[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 146 (Friday, July 31, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 38117-38140]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-18284]
========================================================================
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. 74, No. 146 / Friday, July 31, 2009 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 38117]]
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
10 CFR Part 51
RIN 3150-AI42
[NRC-2008-0608]
Revisions to Environmental Review for Renewal of Nuclear Power
Plant Operating Licenses
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is proposing to amend
its environmental protection regulations by updating the Commission's
1996 findings on the environmental impacts related to the renewal of a
nuclear power plant's operating license. The Commission stated that it
intends to review the assessment of impacts and update it on a 10-year
cycle, if necessary. The proposed rule redefines the number and scope
of the environmental impact issues which must be addressed by the
Commission in conjunction with the review of applications for license
renewal. As part of this 10-year update, the NRC revised the 1996
Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) for License Renewal of
Nuclear Plants. Concurrent with the amendments described in this
proposed rule, the NRC is publishing for comment the revised GEIS, a
revised Regulatory Guide 4.2, Supplement 1, Preparation of
Environmental Reports for Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal
Applications, and a revised Environmental Standard Review Plan,
Standard Review Plans for Environmental Reviews for Nuclear Power
Plants, Supplement 1: Operating License Renewal.
DATES: Comments on this proposed rule, its information collection
aspects and its draft regulatory analysis should be submitted by
October 14, 2009. Comments on the revised GEIS (NUREG-1437, Revision
1); Regulatory Guide (RG) 4.2, Supplement 1, Revision 1; and
Environmental Standard Review Plan (ESRP), Supplement 1, Revision 1
(NUREG-1555), should be submitted by October 14, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted by letter or electronic mail and
will be made available for public inspection. Because comments will not
be edited to remove any identification or contact information, such as
name, addresses, telephone number, e-mail address, etc., the NRC
cautions against including any personal information in your submissions
that you do not want to be publicly disclosed. The NRC requests that
any party soliciting or aggregating comments received from other
persons for submission to the NRC inform these persons that the NRC
will not edit their comments to remove any identifying or comment
information, and therefore, they should not include any information in
their comments that they do not want publicly disclosed.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and
search for documents filed under Docket ID [NRC-2008-0608]. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher, (301) 492-3668; e-mail
[email protected].
Mail comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001, ATTN: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff.
E-mail comments to: [email protected]. If you do not
receive a reply e-mail confirming that we have received your comments,
contact us directly at (301) 415-1677.
Fax comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission at
(301) 415-1101.
Publicly available documents related to this rulemaking may be
accessed using the following methods:
NRC's Public Document Room (PDR): Publicly available documents may
be examined at the NRC's PDR, Public File Area O1-F21, One White Flint
North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. The PDR reproduction
contractor will copy documents for a fee.
NRC's Agencywide Document Access and Management System (ADAMS):
Publicly available documents created or received at the NRC are
available electronically at the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. From this link, the public can gain
entry into ADAMS, which provides text and image files of NRC's public
documents. If problems are encountered accessing documents in ADAMS,
contact the NRC's PDR reference staff at (800) 397-4209, or (301) 415-
4737, or by e-mail to [email protected].
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Jason Lising, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
20555-0001; telephone (301) 415-3220; e-mail: [email protected]; or
Ms. Jennifer Davis, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone (301) 415-
3835; e-mail: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
II. Background
III. Public Comments
IV. Discussion
V. Proposed Actions and Basis for Changes to Table B-1
VI. Section-by-Section Analysis
VII. Specific Request for Comments
VIII. Guidance Documents
IX. Agreement State Compatibility
X. Availability of Documents
XI. Plain Language
XII. Voluntary Consensus Standards
XIII. Finding of No Significant Environmental Impact
XIV. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement
XV. Regulatory Analysis
XVI. Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification
XVII. Backfit Analysis
I. Introduction
The NRC is proposing to amend Title 10, Part 51, ``Environmental
Protection Regulations for Domestic Licensing and Related Regulatory
Functions,'' of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR Part 51) by
updating Table B-1 in Appendix B to Subpart A of ``Summary of Findings
on NEPA Issues for License Renewal of Nuclear Power Plants,'' and other
related provisions in Part 51 (e.g., Sec. 51.53(c)(3)), which
describes the requirements for the license renewal applicant's
environmental report. These amendments are based on comments received
from the public on NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental Impact Statement
for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants'' (May 1996), referred to as the
``1996 GEIS,'' and its Addendum 1 (August 1999), a review of plant-
specific supplemental environmental impact statements (SEISs) completed
[[Page 38118]]
since the GEIS was issued in 1996, lessons learned, and knowledge
gained from the preparation of these SEISs. The NRC staff has prepared
a draft revision to the 1996 GEIS, referred to as the ``revised GEIS,''
which updates the 1996 GEIS based upon consideration of the above
described factors. The revised GEIS provides the technical basis for
this proposed rule.
In the 1996 GEIS and final rule (61 FR 28467, June 5, 1996), which
promulgated Table B-1 and related provisions in Part 51, the Commission
determined that certain environmental impacts associated with the
renewal of a nuclear power plant operating license were the same or
similar for all plants and as such, could be treated on a generic
basis. In this way, repetitive reviews of these environmental impacts
could be avoided. The Commission based its generic assessment of
certain environmental impacts 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 GEIS improved the efficiency of the license renewal
process by (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
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.
As stated in the 1996 final rule that incorporated the findings of
the GEIS in Part 51, the NRC recognized that the assessment of the
environmental impact issues might change over time, and that additional
issues may be identified for consideration. This proposed rule is the
result of the 10-year review conducted by the NRC on the information
and findings currently presented in Table B-1 of Appendix B to Part 51.
II. Background
Rulemaking History
In 1986, the NRC initiated a program to develop license renewal
regulations and associated regulatory guidance in anticipation of
applications for the renewal of nuclear power plant operating licenses.
A solicitation for comments on the development of a policy statement
was published in the Federal Register on November 6, 1986 (51 FR
40334). However, the Commission decided to forgo the development of a
policy statement and to proceed directly to rulemaking. An advance
notice of proposed rulemaking was published on August 29, 1988 (53 FR
32919). Subsequently, in addition to a decision to proceed with the
development of license renewal regulations focused on the protection of
health and safety, the NRC decided to amend its environmental
protection regulations in Part 51.
