will have practical utility? Please explain your response.
2. Is the estimate of the burden of the proposed information
collection accurate? Please explain your response.
3. Is there a way to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of
the information to be collected? Please explain your response.
4. How can the burden of the proposed information collection on
respondents be minimized, including the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology? Please explain
your response.
A copy of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) clearance
package and proposed rule is available in ADAMS under Accession No.
ML22208A002 or may be obtained free of charge by contacting the NRC's
Public Document Room reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, at 301-415-
4737, or by email to [email protected]. You may obtain information
and comment submissions related to the OMB clearance package by
searching on https://www.regulations.gov under Docket ID NRC-2018-0296.
You may submit comments on any aspect of these proposed information
collections, including suggestions for reducing the burden and on the
above issues, by the following methods:
Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0296.
Mail comments to: FOIA, Library, and Information
Collections Branch, Office of the Chief Information Officer, Mail Stop:
T6-A10M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001
or to the OMB reviewer at OMB Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs (3150-0021), Attn: Desk Officer for the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, 725 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20503; email:
[email protected].
Submit comments by April 3, 2023. Comments received after this date
will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the NRC is able to
ensure consideration only for comments received on or before this date.
Public Protection Notification
The NRC may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information unless the document requesting
or requiring the collection displays a currently valid OMB control
number.
XIII. Voluntary Consensus Standards
The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995,
Public Law 104-113, requires that Federal agencies use technical
standards that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies unless the use of such a standard is inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical. This proposed rule, which
amends various provisions of 10 CFR part 51, does not constitute the
establishment of a standard that contains generally applicable
requirements.
XIV. Public Meetings
The NRC plans to hold public meetings to promote a full
understanding of the proposed rule, the draft revised LR GEIS, and
associated guidance documents, and to receive public comments.
The NRC will publish a notice of the location, time, and agenda of
the meetings in the Federal Register, on Regulations.gov, and on the
NRC's public meeting website within at least 10 calendar days before
the meeting. Stakeholders should monitor the NRC's public meeting
website for information about the public meeting at: https://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/public-meetings/index.cfm.
XV. Availability of Documents
The documents identified in the following table are available to
interested persons through one or more of the following methods, as
indicated.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ADAMS Accession No.
Document Federal Register
citation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of
Nuclear Power Plants
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Draft NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental Impact ML23010A078.
Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Power
Plants,'' Volume 1, Revision 2.
Draft NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental Impact ML23010A086.
Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Power
Plants,'' Volume 2, Revision 2.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Draft Guidance Documents
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Draft NUREG-1555, Supplement 1, Revision 2, ML22165A070.
``Standard Review Plans for Environmental
Reviews for Nuclear Power Plants, Supplement 1:
Operating License Renewal''.
Draft Regulatory Guide DG-4027, ``Preparation of ML22165A072.
Environmental Reports for Nuclear Power Plant
License Renewal Applications'' (also referenced
as RG 4.2, Supplement 1).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed Rule Documents
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SECY-22-0109, ``Proposed Rule: Renewing Nuclear ML22165A004.
Power Plant Operating Licenses--Environmental
Review (RIN 3150-AK32; NRC-2018-0296)''.
Draft Regulatory Analysis for the 10 CFR Part ML23010A074.
51, Generic Environmental Impact Statement for
License Renewal of Nuclear Power Plants.
Draft Supporting Statement for Information ML22208A002.
Collections Contained in the Renewing Nuclear
Power Plant Operating Licenses--Environmental
Review Proposed Rule.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Related Documents
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Revisions to Environmental Review for Renewal of 78 FR 37281.
Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses, Final
Rule, June 20, 2013.
[[Page 13350]]
Revisions to Environmental Review for Renewal of 78 FR 46255.
Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses;
Correction, Final Rule, Correcting Amendment,
July 31, 2013.
Continued Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel, Final 79 FR 56251.
Rule, September 29, 2014.
Corrected Transcript for Public Scoping Meeting ML20296A270.
to Discuss the Review and Potential Update of
NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental Impact
Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Power
Plants,'' August 27, 2020, 1:30 p.m.
Corrected Transcript for Public Scoping Meeting ML20296A271.
to Discuss the Review and Potential Update of
NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental Impact
Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Power
Plants,'' August 27, 2020, 6:30 p.m.
Corrected Transcript for Public Scoping Meeting ML20296A272.
to Discuss the Review and Potential Update of
NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental Impact
Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Power
Plants,'' August 19, 2020, 1:30 p.m.
Corrected Transcript for Public Scoping Meeting ML20296A273.
to Discuss the Review and Potential Update of
NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental Impact
Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Power
Plants,'' August 19, 2020, 6:30 p.m.
Environmental Impact Statement Scoping Process ML21039A576.
Summary Report, Review and Update of the
Generic Environmental Impact Statement for
License Renewal of Nuclear Plants (NUREG-1437),
June 2021.
Notice of Intent to Review and Update the 85 FR 47252.
Generic Environmental Impact Statement for
License Renewal of Nuclear Plants, August 4,
2020.
NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental Impact ML040690705.
Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Power
Plants,'' Volume 1, dated May 1996.
NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental Impact ML040690738.
Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Power
Plants,'' Volume 2, dated May 1996.
NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental Impact ML13106A241.
Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Power
Plants,'' Volume 1, Revision 1, dated June 2013.
NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental Impact ML13106A242.
Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Power
Plants,'' Volume 2, Revision 1, dated June 2013.
NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental Impact ML13106A244.
Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Power
Plants,'' Volume 3, Revision 1, dated June 2013.
NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental Impact ML19290H346.
Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear
Plants,'' Supplement 5, Second Renewal,
Regarding Subsequent License Renewal for Turkey
Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 3 and 4,
dated October 2019.
SECY-21-0066, ``Rulemaking Plan for Renewing ML20364A008.
Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses--
Environmental Review (RIN 3150-AK32, NRC-2018-
0296),'' dated July 22, 2021.
SECY-22-0024, ``Rulemaking Plan for Renewing ML22062B643.
Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses--
Environmental Review (RIN 3150-AK32, NRC-2018-
0296),'' dated March 25, 2022.
SECY-22-0036, ``Rulemaking Plan for Renewing ML22083A149.
Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses--10-Year
Environmental Regulatory Update (NRC-2022-
0087),'' dated April 25, 2022.
SRM-SECY-21-0066, ``Rulemaking Plan for Renewing ML22053A308.
Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses--
Environmental Review (RIN 3150-AK32, NRC-2018-
0296),'' dated February 24, 2022.
SRM-SECY-22-0024, ``Rulemaking Plan for Renewing ML22096A035.
Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses--
Environmental Review (RIN 3150-AK32, NRC-2018-
0296),'' dated April 5, 2022.
SRM-SECY-22-0036, ``Rulemaking Plan for Renewing ML22168A130.
Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses--10-Year
Environmental Regulatory Update (NRC-2022-
0087),'' dated June 17, 2022.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Memorandum ML093070690.
and Order CLI-09-21, dated November 3, 2009.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Memorandum ML22055A496.
and Order CLI-22-02, dated February 24, 2022.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Memorandum ML22055A521,
and Order CLI-22-03, dated February 24, 2022. ML22055A526,
ML22055A527,
ML22055A533,
ML22055A554.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Memorandum ML22055A557.
and Order CLI-22-04, dated February 24, 2022.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The NRC may post materials related to this document, including
public comments, on the Federal rulemaking website at https://www.regulations.gov under Docket ID NRC-2018-0296. In addition, the
Federal rulemaking website allows members of the public to receive
alerts when changes or additions occur in a docket folder. The
following actions are needed to subscribe: (1) navigate to the docket
folder NRC-2018-0296, (2) click the ``Subscribe'' link, and (3) enter
an email address and click on the ``Subscribe'' link.
List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 51
Administrative practice and procedure, Environmental impact
statements, Hazardous waste, Nuclear energy, Nuclear materials, Nuclear
power plants and reactors, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
For the reasons set out in the preamble and under the authority of
the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended; the Energy Reorganization
Act of 1974, as amended; and 5 U.S.C. 552 and 553, the NRC is proposing
to amend 10 CFR part 51 as follows:
PART 51--ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION REGULATIONS FOR DOMESTIC
LICENSING AND RELATED REGULATORY FUNCTIONS
0
1. The authority citation for part 51 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Atomic Energy Act of 1954, secs. 161, 193 (42 U.S.C.
2201, 2243); Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, secs. 201, 202 (42
U.S.C. 5841, 5842); National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42
U.S.C. 4332, 4334, 4335); Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, secs.
144(f), 121, 135, 141, 148 (42 U.S.C. 10134(f), 10141, 10155, 10161,
10168); 44 U.S.C. 3504 note.
Sections 51.20, 51.30, 51.60, 51.80, and 51.97 also issued under
Nuclear Waste Policy
[[Page 13351]]
Act secs. 135, 141, 148 (42 U.S.C. 10155, 10161, 10168).
Section 51.22 also issued under Atomic Energy Act sec. 274 (42
U.S.C. 2021) and under Nuclear Waste Policy Act sec. 121 (42 U.S.C.
10141).
Sections 51.43, 51.67, and 51.109 also issued under Nuclear
Waste Policy Act sec. 114(f) (42 U.S.C. 10134(f)).
0
2. Amend Sec. 51.53 by:
0
a. Removing in paragraph (c)(3) introductory text, the words ``an
initial renewed license and holding an operating license, construction
permit, or combined license as of June 30, 1995'' and adding in its
place the words ``a license renewal covered by Table B-1 for a power
plant for which an operating license, construction permit, or combined
license was issued as of June 30, 1995'';
0
b. Revising paragraph (c)(3)(ii)(B);
0
c. Removing in paragraph (c)(3)(ii)(D), the words ``is located at an
inland site and'';
0
d. Revising paragraphs (c)(3)(ii)(E); (G); (K); (N); (O); and
0
e. Adding paragraph (c)(3)(ii)(Q).
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 51.53 Postconstruction environmental reports.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(3) * * *
(ii) * * *
(B) If the applicant's plant utilizes once-through cooling or
cooling pond water intake and discharge systems, the applicant shall
provide a copy of current Clean Water Act 316(b) Best Technology
Available determinations and, if applicable, a 316(a) variance in
accordance with 40 CFR part 125, or equivalent State permits and
supporting documentation. If the applicant cannot provide these
documents, it shall assess the impact of the proposed action on fish
and shellfish resources resulting from impingement mortality and
entrainment and thermal discharges.
* * * * *
(E) All license renewal applicants shall assess the impact of
refurbishment, continued operations, and other license renewal-related
construction activities on important plant and animal habitats.
Additionally, the applicant shall assess the impact of the proposed
action on federally protected ecological resources in accordance with
Federal laws protecting such resources, including but not limited to,
the Endangered Species Act, the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation
and Management Act, and the National Marine Sanctuaries Act.
* * * * *
(G) If the applicant's plant uses a cooling pond, lake, canal, or
discharges into waters of the United States accessible to the public,
an assessment of the impact of the proposed action on public health
from thermophilic organisms in the affected water must be provided.