On October 13, 1989 (54 FR 41980), the NRC published a notice of
its intent to hold a public workshop on license renewal on November 13
and 14, 1989. One of the workshop sessions was devoted to the
environmental issues associated with license renewal and the possible
merit of amending 10 CFR Part 51. The workshop is summarized in NUREG/
CP-0108, ``Proceedings of the Public Workshop on Nuclear Power Plant
License Renewal'' (April 1990). Responses to the public comments
submitted after the workshop are summarized in NUREG-1411, ``Response
to Public Comments Resulting from the Public Workshop on Nuclear Power
Plant License Renewal'' (July 1990).
On July 23, 1990, the NRC published an advance notice of proposed
rulemaking (55 FR 29964) and a notice of intent to prepare a generic
environmental impact statement (55 FR 29967). The proposed rule
published on September 17, 1991 (56 FR 47016), described the supporting
documents that were available and announced a public workshop to be
held on November 4 and 5, 1991. The supporting documents for the
proposed rule included:
(1) NUREG-1437, ``Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement for
License Renewal of Nuclear Plants'' (August 1991);
(2) NUREG-1440, ``Regulatory Analysis of Proposed Amendments to
Regulations Concerning the Environmental Review for Renewal of Nuclear
Power Plant Operating Licenses: Draft Report for Comment'' (August
1991);
(3) Draft Regulatory Guide DG-4002, Proposed Supplement 1 to
Regulatory Guide 4.2, ``Guidance for the Preparation of Supplemental
Environmental Reports in Support of an Application To Renew a Nuclear
Power Station Operating License'' (August 1991); and
(4) NUREG-1429, ``Environmental Standard Review Plan for the Review
of License Renewal Applications for Nuclear Power Plants: Draft Report
for Comment'' (August 1991).
After the comment period, the Commission directed the NRC staff to
discuss concerns raised by a number of States that certain features of
the proposed rule conflicted with State regulatory authority over the
need for power and utility economics. To facilitate these discussions,
the NRC developed an options paper entitled, ``Addressing the Concerns
of States and Others Regarding the Role of Need for Generating
Capacity, Alternative Energy Sources, Utility Costs, and Cost-Benefit
Analysis in NRC Environmental Reviews for Relicensing Nuclear Power
Plants: An NRC Staff Discussion Paper.'' A Federal Register document
published on January 18, 1994 (59 FR 2542), announced the scheduling of
three regional workshops in February 1994 and the availability of the
options paper. A fourth public meeting was held in May 1994 to address
proposals that had been submitted after the regional workshops. After
consideration of all comments, the NRC issued a supplement to the
proposed rule on July 25, 1994 (59 FR 37724), to resolve concerns about
the need for power and utility economics.
The NRC published the final rule, ``Environmental Review for
Renewal of Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses,'' on June 5, 1996
(61 FR 28467). The final rule identified and assessed license renewal
environmental impact issues for which a generic analysis had been
performed and therefore, did not have to be addressed by a licensee in
its environmental report or by the NRC staff in its SEIS. Similarly,
the final rule identified and assessed those environmental impacts for
which a site-specific analysis was required, both by the licensee in
its environmental report and by the NRC staff in its SEIS. The final
rule, amongst other amendments to Part 51, added Appendix B to Subpart
A of Part 51. Appendix B included Table B-1, which summarizes the
findings of NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental Impact Statement for
License Renewal of Nuclear Plants,'' May 1996 (1996 GEIS).
On December 18, 1996 (61 FR 66537), the NRC amended the final rule
[[Page 38119]]
published in June 1996 to incorporate minor clarifying and conforming
changes and add language omitted from Table B-1. This amendment also
analyzed comments received specific to the treatment of low-level waste
storage and disposal impacts, the cumulative radiological effects from
the uranium fuel cycle, and the effects from the disposal of high-level
waste and spent fuel requested in the June 1996 final rule.
On September 3, 1999 (64 FR 48496), the NRC amended the December
1996 final rule to expand the generic findings about the environmental
impacts resulting from transportation of fuel and waste to and from a
single nuclear power plant. This amendment permitted the NRC to make a
generic finding regarding these environmental impacts so that an
analysis would not have to be repeated for each license renewal
application. The amendment also incorporated rule language consistent
with the findings in the 1996 GEIS, which addressed local traffic
impacts attributable to continued operations of the nuclear power plant
during the license renewal term. The Generic Environmental Impact
Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants: Main Report Section
6.3--``Transportation,'' Table 9.1, ``Summary of Findings on NEPA
Issues for License Renewal of Nuclear Power Plants,'' Final Report
(NUREG-1437, Volume 1, Addendum 1), published in August 1999, provides
the analysis supporting the amendment.
The current proposed rulemaking began in June 2003 when the NRC
issued a notice of intent to update the 1996 GEIS in the Federal
Register (68 FR 33209). The original comment period began in June 2003
and ended in September 2003. In October 2005 the scoping period was
reopened until December 30, 2005 (70 FR 57628).
III. Public Comments
Scoping Process
On June 3, 2003 (68 FR 33209), the NRC solicited public comments
which provided the public with an opportunity to participate in the
environmental scoping process, as defined in Sec. 51.26. In this
notice, the NRC announced the intent to update the 1996 GEIS. The NRC
conducted scoping meetings in each of the four NRC regions for the GEIS
update. The scoping meetings were held in Atlanta, Georgia (July 8,
2003), Oak Lawn, Illinois (July 10, 2003), Anaheim, California (July
15, 2003), and Boston, Massachusetts (July 17, 2003). The public
comment period closed in September 2003 and the project was inactive
for the next two years due to limited staff resources and competing
demands. On October 3, 2005 (70 FR 57628), the NRC reopened the public
comment period and extended it until December 30, 2005. All comments
submitted in response to the 2003 scoping request have been considered
in preparing the revised GEIS and are publicly available. No comments
were received during the 2005 public comment period.
The official transcripts, written comments, and meeting summaries
are available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public
Document Room (PDR) or from the Publicly Available Records (PARS)
component of NRC's document system under ADAMS Accession Nos.
ML032170942, ML032260339, ML032260715, and ML032170934. All comments
and suggestions received orally or in writing during the scoping
process were considered.
The NRC has prepared a scoping summary report that is available
electronically for public inspection in the NRC PDR or from the PARS
component of ADAMS under Accession No. ML073450750. Additionally, the
scoping summary is located in Appendix A in the revised GEIS.