* * * * *
(K) All applicants shall identify any potentially affected historic
and cultural resources and historic properties and assess whether
future plant operations and any planned refurbishment activities would
affect these resources in accordance with the Section 106 of the
National Historic Preservation Act and in the context of the National
Environmental Policy Act.
* * * * *
(N) Applicants shall provide information on the general demographic
composition of minority and low-income populations and communities (by
race and ethnicity) and Indian tribes in the vicinity of the nuclear
power plant that could be disproportionately affected by license
renewal, including continued reactor operations and refurbishment
activities.
* * * * *
(O) Applicants shall provide information about other past, present,
and reasonably foreseeable actions occurring in the vicinity of the
nuclear power plant that may result in a cumulative effect.
* * * * *
(Q) Applicants shall include an assessment of the effects of any
observed and projected changes in climate on environmental resource
areas that are affected by license renewal, as well as any mitigation
measures implemented at the applicant's plant to address climate change
impacts.
* * * * *
Sec. 51.95 [Amended]
0
3. In Sec. 51.95, paragraph (c) introductory text, removing the words
``(June 2013)''.
0
4. Revise appendix B to subpart A of 10 CFR part 51 to read as follows:
Appendix B to Subpart A of 10 CFR Part 51--Environmental Effect of
Renewing the Operating License of a Nuclear Power Plant
The Commission has assessed the environmental impacts associated
with granting a renewed operating license for a licensee holding an
operating license, construction permit, or combined license as of
June 30, 1995. This assessment applies to applications for initial
or a first (i.e., one term) subsequent license renewal. Table B-1
summarizes the Commission's findings on the scope and magnitude of
environmental impacts of renewing the operating license for a
nuclear power plant as required by section 102(2) of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended. Table B-1, subject to
an evaluation of those issues identified in Category 2 as requiring
further analysis and possible significant new information,
represents the analysis of the environmental impacts associated with
renewal of any operating license and is to be used in accordance
with Sec. 51.95(c). On a 10-year cycle, the Commission intends to
review the material in this appendix and update it if necessary. A
scoping notice must be published in the Federal Register indicating
the results of the NRC's review and inviting public comments and
proposals for other areas that should be updated.
Table B-1--Summary of Findings on Environmental Issues for Initial and One Term of Subsequent License Renewal of
Nuclear Power Plants \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category
Issue \2\ Finding \3\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Land Use
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Onsite land use............................ 1 SMALL. Changes in onsite land use from continued
operations and refurbishment associated with license
renewal would be a small fraction of the nuclear power
plant site and would involve only land that is
controlled by the licensee.
Offsite land use........................... 1 SMALL. Offsite land use would not be affected by
continued operations and refurbishment associated with
license renewal.
Offsite land use in transmission line right- 1 SMALL. Use of transmission line ROWs from continued
of-ways (ROWs) \4\. operations and refurbishment associated with license
renewal would continue with no change in land use
restrictions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Visual Resources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aesthetic impacts.......................... 1 SMALL. No important changes to the visual appearance of
plant structures or transmission lines are expected
from continued operations and refurbishment associated
with license renewal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 13352]]
Air Quality
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air quality impacts........................ 1 SMALL. Air quality impacts from continued operations
and refurbishment associated with license renewal are
expected to be small at all plants. Emissions from
emergency diesel generators and fire pumps and routine
operations of boilers used for space heating are
minor. Impacts from cooling tower particulate
emissions have been small.
Emissions resulting from refurbishment activities at
locations in or near air quality nonattainment or
maintenance areas would be short-lived and would cease
after these activities are completed. Operating
experience has shown that the scale of refurbishment
activities has not resulted in exceedance of the de
minimis thresholds for criteria pollutants, and best
management practices, including fugitive dust controls
and the imposition of permit conditions in State and
local air emissions permits, would ensure conformance
with applicable State or Tribal implementation plans.
Air quality effects of transmission lines 1 SMALL. Production of ozone and oxides of nitrogen from
\4\. transmission lines is insignificant and does not
contribute measurably to ambient levels of these
gases.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Noise
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Noise impacts.............................. 1 SMALL. Noise levels would remain below regulatory
guidelines for offsite receptors during continued
operations and refurbishment associated with license
renewal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Geologic Environment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Geology and soils.......................... 1 SMALL. The impact of continued operations and
refurbishment activities on geology and soils would be
small for all nuclear power plants and would not
change appreciably during the license renewal term.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Surface Water Resources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Surface water use and quality (non-cooling 1 SMALL. Impacts are expected to be small if best
system impacts). management practices are employed to control soil
erosion and spills. Surface water use associated with
continued operations and refurbishment associated with
license renewal would not increase significantly or
would be reduced if refurbishment occurs during a
plant outage.
Altered current patterns at intake and 1 SMALL. Altered current patterns would be limited to the
discharge structures. area in the vicinity of the intake and discharge
structures. These impacts have been small at operating
nuclear power plants.
Altered salinity gradients................. 1 SMALL. Effects of salinity gradients would be limited
to the area in the vicinity of the intake and
discharge structures. These impacts have been small at
operating nuclear power plants.
Altered thermal stratifications of lakes... 1 SMALL. Effects on thermal stratification would be
limited to the area in the vicinity of the intake and
discharge structures. These impacts have been small at
operating nuclear power plants.
Scouring caused by discharged cooling water 1 SMALL. Scouring effects would be limited to the area in
the vicinity of the intake and discharge structures.
These impacts have been small at operating nuclear
power plants.
Discharge of metals in cooling system 1 SMALL. Discharges of metals have not been found to be a
effluent. problem at operating nuclear power plants with cooling-
tower-based heat dissipation systems and have been
satisfactorily mitigated at other plants. Discharges
are monitored and controlled as part of the National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit
process.
Discharge of biocides, sanitary wastes, and 1 SMALL. The effects of these discharges are regulated by
minor chemical spills. Federal and State environmental agencies. Discharges
are monitored and controlled as part of the NPDES
permit process. These impacts have been small at
operating nuclear power plants.
Surface water use conflicts (plants with 1 SMALL. These conflicts have not been found to be a
once-through cooling systems). problem at operating nuclear power plants with once-
through heat dissipation systems.
Surface water use conflicts (plants with 2 SMALL or MODERATE. Impacts could be of small or
cooling ponds or cooling towers using moderate significance, depending on makeup water
makeup water from a river). requirements, water availability, and competing water
demands.
Effects of dredging on surface water 1 SMALL. Dredging to remove accumulated sediments in the
quality. vicinity of intake and discharge structures and to
maintain barge shipping has not been found to be a
problem for surface water quality. Dredging is
performed under permit from the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, and possibly, from other State or local
agencies.
Temperature effects on sediment transport 1 SMALL. These effects have not been found to be a
capacity. problem at operating nuclear power plants and are not
expected to be a problem during the license renewal
term.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Groundwater Resources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Groundwater contamination and use (non- 1 SMALL. Extensive dewatering is not anticipated from
cooling system impacts). continued operations and refurbishment associated with
license renewal. Industrial practices involving the
use of solvents, hydrocarbons, heavy metals, or other
chemicals, and/or the use of wastewater ponds or
lagoons have the potential to contaminate site
groundwater, soil, and subsoil. Contamination is
subject to State or U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) regulated cleanup and monitoring
programs. The application of best management practices
for handling any materials produced or used during
these activities would reduce impacts.
Groundwater use conflicts (plants that 1 SMALL. Plants that withdraw less than 100 gpm are not
withdraw less than 100 gallons per minute expected to cause any groundwater use conflicts.
[gpm]).
Groundwater use conflicts (plants that 2 SMALL, MODERATE, or LARGE. Plants that withdraw more
withdraw more than 100 gallons per minute than 100 gpm could cause groundwater use conflicts
[gpm]). with nearby groundwater users.
Groundwater use conflicts (plants with 2 SMALL, MODERATE, or LARGE. Water use conflicts could
closed-cycle cooling systems that withdraw result from water withdrawals from rivers during low-
makeup water from a river). flow conditions, which may affect aquifer recharge.
The significance of impacts would depend on makeup
water requirements, water availability, and competing
water demands.
Groundwater quality degradation resulting 1 SMALL. Groundwater withdrawals at operating nuclear
from water withdrawals. power plants would not contribute significantly to
groundwater quality degradation.
[[Page 13353]]
Groundwater quality degradation (plants 2 SMALL or MODERATE. Sites with cooling ponds could
with cooling ponds). degrade groundwater quality. The significance of the
impact would depend on site-specific conditions
including cooling pond water quality, site
hydrogeologic conditions (including the interaction of
surface water and groundwater), and the location,
depth, and pump rate of water wells.
Radionuclides released to groundwater...... 2 SMALL or MODERATE. Leaks of radioactive liquids from
plant components and pipes have occurred at numerous
plants. Groundwater protection programs have been
established at all operating nuclear power plants to
minimize the potential impact from any inadvertent
releases. The magnitude of impacts would depend on
site-specific characteristics.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Terrestrial Resources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-cooling system impacts on terrestrial 2 SMALL, MODERATE, or LARGE. The magnitude of effects of
resources. continued nuclear power plant operation and
refurbishment, unrelated to operation of the cooling
system, would depend on numerous site-specific
factors, including ecological setting, planned
activities during the license renewal term, and
characteristics of the plants and animals present in
the area. Application of best management practices and
other conservation initiatives would reduce the
potential for impacts.
Exposure of terrestrial organisms to 1 SMALL. Doses to terrestrial organisms from continued
radionuclides. nuclear power plant operation and refurbishment during
the license renewal term would be expected to remain
well below U.S. Department of Energy exposure
guidelines developed to protect these organisms.
Cooling system impacts on terrestrial 1 SMALL. Continued operation of nuclear power plant
resources (plants with once-through cooling systems during license renewal could cause
cooling systems or cooling ponds). thermal effluent additions to receiving waterbodies;
chemical effluent additions to surface water or
groundwater, impingement of waterfowl, disturbance of
terrestrial plants and wetlands from maintenance
dredging, and erosion of shoreline habitat. However,
plants where these impacts have occurred successfully
mitigated the impact, and it is no longer of concern.
These impacts are not expected to be significant
issues during the license renewal term.
Cooling tower impacts on terrestrial plants 1 SMALL. Continued operation of nuclear power plant
cooling towers could deposit particulates and water
droplets or ice on vegetation and lead to structural
damage or changes in terrestrial plant communities.
However, nuclear power plants where these impacts
occurred have successfully mitigated the impact. These
impacts are not expected to be significant issues
during the license renewal term.
Bird collisions with plant structures and 1 SMALL. Bird mortalities from collisions with nuclear
transmission lines \4\. power plant structures and in-scope transmission lines
would be negligible for any species and are unlikely
to threaten the stability of local or migratory bird
populations or result in noticeable impairment of the
function of a species within the ecosystem. These
impacts are not expected to be significant issues
during the license renewal term.