IV. Discussion
1996 GEIS
Under the NRC's environmental protection regulations in Part 51,
which implements Section 102(2) of the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969 (NEPA), renewal of a nuclear power plant operating license
requires the preparation of an environmental impact statement (EIS). To
help in the preparation of individual operating license renewal EISs,
the NRC prepared the 1996 GEIS.
In 1996 and 1999, the Commission amended its environmental
protection regulations in Part 51, to improve the efficiency of the
environmental review process for applicants seeking to renew a nuclear
power plant operating license for up to an additional 20 years. These
amendments were based on the analyses reported in the 1996 GEIS.
The 1996 GEIS summarizes the findings of a systematic inquiry into
the environmental impacts of continued operations and refurbishment
activities associated with license renewal. The NRC identified 92
environmental impact issues. Of the 92 environmental issues analyzed,
69 issues were resolved generically (i.e., Category 1), 21 would
require a further plant-specific analysis (i.e., Category 2), and 2
would require a site-specific assessment by the NRC prior to issuance
of a renewed license (i.e., uncategorized). As part of a license
renewal application, an applicant submits an environmental report to
the NRC, and the NRC prepares a plant-specific SEIS to the 1996 GEIS.
The GEIS assigns one of three impact levels (small, moderate, or
large) to a given environmental resource (e.g., air, water, or soil). A
small impact means that the environmental effects are not detectable,
or are so minor that they will neither destabilize, nor noticeably
alter, any important attribute of the resource. A moderate impact means
that the environmental effects are sufficient to alter noticeably, but
not to destabilize, important attributes of the resource. A large
impact means that the environmental effects are clearly noticeable, and
are sufficient to destabilize important attributes of the resource.
Table B-1 in Appendix B to Part 51, summarizes the findings of the
analyses conducted for the 1996 GEIS. Issues and processes common to
all nuclear power plants having generic (i.e., the same or similar)
environmental impacts are considered Category 1 issues. Category 2
issues are those issues that cannot be generically dispositioned and
would require a plant-specific analysis to determine the level of
impact.
The 1996 GEIS has been effective in focusing NRC resources on
important environmental issues and increased the efficiency of the
environmental review process. Currently, 51 nuclear units at 29 plant
sites have received renewed licenses.
Revised GEIS
The GEIS revision evaluates the environmental issues and findings
of the 1996 GEIS. Lessons learned and knowledge gained during previous
license renewal reviews provided a significant source of new
information for this assessment. 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 determine if the findings presented in the 1996 GEIS
remain valid. In doing so, the NRC considered the need to modify, add
to, or delete any of the 92 environmental issues in the 1996 GEIS.
After this evaluation, the staff carried forward 78 impact issues for
detailed consideration in this GEIS revision. Fifty-eight of these
issues were determined to be Category 1 and would not require
additional plant-specific analysis. Of the remaining twenty issues,
nineteen were determined to be Category 2 and one remained
uncategorized. No
[[Page 38120]]
environmental issues identified in Table B-1 and in the 1996 GEIS were
eliminated, but several were combined or regrouped according to
similarities.
Environmental issues in the revised GEIS are arranged by resource
area. This perspective is a change from the 1996 GEIS in which
environmental issues were arranged by power plant systems (e.g.,
cooling systems, transmission lines) and activities (e.g.,
refurbishment). The structure of the revised GEIS adopts the NRC's
standard format for EISs as established in Part 51, Appendix A to
Subpart A of Part 51--``Format for Presentation of Material in
Environmental Impact Statements.'' The environmental impacts of license
renewal activities, including plant operations and refurbishment along
with replacement power alternatives, are addressed in each resource
area. The revised GEIS summarizes environmental impact issues under the
following resource areas: (1) Land use and visual resources; (2)
meteorology, air quality, and noise; (3) geology, seismology, and
soils; (4) hydrology (surface water and groundwater); (5) ecology
(terrestrial ecology, aquatic ecology, threatened, endangered, and
protected species and essential fish habitat); (6) historic and
cultural resources; (7) socioeconomics; (8) human health (radiological
and nonradiological hazards); (9) environmental justice; and (10) waste
management and pollution prevention. The proposed rule revises Table B-
1 in Appendix B to Subpart A of Part 51 to follow the organizational
format of the revised GEIS.
Environmental impacts of license renewal and the resources that
could be affected were identified in the revised GEIS. The general
analytical approach for identifying environmental impacts was to (1)
describe the nuclear power plant activity that could affect the
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 environmental impact on the affected
resource, (5) characterize the significance of the effects, (6)
determine whether the results of the analysis apply to all nuclear
power plants (whether the impact issue is Category 1 or Category 2),
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 levels of significance were reviewed, impacts were
reexamined to determine if any should be removed, added, recombined, or
divided.
The Commission would like to emphasize that in complying with the
NRC's environmental regulations under Sec. 51.53(c)(3)(iv) applicants
are required to provide any new and significant information regarding
the environmental impacts of license renewal of which the applicant is
aware, even on Category 1 issues. The proposed amendments would not
change this requirement.
The revised GEIS retains the 1996 GEIS definitions of a Category 1
and Category 2 issue. The revised GEIS discusses four major types of
changes:
(1) New Category 1 Issue: These issues would include Category 1
issues not previously listed in the 1996 GEIS or multiple Category 1
issues from the 1996 GEIS that have been combined into a Category 1
issue in the revised GEIS. The applicant does not need to assess this
issue in its environmental report. Under Sec. 51.53(c)(3)(iv),
however, the applicant is responsible for reporting in the
environmental report any ``new and significant information'' of which
the applicant is aware. If the applicant is not aware of any new and
significant information that would change the conclusion in the revised
GEIS, the applicant would be required to state this determination in
the environmental report. The NRC has addressed the environmental
impacts of these Category 1 issues generically for all plants in the
revised GEIS.
(2) New Category 2 Issue: These issues would include Category 2
issues not previously listed in the 1996 GEIS or multiple Category 2
issues from the 1996 GEIS that have been combined into a Category 2
issue in the revised GEIS. For each new Category 2 issue, the applicant
would have to conduct an assessment of the potential environmental
impacts related to that issue and include it in the environmental
report. The assessment 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:
These would include issues that were considered as Category 2 in the
1996 GEIS and would now be considered as Category 1 in the revised
GEIS. An applicant would no longer be required to conduct an assessment
on the environmental impacts associated with these issues. 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) Existing Issue Category Change from Category 1 to Category 2:
These would include issues that were considered as Category 1 in the
1996 GEIS and would now be considered as Category 2 in the revised
GEIS. An applicant that previously did not have to provide an analysis
on the environmental impacts associated with these issues would now be
required to conduct an assessment of the environmental impacts and
include it in the environmental report.