Water use conflicts with terrestrial 2 SMALL or MODERATE. Nuclear power plants could consume
resources (plants with cooling ponds or water at rates that cause occasional or intermittent
cooling towers using makeup water from a water use conflicts with nearby and downstream
river). terrestrial and riparian communities. Such impacts
could noticeably affect riparian or wetland species or
alter characteristics of the ecological environment
during the license renewal term. The one plant where
impacts have occurred successfully mitigated the
impact. Impacts are expected to be small at most
nuclear power plants but could be moderate at some.
Transmission line right-of-way (ROW) 1 SMALL. In-scope transmission lines tend to occupy only
management impacts on terrestrial industrial-use or other developed portions of nuclear
resources \4\. power plant sites and, therefore, effects of ROW
maintenance on terrestrial plants and animals during
the license renewal term would be negligible.
Application of best management practices would reduce
the potential for impacts.
Electromagnetic field effects on 1 SMALL. In-scope transmission lines tend to occupy only
terrestrial plants and animals \4\. industrial-use or other developed portions of nuclear
power plant sites and, therefore, effects of
electromagnetic fields on terrestrial plants and
animals during the license renewal term would be
negligible.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aquatic Resources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impingement mortality and entrainment of 2 SMALL, MODERATE, or LARGE. The impacts of impingement
aquatic organisms (plants with once- mortality and entrainment would generally be small at
through cooling systems or cooling ponds). nuclear power plants with once-through cooling systems
or cooling ponds that have implemented best technology
requirements for existing facilities under Clean Water
Act (CWA) Section 316(b). For all other plants,
impacts could be small, moderate, or large depending
on characteristics of the cooling water intake system,
results of impingement and entrainment studies
performed at the plant, trends in local fish and
shellfish populations, and implementation of
mitigation measures.
Impingement mortality and entrainment of 1 SMALL. No significant impacts on aquatic populations
aquatic organisms (plants with cooling associated with impingement mortality and entrainment
towers). at nuclear power plants with cooling towers have been
reported, including effects on fish and shellfish from
direct mortality, injury, or other sublethal effects.
Impacts during the license renewal term would be
similar and small. Further, effects of these cooling
water intake systems would be mitigated through
adherence to NPDES permit conditions established
pursuant to CWA Section 316(b).
Entrainment of phytoplankton and 1 SMALL. Entrainment has not resulted in noticeable
zooplankton. impacts on phytoplankton or zooplankton populations
near operating nuclear power plants. Impacts during
the license renewal term would be similar and small.
Further, effects would be mitigated through adherence
to NPDES permit conditions established pursuant to CWA
Section 316(b).
Effects of thermal effluents on aquatic 2 SMALL, MODERATE, or LARGE. Acute, sublethal, and
organisms (plants with once-through community-level effects of thermal effluents on
cooling systems or cooling ponds). aquatic organisms would generally be small at nuclear
power plants with once-through cooling systems or
cooling ponds that adhere to State water quality
criteria or that have and maintain a valid CWA Section
316(a) variance. For all other plants, impacts could
be small, moderate, or large depending on site-
specific factors, including ecological setting of the
plant; characteristics of the cooling system and
effluent discharges; and characteristics of the fish,
shellfish, and other aquatic organisms present in the
area.
Effects of thermal effluents on aquatic 1 SMALL. Acute, sublethal, and community-level effects of
organisms (plants with cooling towers). thermal effluents have not resulted in noticeable
impacts on aquatic communities at nuclear power plants
with cooling towers. Impacts during the license
renewal term would be similar and small. Further,
effects would be mitigated through adherence to State
water quality criteria or CWA Section 316(a)
variances.
[[Page 13354]]
Infrequently reported effects of thermal 1 SMALL. Continued operation of nuclear power plant
effluents. cooling systems could result in certain infrequently
reported thermal impacts, including cold shock,
thermal migration barriers, accelerated maturation of
aquatic insects, proliferation of aquatic nuisance
organisms, depletion of dissolved oxygen, gas
supersaturation, eutrophication, and increased
susceptibility of exposed fish and shellfish to
predation, parasitism, and disease. Most of these
effects have not been reported at operating nuclear
power plants. Plants that have experienced these
impacts successfully mitigated the impact, and it is
no longer of concern. Infrequently reported thermal
impacts are not expected to be significant issues
during the license renewal term.
Effects of nonradiological contaminants on 1 SMALL. Heavy metal leaching from condenser tubes was an
aquatic organisms. issue at several operating nuclear power plants. These
plants successfully mitigated the issue, and it is no
longer of concern. Cooling system effluents would be
the primary source of nonradiological contaminants
during the license renewal term. Implementation of
best management practices and adherence to NPDES
permit limitations would minimize the effects of these
contaminants on the aquatic environment.
Exposure of aquatic organisms to 1 SMALL. Doses to aquatic organisms from continued
radionuclides. nuclear power plant operation and refurbishment during
the license renewal term would be expected to remain
well below U.S. Department of Energy exposure
guidelines developed to protect these organisms.
Effects of dredging on aquatic resources... 1 SMALL. Dredging at nuclear power plants is expected to
occur infrequently, would be of relatively short
duration, and would affect relatively small areas.
Continued operation of many plants may not require any
dredging. Adherence to best management practices and
CWA Section 404 permit conditions would mitigate
potential impacts at plants where dredging is
necessary to maintain function or reliability of
cooling systems. Dredging is not expected to be a
significant issue during the license renewal term.
Water use conflicts with aquatic resources 2 SMALL or MODERATE. Nuclear power plants could consume
(plants with cooling ponds or cooling water at rates that cause occasional or intermittent
towers using makeup water from a river). water use conflicts with nearby and downstream aquatic
communities. Such impacts could noticeably affect
aquatic plants or animals or alter characteristics of
the ecological environment during the license renewal
term. The one plant where impacts have occurred
successfully mitigated the impact. Impacts are
expected to be small at most nuclear power plants but
could be moderate at some.
Non-cooling system impacts on aquatic 1 SMALL. No significant impacts on aquatic resources
resources. associated with landscape and grounds maintenance,
stormwater management, or ground-disturbing activities
at operating nuclear power plants have been reported.
Impacts from continued operation and refurbishment
during the license renewal term would be similar and
small. Application of best management practices and
other conservation initiatives would reduce the
potential for impacts.
Impacts of transmission line right-of-way 1 SMALL. In-scope transmission lines tend to occupy only
(ROW) management on aquatic resources \4\. industrial-use or other developed portions of nuclear
power plant sites and, therefore, the effects of ROW
maintenance on aquatic plants and animals during the
license renewal term would be negligible. Application
of best management practices would reduce the
potential for impacts.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federally Protected Ecological Resources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Endangered Species Act: federally listed 2 The potential effects of continued nuclear power plant
species and critical habitats under U.S. operation and refurbishment on federally listed
Fish and Wildlife jurisdiction. species and critical habitats would depend on numerous
site-specific factors, including the ecological
setting; listed species and critical habitats present
in the action area; and plant-specific factors related
to operations, including water withdrawal, effluent
discharges, and other ground-disturbing activities.
Consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
under Endangered Species Act Section 7(a)(2) would be
required if license renewal may affect listed species
or critical habitats under this agency's jurisdiction.
Endangered Species Act: federally listed 2 The potential effects of continued nuclear power plant
species and critical habitats under operation and refurbishment on federally listed
National Marine Fisheries Service species and critical habitats would depend on numerous
jurisdiction. site-specific factors, including the ecological
setting; listed species and critical habitats present
in the action area; and plant-specific factors related
to operations, including water withdrawal, effluent
discharges, and other ground-disturbing activities.
Consultation with the National Marine Fisheries
Service under Endangered Species Act Section 7(a)(2)
would be required if license renewal may affect listed
species or critical habitats under this agency's
jurisdiction.
Magnuson-Stevens Act: essential fish 2 The potential effects of continued nuclear power plant
habitat. operation and refurbishment on essential fish habitat
would depend on numerous site-specific factors,
including the ecological setting; essential fish
habitat present in the area, including habitats of
particular concern; and plant-specific factors related
to operations, including water withdrawal, effluent
discharges, and other activities that may affect
aquatic habitats. Consultation with the National
Marine Fisheries Service under Magnuson-Stevens Act
Section 305(b) would be required if license renewal
could result in adverse effects to essential fish
habitat.
National Marine Sanctuaries Act: sanctuary 2 The potential effects of continued nuclear power plant
resources. operation and refurbishment on sanctuary resources
would depend on numerous site-specific factors,
including the ecological setting; national marine
sanctuaries present in the area, and plant-specific
factors related to operations, including water
withdrawal, effluent discharges, and other activities
that may affect aquatic habitats. Consultation with
the Office of National Marine Sanctuaries under
National Marine Sanctuaries Act Section 304(d) would
be required if license renewal could destroy, cause
the loss of, or injure sanctuary resources.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Historic and Cultural Resources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Historic and cultural resources \4\........ 2 Impacts from continued operations and refurbishment on
historic and cultural resources located onsite and in
the transmission line ROW are analyzed on a plant-
specific basis. The NRC will perform a National
Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) Section 106 review,
in accordance with 36 CFR Part 800 which includes
consultation with the State and Tribal Historic
Preservation Officers, Indian Tribes, and other
interested parties.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 13355]]
Socioeconomics
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Employment and income, recreation and 1 SMALL. Although most nuclear plants have large numbers
tourism. of employees with higher than average wages and
salaries, employment, income, recreation, and tourism
impacts from continued operations and refurbishment
associated with license renewal are expected to be
small.
Tax revenue................................ 1 SMALL. Nuclear plants provide tax revenue to local
jurisdictions in the form of property tax payments,
payments in lieu of tax (PILOT), or tax payments on
energy production. The amount of tax revenue paid
during the license renewal term as a result of
continued operations and refurbishment associated with
license renewal is not expected to change.
Community services and education........... 1 SMALL. Changes resulting from continued operations and
refurbishment associated with license renewal to local
community and educational services would be small.
With little or no change in employment at the
licensee's plant, value of the power plant, payments
on energy production, and PILOT payments expected
during the license renewal term, community and
educational services would not be affected by
continued power plant operations.
Population and housing..................... 1 SMALL. Changes resulting from continued operations and
refurbishment associated with license renewal to
regional population and housing availability and value
would be small. With little or no change in employment
at the licensee's plant expected during the license
renewal term, population and housing availability and
values would not be affected by continued power plant
operations.
Transportation............................. 1 SMALL. Changes resulting from continued operations and
refurbishment associated with license renewal to
traffic volumes would be small.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Human Health
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Radiation exposures to plant workers....... 1 SMALL. Occupational doses from continued operations and
refurbishment associated with license renewal are
expected to be within the range of doses experienced
during the current license term, and would continue to
be well below regulatory limits.
Radiation exposures to the public.......... 1 SMALL. Radiation doses to the public from continued
operations and refurbishment associated with license
renewal are expected to continue at current levels,
and would be well below regulatory limits.