V. Proposed Actions and Basis for Changes to Table B-1
The revised GEIS which is concurrently issued for public comment
and publicly available (ADAMS Accession No. ML090220654) provides a
summary change table comparing the ninety-two environmental issues in
the 1996 GEIS with the seventy-eight environmental issues in the
revised GEIS. The proposed rule amends Table B-1 in Appendix B to
Subpart A, ``Summary of Findings on NEPA Issues for License Renewal of
Nuclear Power Plants,'' to reflect the changes made in the revised
GEIS. The changes to Table B-1 are described below:
(i) Land Use
(1) Onsite Land Use--``Onsite land use'' remains a Category 1
issue. The proposed rule makes minor clarifying changes to the finding
column of Table B-1 for this issue.
(2) Offsite Land Use--The proposed rule language combines two
Category 2 issues, ``Offsite land use (refurbishment)'' and ``Offsite
land use (license renewal term)'' reclassifies this combined issue as a
Category 1 issue, and names it, ``Offsite land use.'' The finding
column of the current Table B-1 for ``Offsite land use
(refurbishment)'' indicates that impacts may be of moderate
significance at plants in low population areas. The finding column of
the current Table B-1 for ``Offsite land use (license renewal term)''
indicates that significant changes in land use may be associated with
population and tax revenue changes resulting from license renewal. As
described in the 1996 GEIS, environmental impacts are considered to be
small if refurbishment activities were to occur at plants located in
high population areas and if population and tax revenues would not
change.
Significant impacts on offsite land use are not anticipated.
Previous plant-specific license renewal reviews conducted by the NRC
have shown no requirement for a substantial number of additional
workers during the license renewal term and that refurbishment
[[Page 38121]]
activities, such as steam generator and vessel head replacement, have
not required the large numbers of workers and the months of time that
was conservatively estimated in the 1996 GEIS. These reviews support a
finding that offsite land use impacts during the license renewal term
would be small for all nuclear power plants.
(3) Offsite Land Use in Transmission Line Rights-of-Way (ROWs)--The
proposed rule renames ``Powerline right of way'' as ``Offsite land use
in transmission line rights-of-way (ROWs);'' it remains a Category 1
issue. The proposed rule makes minor clarifying changes to the finding
column of Table B-1 for this issue.
(ii) Visual Resources
(4) Aesthetic Impacts--The proposed rule language combines three
Category 1 issues, ``Aesthetic impacts (refurbishment),'' ``aesthetic
impacts (license renewal term),'' and ``aesthetic impacts of
transmission lines (license renewal term)'' into one new Category 1
issue, ``Aesthetic impacts.'' The 1996 GEIS concluded that renewal of
operating licenses and the refurbishment activities would have no
significant aesthetic impact during the license renewal term. Impacts
are considered to be small if the visual appearance of plant and
transmission line structures would not change. Previous license renewal
reviews conducted by the NRC show that the appearance of nuclear plants
and transmission line structures do not change significantly over time
or because of refurbishment activities. Therefore, aesthetic impacts
are not anticipated and the combined issue remains a Category 1 issue.
These three issues are combined into one Category 1 issue as they
are similar and combining them would streamline the license renewal
process.
(iii) Air Quality
(5) Air Quality (Non-Attainment and Maintenance Areas)--The
proposed language renames ``Air quality during refurbishment (non-
attainment and maintenance areas)'' as ``Air quality (non-attainment
and maintenance areas)'' and expands it to include emissions from
testing emergency diesel generators, boilers used for facility heating,
and particulate emissions from cooling towers. The issue remains a
Category 2 issue.
(6) Air Quality Effects of Transmission Lines--``Air quality
effects of transmission lines'' remains a Category 1 issue. There are
no changes for this issue.
(iv) Noise
(7) Noise Impacts--The proposed rule renames ``Noise'' as ``Noise
impacts''; it remains a Category 1 issue. The proposed rule makes minor
clarifying changes to the finding column of Table B-1 for this issue.
(v) Geology and Soils
(8) Impacts of Nuclear Plants on Geology and Soils--The proposed
language adds a new Category 1 issue, ``Impacts of nuclear plants on
geology and soils,'' to the impacts of continued power plant operations
and refurbishment activities on geology and soils (i.e., prime
farmland) and to determine if there is new or significant information
in regard to regional or local seismology. New seismological conditions
are limited to the identification of previously unknown geologic faults
and are expected to be rare. Geology and soil conditions at all nuclear
power plants and associated transmission lines have been well
established during the current licensing term and are expected to
remain unchanged during the 20-year license renewal term. The impact of
continued operations and refurbishment activities during the license
renewal term on geologic and soil resources would consist of soil
disturbance for construction or renovation projects. Implementing best
management practices would reduce soil erosion and subsequent impacts
on surface water quality. Best management practices include: (1)
Minimizing the amount of disturbed land, (2) stockpiling topsoil before
ground disturbance, (3) mulching and seeding in disturbed areas, (4)
covering loose materials with geotextiles, (5) using silt fences to
reduce sediment loading to surface water, (6) using check dams to
minimize the erosive power of drainages, and (7) installing proper
culvert outlets to direct flows in streams or drainages.
No information in any plant-specific SEIS prepared to date, or in
the referenced documents, has identified these impacts as being
significant.
(vi) Surface Water
(9) Surface-Water Use and Quality--The proposed rule combines two
Category 1 issues, ``Impacts of refurbishment on surface water
quality'' and ``Impacts of refurbishment on surface water use,'' and
names the combined issue ``Surface-water use and quality.'' These two
issues were combined because the impacts of refurbishment on both
surface water use and quality are negligible and the effects are
closely related.
The NRC expects licensees to use best management practices during
the license renewal term for both continuing operations and
refurbishment activities. Use of best management practices will
minimize soil erosion. In addition, implementation of spill prevention
and control plans will reduce the likelihood of any liquid chemical
spills. If refurbishment activities take place during a reactor
shutdown, the overall water use by the facility will be reduced. Based
on this conclusion, the impact on surface water use and quality during
a license renewal term will continue to be small for all plants. The
combined issue remains a Category 1 issue. The proposed rule makes
minor clarifying changes to the finding column of Table B-1 for this
issue.