Chemical hazards........................... 1 SMALL. Chemical hazards to plant workers resulting from
continued operations and refurbishment associated with
license renewal are expected to be minimized by the
licensee implementing good industrial hygiene
practices as required by permits and Federal and State
regulations. Chemical releases to the environment and
the potential for impacts to the public are expected
to be minimized by adherence to discharge limitations
of NPDES and other permits.
Microbiological hazards to plant workers... 1 SMALL. Occupational health impacts are expected to be
controlled by continued application of accepted
industrial hygiene practices to minimize worker
exposures as required by permits and Federal and State
regulations.
Microbiological hazards to the public...... 2 SMALL, MODERATE, or LARGE. These microorganisms are not
expected to be a problem at most operating plants
except possibly at plants using cooling ponds, lakes,
canals, or that discharge to waters of the United
States accessible to the public. Impacts would depend
on site-specific characteristics.
Electromagnetic fields (EMFs) \6\.......... \5\ N/A Uncertain impact. Studies of 60-Hz EMFs have not
uncovered consistent evidence linking harmful effects
with field exposures. EMFs are unlike other agents
that have a toxic effect (e.g., toxic chemicals and
ionizing radiation) in that dramatic acute effects
cannot be forced and longer-term effects, if real, are
subtle. Because the state of the science is currently
inadequate, no generic conclusion on human health
impacts is possible.
Physical occupational hazards.............. 1 SMALL. Occupational safety and health hazards are
generic to all types of electrical generating
stations, including nuclear power plants, and are of
small significance if the workers adhere to safety
standards and use protective equipment as required by
Federal and State regulations.
Electric shock hazards \4\................. 2 SMALL, MODERATE, or LARGE. Electrical shock potential
is of small significance for transmission lines that
are operated in adherence with the National Electrical
Safety Code (NESC). Without a review of conformance
with NESC criteria of each nuclear power plant's in-
scope transmission lines, it is not possible to
determine the significance of the electrical shock
potential.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Postulated Accidents
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Design-basis accidents..................... 1 SMALL. The NRC staff has concluded that the
environmental impacts of design-basis accidents are of
small significance for all plants.
Severe accidents \7\....................... 1 SMALL. The probability-weighted consequences of
atmospheric releases, fallout onto open bodies of
water, releases to groundwater, and societal and
economic impacts from severe accidents are small for
all plants. Severe accident mitigation alternatives do
not warrant further plant-specific analysis because
the demonstrated reductions in population dose risk
and continued severe accident regulatory improvements
substantially reduce the likelihood of finding cost-
effective significant plant improvements.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Environmental Justice
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impacts on minority populations, low-income 2 Impacts on minority populations, low-income
populations, and Indian tribes. populations, Indian tribes, and subsistence
consumption resulting from continued operations and
refurbishment associated with license renewal will be
addressed in nuclear plant-specific reviews.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Waste Management
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-level waste storage and disposal....... 1 SMALL. The comprehensive regulatory controls that are
in place and the low public doses being achieved at
reactors ensure that the radiological impacts on the
environment would remain small during the license
renewal term.
[[Page 13356]]
Onsite storage of spent nuclear fuel....... 1 During the license renewal term, SMALL. The expected
increase in the volume of spent fuel from an
additional 20 years of operation can be safely
accommodated onsite during the license renewal term
with small environmental impacts through dry or pool
storage at all plants.
For the period after the licensed life for reactor
operations, the impacts of onsite storage of spent
nuclear fuel during the continued storage period are
discussed in NUREG-2157 and as stated in Sec.
51.23(b), shall be deemed incorporated into this
issue.
Offsite radiological impacts of spent 1 For the high-level waste and spent-fuel disposal
nuclear fuel and high-level waste disposal. component of the fuel cycle, the EPA established a
dose limit of 0.15 mSv (15 millirem) per year for the
first 10,000 years and 1.0 mSv (100 millirem) per year
between 10,000 years and 1 million years for offsite
releases of radionuclides at the proposed repository
at Yucca Mountain, Nevada.
The Commission concludes that the impacts would not be
sufficiently large to require the NEPA conclusion, for
any plant, that the option of extended operation under
10 CFR part 54 should be eliminated. Accordingly,
while the Commission has not assigned a single level
of significance for the impacts of spent fuel and high
level waste disposal, this issue is considered
Category 1.
Mixed-waste storage and disposal........... 1 SMALL. The comprehensive regulatory controls and the
facilities and procedures that are in place ensure
proper handling and storage, as well as negligible
doses and exposure to toxic materials for the public
and the environment at all plants. License renewal
would not increase the small, continuing risk to human
health and the environment posed by mixed waste at all
plants. The radiological and nonradiological
environmental impacts of long-term disposal of mixed
waste from any individual plant at licensed sites are
small.
Nonradioactive waste storage and disposal.. 1 SMALL. No changes to systems that generate
nonradioactive waste are anticipated during the
license renewal term. Facilities and procedures are in
place to ensure continued proper handling, storage,
and disposal, as well as negligible exposure to toxic
materials for the public and the environment at all
plants.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Greenhouse gas impacts on climate change... 1 SMALL. Greenhouse gas impacts on climate change from
continued operations and refurbishment associated with
license renewal are expected to be small at all
plants. Greenhouse gas emissions from routine
operations of nuclear power plants are typically very
minor, because such plants, by their very nature, do
not normally combust fossil fuels to generate
electricity.
Greenhouse gas emissions from construction vehicles and
other motorized equipment for refurbishment activities
would be intermittent and temporary, restricted to the
refurbishment period. Worker vehicle greenhouse gas
emissions for refurbishment would be similar to worker
vehicle emissions from normal nuclear power plant
operations.