(10) Altered Current Patterns at Intake and Discharge Structures,
(11) Altered Salinity Gradients, (12) Altered Thermal Stratification of
Lakes, and (13) Scouring Caused by Discharged Cooling Water--``Altered
current patterns at intake and discharge structures,'' ``Altered
salinity gradients,'' ``Altered thermal stratification of lakes,'' and
``Scouring caused by discharged cooling water'' remain Category 1
issues. The proposed rule makes minor clarifying changes to the finding
column of Table B-1 for each of these issues.
(14) Discharge of Metals in Cooling System Effluent--The proposed
language renames ``Discharge of other metals in waste water'' as
``Discharge of metals in cooling system effluent''; it remains a
Category 1 issue. The proposed rule makes minor clarifying changes to
the finding column of Table B-1 for this issue.
(15) Discharge of Biocides, Sanitary Wastes, and Minor Chemical
Spills--The proposed rule combines two Category 1 issues, ``Discharge
of chlorine or other biocides'' and ``Discharge of sanitary wastes and
minor chemical spills'' as ``Discharge of biocides, sanitary wastes,
and minor chemical spills.'' The combined issue remains a Category 1
issue. The proposed rule makes minor clarifying changes to the finding
column of Table B-1 for this issue.
(16) Water Use Conflicts (plants with once-through cooling
systems)--``Water use conflicts (plants with once-through cooling
systems)'' remains a Category 1 issue. The proposed rule makes a minor
clarifying change to the finding column of Table B-1 for this issue.
(17) Water Use Conflicts (plants with cooling ponds or cooling
towers using make-up water from a river with low flow)--``Water use
conflicts (plants with cooling ponds or cooling towers using
[[Page 38122]]
make-up water from a river with low flow)'' remains a Category 2 issue.
The proposed rule makes minor clarifying changes to the finding column
of Table B-1 for this issue.
(18) Effects of Dredging on Water Quality--The proposed rule adds a
new Category 1 issue, ``Effects of dredging on water quality,'' that
evaluates the impacts of dredging to maintain intake and discharge
structures at nuclear power plant facilities. The impact of dredging on
surface water quality was not considered in the 1996 GEIS and is not
listed in the current Table B-1. Most plants have intake and discharge
structures that must be maintained by periodic dredging of sediment
accumulated in or on the structures.
This dredging, while temporarily increasing turbidity in the source
water body, has been shown to have little effect on water quality. In
addition to maintaining intake and discharge structures, dredging is
often done to keep barge slips and channels open to service the plant.
Dredged material is most often disposed on property owned by the
applicant and usually contains no hazardous materials. Dredging is
performed under a permit issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and
consequently, each dredging action would be subject to a site-specific
environmental review conducted by the Corps.
Temporary impacts of dredging are measurable in general water
quality terms, but the impacts have been shown to be small.
(19) Temperature Effects on Sediment Transport Capacity--
``Temperature effects on sediment transport capacity'' remains a
Category 1 issue. There are no changes to this issue.
(vii) Groundwater
(20) Groundwater Use and Quality--The proposed rule renames
``Impacts of refurbishment on groundwater use and quality'' as
``Groundwater use and quality.'' The issue remains a Category 1 issue.
The NRC has concluded that use of best management practices would
address any wastes or spills that could affect groundwater quality. The
proposed rule updates the finding column of Table B-1 for this issue to
include a statement identifying best management practices and makes
other minor clarifying changes to the finding column.
(21) Groundwater Use Conflicts (Plants that Withdraw Less Than 100
Gallons per Minute [gpm])--The proposed rule renames ``Ground-water use
conflicts (potable and service water; plants that use <100 gpm)'' as
``Groundwater use conflicts (plants that withdraw less than 100 gallons
per minute [gpm]).'' The issue remains a Category 1 issue. The proposed
rule makes minor clarifying changes to the finding column of Table B-1
for this issue.
(22) Groundwater use conflicts (plants that withdraw more than 100
gpm including those using Ranney Wells)--The proposed rule combines two
Category 2 issues, ``Groundwater use conflicts (potable and service
water, and dewatering; plants that use >100 gpm)'' and ``Ground-water
use conflicts (Ranney wells)'' and names the combined issue
``Groundwater use conflicts (plants that withdraw more than 100 gpm
including those using Ranney wells).'' The combined issue remains a
Category 2 issue. Because Ranney wells produce significantly more than
100 gpm, the Ranney wells issue was combined with the general issue of
groundwater use conflicts for plants using more than 100 gpm of
groundwater. The proposed rule makes clarifying changes to the finding
column of Table B-1 for this combined issue.
(23) Groundwater Use Conflicts (Plants With Closed-Cycle Cooling
Systems that Withdraw Makeup Water from a River)--The proposed rule
renames ``Ground-water use conflicts (plants using cooling tower
withdrawing make-up water from a small river'' as ``Groundwater use
conflicts (plants with closed-cycle cooling systems that withdraw
makeup water from a river).'' The combined issue remains a Category 2
issue. The proposed rule makes minor clarifying changes to the finding
column of Table B-1 for this issue.
(24) Groundwater Quality Degradation Resulting from Water
Withdrawals--The proposed rule combines two Category 1 issues,
``Ground-water quality degradation (Ranney wells)'' and ``Ground-water
quality degradation (saltwater intrusion)'' and names the combined
issue ``Groundwater quality degradation resulting from water
withdrawals.'' The combined issue remains a Category 1 issue. The two
issues were combined as they both consider the possibility of
groundwater quality becoming degraded as a result of the plant drawing
water of potentially lower quality into the aquifer. The proposed rule
makes clarifying changes to the finding column of Table B-1 for this
combined issue.
(25) Groundwater Quality Degradation (Plants with Cooling Ponds in
Salt Marshes) and (26) Groundwater Quality Degradation (Plants with
Cooling Ponds at Inland Sites)--``Groundwater quality degradation
(plants with cooling ponds in salt marshes)'' and ``Groundwater quality
degradation (plants with cooling ponds at inland sites)'' remain,
respectively, Category 1 and Category 2 issues. The proposed rule makes
clarifying changes to the finding column of Table B-1 for each of these
issues.