Climate change impacts on environmental 2 Climate change can have additive effects on
resources. environmental resource conditions that may also be
directly impacted by continued operations and
refurbishment during the license renewal term. The
effects of climate change can vary regionally and
climate change information at the regional and local
scale is necessary to assess trends and the impacts on
the human environment for a specific location. The
impacts of climate change on environmental resources
during the license renewal term are location-specific
and cannot be evaluated generically.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cumulative Effects
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cumulative effects......................... 2 Cumulative effects or impacts of continued operations
and refurbishment associated with license renewal must
be considered on a plant-specific basis. The effects
depend on regional resource characteristics, the
incremental resource-specific effects of license
renewal, and the cumulative significance of other
factors affecting the environmental resource.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Uranium Fuel Cycle
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offsite radiological impacts--individual 1 SMALL. The impacts to the public from radiological
impacts from other than the disposal of exposures have been considered by the Commission in
spent fuel and high-level waste. Table S-3 of this part. Based on information in the
GEIS, impacts to individuals from radioactive gaseous
and liquid releases, including radon-222 and
technetium-99, would remain at or below the NRC's
regulatory limits.
Offsite radiological impacts--collective 1 There are no regulatory limits applicable to collective
impacts from other than the disposal of doses to the general public from fuel-cycle
spent fuel and high-level waste. facilities. The practice of estimating health effects
on the basis of collective doses may not be
meaningful. All fuel-cycle facilities are designed and
operated to meet the applicable regulatory limits and
standards. The Commission concludes that the
collective impacts are acceptable.
The Commission concludes that the impacts would not be
sufficiently large to require the NEPA conclusion, for
any plant, that the option of extended operation under
10 CFR Part 54 should be eliminated. Accordingly,
while the Commission has not assigned a single level
of significance for the collective impacts of the
uranium fuel cycle, this issue is considered Category
1.
Nonradiological impacts of the uranium fuel 1 SMALL. The nonradiological impacts of the uranium fuel
cycle. cycle resulting from the renewal of an operating
license for any plant would be small.
Transportation............................. 1 SMALL. The impacts of transporting materials to and
from uranium-fuel-cycle facilities on workers, the
public, and the environment are expected to be small.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Termination of Nuclear Power Plant Operations and Decommissioning
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Termination of plant operations and 1 SMALL. License renewal is expected to have a negligible
decommissioning. effect on the impacts of terminating operations and
decommissioning on all resources.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Data supporting this table are contained in NUREG-1437, Revision 2, ``Generic Environmental Impact Statement
for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants'' (February 2023).
[[Page 13357]]
\2\ The numerical entries in this column are based on the following category definitions: Category 1: For the
issue, the analysis reported in the Generic Environmental Impact Statement has shown: (1) The environmental
impacts associated with the issue have been determined to apply either to all plants or, for some issues, to
plants having a specific type of cooling system or other specified plant or site characteristic; (2) A single
significance level (i.e., small, moderate, or large) has been assigned to the impacts (except for offsite
radiological impacts of spent nuclear fuel and high-level waste disposal and offsite radiological impacts--
collective impacts from other than the disposal of spent fuel and high-level waste); and (3) Mitigation of
adverse impacts associated with the issue has been considered in the analysis, and it has been determined that
additional plant-specific mitigation measures are not likely to be sufficiently beneficial to warrant
implementation. The generic analysis of the issue may be adopted in each plant-specific review. Category 2:
For the issue, the analysis reported in the Generic Environmental Impact Statement has shown that one or more
of the criteria of Category 1 cannot be met, and therefore additional plant-specific review is required.
\3\ The impact findings in this column are based on the definitions of three significance levels. Unless the
significance level is identified as beneficial, the impact is adverse, or in the case of ``small,'' may be
negligible. The definitions of significance follow: SMALL--For the issue, environmental effects are not
detectable or are so minor that they will neither destabilize nor noticeably alter any important attribute of
the resource. For the purposes of assessing radiological impacts, the Commission has concluded that those
impacts that do not exceed permissible levels in the Commission's regulations are considered small as the term
is used in this table. MODERATE--For the issue, environmental effects are sufficient to alter noticeably, but
not to destabilize, important attributes of the resource. LARGE--For the issue, environmental effects are
clearly noticeable and are sufficient to destabilize important attributes of the resource. For issues where
probability is a key consideration (i.e., accident consequences), probability was a factor in determining
significance.
\4\ This issue applies only to the in-scope portion of electric power transmission lines, which are defined as
transmission lines that connect the nuclear power plant to the substation where electricity is fed into the
regional power distribution system and transmission lines that supply power to the nuclear plant from the
grid.
\5\ NA (not applicable). The categorization and impact finding definitions do not apply to these issues.
\6\ If, in the future, the Commission finds that, contrary to current indications, a consensus has been reached
by appropriate Federal health agencies that there are adverse health effects from electromagnetic fields, the
Commission will require applicants to submit plant-specific reviews of these health effects as part of their
license renewal applications. Until such time, applicants for license renewal are not required to submit
information on this issue.
\7\ Although the NRC does not anticipate any license renewal applications for nuclear power plants for which a
previous severe accident mitigation design alternative (SAMDA) or severe accident mitigation alternative
(SAMA) analysis has not been performed, alternatives to mitigate severe accidents must be considered for all
plants that have not considered such alternatives and would be the functional equivalent of a Category 2 issue
requiring site-specific analysis.
Dated: February 23, 2023.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Brooke P. Clark,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2023-04102 Filed 3-2-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P