(27) Groundwater and Soil Contamination--The proposed rule adds a
new Category 2 issue, ``Groundwater and Soil Contamination,'' to
evaluate the impacts of the industrial use of solvents, hydrocarbons,
heavy metals, or other chemicals on groundwater, soil, and subsoil at
nuclear power plant sites during the license renewal term. Review of
license renewal applications has shown the existence of these non-
radionuclide contaminants at some plants. This contamination is usually
regulated by State environmental regulatory authorities or the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). In addition, this new Category 2
issue has been added because each specific site has its own program for
handling waste and hazardous materials, and no generic evaluation would
apply to all nuclear power plants.
Industrial practices at all plants have the potential to
contaminate site groundwater and soil through the use and spillage of
solvents, hydrocarbons, heavy metals, or other chemicals, especially on
sites with unlined wastewater lagoons and storm water lagoons. Any
contamination by these substances is subject to characterization and
clean-up by State and EPA regulated remediation and monitoring
programs.
(28) Radionuclides Released to Groundwater--The proposed rule adds
a new Category 2 issue, ``Radionuclides released to groundwater,'' to
evaluate the potential impact of discharges of radionuclides, such as
tritium, from plant systems into groundwater. The issue is relevant to
license renewal because virtually all commercial nuclear power plants
routinely release radioactive gaseous and liquid materials into the
environment. A September 2006 NRC report, ``Liquid Radioactive Release
Lessons Learned Task Force Report,'' documented instances of
inadvertent releases of radionuclides into groundwater from nuclear
power plants (ADAMS Accession No. ML062650312).
NRC regulations in Parts 20 and 50 limit the amount of
radioactivity released into the environment to be ``As Low As is
Reasonably Achievable'' (ALARA) to ensure that the impact on public
health is very low. Most of the inadvertent liquid release events
involved tritium, which is a radioactive isotope of hydrogen. However,
other
[[Page 38123]]
radioactive isotopes have been inadvertently released into the
environment. An example is leakage from spent fuel pools, where leakage
from the stored fuel would allow fission products to be released into
the pool water.
The most significant conclusion of the NRC report regards public
health impacts. Although there have been a number of events where
radionuclides were released inadvertently into groundwater, based on
the data available, the NRC did not identify any instances where the
health of the public was impacted. The NRC did identify that under the
existing regulatory requirements, the potential exists for inadvertent
radionuclide releases to migrate offsite into groundwater.
Another factor in adding this new Category 2 issue is the level of
public concern associated with such inadvertent releases of
radionuclides into groundwater. The NRC concludes that the impact of
radionuclide releases to groundwater quality could be small or
moderate, depending on the occurrence and frequency of leaks and the
ability to respond to leaks in a timely fashion.
(viii) Terrestrial Resources
(29) Impacts of Continued Plant Operations on Terrestrial
Ecosystems--The proposed rule renames ``Refurbishment impacts'' as
``Impacts of continued plant operations on terrestrial ecosystems;'' it
remains a Category 2 issue. The analysis in the revised GEIS expands
the scope of this issue to include the environmental impacts associated
with continued plant operations and maintenance activities in addition
to refurbishment. The proposed rule revises the finding column of Table
B-1 for this issue accordingly.
(30) Exposure of Terrestrial Organisms to Radionuclides--The
proposed rule adds a new Category 1 issue, ``Exposure of terrestrial
organisms to radionuclides,'' to evaluate the issue of the potential
impact of radionuclides on terrestrial organisms resulting from normal
operations of a nuclear power plant during the license renewal term.
This issue was not evaluated in the 1996 GEIS. However, the impact of
radionuclides on terrestrial organisms has been raised by members of
the public as well as Federal and State agencies during previous
license renewal reviews.
The revised GEIS evaluates the potential impact of radionuclides on
terrestrial biota at nuclear power plants from continued operations
during the license renewal term. Site-specific radionuclide
concentrations in water, sediment, and soils were obtained from
Radiological Environmental Monitoring Operating Reports from 15 nuclear
power plants. These 15 plants were selected to represent sites with a
range of radionuclide concentrations in the media, including plants
with high annual worker dose exposure values for both boiling water
reactors and pressurized water reactors. The calculated radiation dose
rates to terrestrial biota were compared against radiation-acceptable
radiation safety guidelines issued by the U.S. Department of Energy,
the International Atomic Energy Agency, the National Council of
Radiation Protection and Measurement, and the International Commission
on Radiological Protection. The NRC concludes that the impact of
radionuclides on terrestrial biota from past and current operations
would be small for all nuclear power plants and would not be expected
to change appreciably during the license renewal term.
(31) Cooling System Impacts on Terrestrial Resources (Plants with
Once-Through Cooling Systems or Cooling Ponds)--The proposed rule
renames ``Cooling pond impacts on terrestrial resources'' as ``Cooling
system impacts on terrestrial resources (plants with once-through
cooling systems or cooling ponds).'' This issue remains a Category 1
issue. The analysis in the revised GEIS expands the scope of this issue
to include plants with once-through cooling systems. This analysis
concludes that the impacts on terrestrial resources from once-through
cooling systems, as well as from cooling ponds, is of small
significance at all plants. The proposed rule revises the finding
column of Table B-1 for this issue accordingly.
(32) Cooling Tower Impacts on Vegetation (Plants with Cooling
Towers)--The proposed rule combines two Category 1 issues, ``Cooling
tower impacts on crops and ornamental vegetation'' and ``Cooling tower
impacts on native plants'' and names the combined issue ``Cooling tower
impacts on vegetation (plants with cooling towers).'' The combined
issue remains a Category 1 issue. The two issues were combined to
conform to the resource-based approach used in the revised GEIS and to
simplify and streamline the analysis. With the recent trend of
replacing lawns with native vegetation, some ornamental plants and
crops are native plants, and the original separation into two issues is
unnecessary and cumbersome. The proposed rule makes clarifying changes
to the finding column of Table B-1 for this combined issue.
(33) Bird Collisions with Cooling Towers and Transmission Lines--
The proposed rule combines two Category 1 issues, ``Bird collisions
with cooling towers'' and ``Bird collision with power lines'' and names
the combined issue ``Bird collisions with cooling towers and
transmission lines.'' The combined issue remains a Category 1 issue.
The two issues were combined to conform to the resource-based approach
used in the revised GEIS and to simplify and streamline the analysis.
The proposed rule makes clarifying changes to the finding column of
Table B-1 for this combined issue.
(34) Water Use Conflicts with Terrestrial Resources (Plants with
Cooling Ponds or Cooling Towers Using Makeup Water from a River with
Low Flow)--The proposed rule adds a new Category 2 issue, ``Water use
conflicts with terrestrial resources (plants with cooling ponds or
cooling towers using make-up water from a river with low flow)'' to
evaluate water use conflict impacts with terrestrial resources in
riparian communities. Such impacts could occur when water that supports
these resources is diminished either because of decreased availability
due to droughts; increased water demand for agricultural, municipal, or
industrial usage; or a combination of these factors. The potential
range of impact levels at plants, subject to license renewal, with
cooling ponds or cooling towers using makeup water from a small river
with low flow cannot be generically determined at this time.
(35) Transmission Line ROW Management Impacts on Terrestrial
Resources--The proposed rule combines two Category 1 issues, ``Power
line right-of-way management (cutting and herbicide application)'' and
``Floodplains and wetland on power line right-of-way'' and names the
combined issue ``Transmission line ROW management impacts on
terrestrial resources.'' The combined issue remains a Category 1 issue.
The two issues were combined to simplify and streamline the analysis.
The scope of the evaluation of transmission lines in the revised
GEIS is reduced from that of the 1996 GEIS--only those transmission
lines currently needed to connect the nuclear power plants to the
regional electrical distribution grid are considered within the scope
of license renewal. Thus, the number of and length of transmission
lines being evaluated are greatly reduced. The revised GEIS analysis
indicates that proper management of transmission line ROW areas does
not
[[Page 38124]]
have significant adverse impacts on current wildlife populations, and
ROW management can provide valuable wildlife habitats. The proposed
rule makes clarifying changes to the finding column of Table B-1 for
this combined issue.
(36) Electromagnetic Fields on Flora and Fauna (Plants,
Agricultural Crops, Honeybees, Wildlife, Livestock)--``Electromagnetic
fields on flora and fauna (plants, agricultural crops, honeybees,
wildlife, livestock)'' remains a Category 1 issue. There are no changes
to this issue.
(ix) Aquatic Resources
(37) Impingement and Entrainment of Aquatic Organisms (Plants with
Once-Through Cooling Systems or Cooling Ponds)--The proposed rule
combines two Category 2 issues, ``Entrainment of fish and shellfish in
early life stages (for plants with once-through cooling and cooling
pond heat dissipation systems)'' and ``Impingement of fish and
shellfish (for plants with once-through cooling and cooling pond heat
dissipation systems)'' and one Category 1 issue, ``Entrainment of
phytoplankton and zooplankton (for all plants)'' and names the combined
issue ``Impingement and entrainment of aquatic organisms (plants with
once-through cooling systems or cooling ponds).'' The combined issue is
a Category 2 issue.
For the revised GEIS, these issues were combined to simplify the
review process in keeping with the resource-based approach and to allow
for a more complete analysis of the environmental impact. Nuclear power
plants typically conduct separate sampling programs to estimate the
numbers of organisms entrained and impinged, which explains the
original separation of these issues. However, it is the combined
effects of entrainment and impingement that reflect the total impact of
the cooling system intake on the resource. Environmental conditions are
different to each nuclear plant site and impacts cannot be determined
generically. The proposed rule revises the finding column of Table B-1
for this issue accordingly.
(38) Impingement and Entrainment of Aquatic Organisms (Plants with
Cooling Towers)--The proposed rule combines three Category 1 issues,
``Entrainment of fish and shellfish in early life stages (for plants
with cooling tower-based heat dissipation systems),'' ``Impingement of
fish and shellfish (for plants with cooling tower-based heat
dissipation systems),'' and ``Entrainment of phytoplankton and
zooplankton (for all plants)'' and names the combined issue
``Impingement and entrainment of aquatic organisms (plants with cooling
towers).'' The combined issue remains a Category 1 issue. The three
issues are combined given their similar nature and to simplify and
streamline the review process. The proposed rule revises the finding
column of Table B-1 for this issue accordingly.
(39) Thermal Impacts on Aquatic Organisms (Plants with Once-Through
Cooling Systems or Cooling Ponds)--The proposed rule combines four
Category 1 issues, ``Cold shock (for all plants),'' ``Thermal plume
barrier to migrating fish (for all plants),'' ``Distribution of aquatic
organisms (for all plants),'' and ``Premature emergence of aquatic
insects (for all plants),'' and one Category 2 issue ``Heat shock (for
plants with once-through and cooling pond heat dissipation systems)''
and names the combined issue ``Thermal impacts on aquatic organisms
(plants with once-through cooling systems or cooling ponds).'' The
combined issue is a Category 2 issue.
The five issues are combined given their similar nature and to
simplify and streamline the review process. With the exception of heat
shock, previous license renewal reviews conducted by the NRC have shown
that the thermal effects of once-through cooling and cooling pond
systems have not been a problem at operating nuclear power plants and
would not change during the license renewal term, so future impacts are
not anticipated. However, it is difficult to differentiate the various
thermal effects of once-through cooling and cooling pond systems in the
field. Different populations may react differently due to changes in
water temperature. For example, if a resident population avoided a
heated effluent, the 1996 GEIS would have identified this issue as
``distribution of aquatic organisms;'' however, had this population
been migrating, the issue would have been considered under ``thermal
plume barrier to migrating fish.'' If individuals had remained in the
heated effluent too long, the issue would have been considered under
``heat shock;'' or, if the individuals then left the warm water, the
issue would have been considered under ``cold shock.'' Using the
resource-based approach in the revised GEIS, each of these issues would
be considered a thermal impact from once-through and cooling pond
systems. Environmental conditions are different at each nuclear plant
site and impacts cannot be determined generically. The proposed rule
revises the finding column of Table B-1 for this issue accordingly.
(40) Thermal Impacts on Aquatic Organisms (Plants with Cooling
Towers)--The proposed rule combines five Category 1 issues, ``Cold
shock (for all plants),'' ``Thermal plume barrier to migrating fish
(for all plants),'' ``Distribution of aquatic organisms (for all
plants),'' ``Premature emergence of aquatic insects (for all plants),''
and ``Heat shock (for plants with cooling-tower-based heat dissipation
systems)'' and names the combined issue ``Thermal impacts on aquatic
organisms (plants with cooling towers).'' The combined issue is a
Category 1 issue.
The five issues are combined given their similar nature and to
simplify and streamline the review process. The proposed rule revises
the finding column of Table B-1 for this issue accordingly.
(41) Effects of Cooling Water Discharge on Dissolved Oxygen, Gas
Supersaturation, and Eutrophication--The proposed rule combines three
Category 1 issues, ``Eutrophication,'' ``Gas supersaturation (gas
bubble disease),'' and ``Low dissolved oxygen in the discharge,'' and
names the combined issue ``Effects of cooling water discharge on
dissolved oxygen, gas supersaturation, and eutrophication.'' The
combined issue is a Category 1 issue.
The three issues are combined given their similar nature and to
simplify and streamline the review process. The proposed rule revises
the finding column of Table B-1 for this issue accordingly.
(42) Effects of Non-Radiological Contaminants on Aquatic
Organisms--The proposed rule renames ``Accumulation of contaminants in
sediments or biota'' as ``Effects of non-radiological contaminants on
aquatic organisms;'' it remains a Category 1 issue. The proposed rule
makes clarifying changes to the finding column of Table B-1 for this
issue.
(43) Exposure of Aquatic Organisms to Radionuclides--The proposed
rule adds a new Category 1 issue, ``Exposure of Aquatic Organisms to
Radionuclides,'' to evaluate the potential impact of radionuclide
discharges upon aquatic organisms. This issue has been raised by
members of the public as well as Federal and State agencies during the
license renewal process for various plants.
The revised GEIS evaluates the potential impact of radionuclides on
aquatic organisms at nuclear power plants from continued operations
during the license renewal term. A radiological assessment was
performed using effluent release data from 15 NRC-licensed nuclear
power plants chosen based on having a range of radionuclide
concentrations in environmental media.
[[Page 38125]]
Site-specific radionuclide concentrations in water and sediments, as
reported in the plant's radioactive effluent and environmental
monitoring reports, were used in the calculations. The data is
representative of boiling water reactors and pressurized water
reactors. The calculated radiation dose rates to aquatic biota were
compared against radiation acceptable radiation safety guidelines
issued by the U.S. Department of Energy, the International Atomic
Energy Agency, the National Council of Radiation Protection and
Measurement, and the International Commission on Radiological
Protection. The NRC concludes that the impact of radionuclides on
aquatic biota from past and current operations would be small for all
nuclear power plants, and would not be expected to change appreciably
during the license renewal term.
(44) Effects of Dredging on Aquatic Organisms--The proposed rule
adds a new Category 1 issue, ``Effects of dredging on aquatic
organisms,'' to evaluate the impacts of dredging on aquatic organisms.
Licensees conduct dredging to maintain intake and discharge structures
at nuclear power plant facilities and in some cases, to maintain barge
slips. Dredging may disturb or remove benthic communities. In general,
maintenance dredging for nuclear power plant operations would occur
infrequently, would be of relatively short duration, and would affect
relatively small areas. Dredging is performed under a permit issued by
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and consequently, each dredging action
would be subject to a site-specific environmental review conducted by
the Corps.
(45) Water Use Conflicts with Aquatic Resources (Plants with
Cooling Ponds or Cooling Towers using Make-Up Water from a River with
Low Flow)--The proposed rule adds a new Category 2 issue, ``Water use
conflicts with aquatic resources (plants with cooling ponds or cooling
towers using make-up water from a river with low flow)'' to evaluate
water use conflict impacts with aquatic resources in instream
communities. Such impacts could occur when water that supports these
resources is diminished either because of decreased availability due to
droughts; increased water demand for agricultural, municipal, or
industrial usage; or a combination of these factors. The potential
range of impact levels at plants, subject to license renewal, with
cooling ponds or cooling towers using makeup water from a small river
with low flow cannot be generically determined at this time.
(46) Refurbishment Impacts on Aquatic Resources--The proposed rule
language renames ``Refurbishment'' as ``Refurbishment impacts on
aquatic resources;'' it remains a Category 1 issue. The proposed rule
makes minor clarifying changes to the finding column of Table B-1 for
this issue.
(47) Impacts of Transmission Line ROW Management on Aquatic
Resources--The proposed rule adds a new Category 1 issue, ``Impacts of
transmission line ROW management on aquatic resources,'' to evaluate
the impact of transmission line ROW management on aquatic resources.
Impacts on aquatic resources from transmission line ROW maintenance
could occur as a result of the direct disturbance of aquatic habitats,
soil erosion, changes in water quality (from sedimentation and thermal
effects), or inadvertent releases of chemical contaminants from
herbicide use. As described in the revised GEIS, any impact on aquatic
resources resulting from transmission line ROW management is expected
to be small, short term, and localized for all plants.
(48) Losses from Predation, Parasitism, and Disease Among Organisms
Exposed to Sublethal Stresses and (49) Stimulation of Aquatic Nuisance
Species (e.g., Shipworms)--``Losses from predation, parasitism, and
disease among organisms exposed to sublethal stresses'' and
``Stimulation of aquatic nuisance species (e.g., shipworms)'' remain
Category 1 issues. The proposed rule does not change the finding column
entries of Table B-1 for these issues.
(x) Threatened, Endangered, and Protected Species and Essential Fish
Habitat
(50) Threatened, Endangered, and Protected Species and Essential
Fish Habitat--The proposed rule renames ``Threatened or endangered
species'' as ``Threatened, endangered, and protected species and
essential fish habitat'' and expands the scope of the issue to include
essential fish habitats protected under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act. The issue remains a Category 2 issue.
The proposed rule makes clarifying changes to the finding column entry
of table B-1 for this issue.
(xi) Historic and Cultural Resources
(51) Historic and Cultural Resources--The proposed rule language
renames ``Historic and archaeological resources'' as ``Historic and
cultural resources;'' it remains a Category 2 issue. The proposed rule
language more accurately reflects the National Historic Preservation
Act requirements that Federal agencies consult with State Historic
Preservation Officer and appropriate Native American Tribes to
determine the potential impacts and mitigation.
(xii) Socioeconomics
(52) Employment and Income, Recreation and Tourism--The proposed
rule adds a new Category 1 issue, ``Employment and income,'' and
combines it with the ``tourism and recreation'' portion of a current
Table B-1 Category 1 issue, ``Public services: public safety, social
services, and tourism and recreation.'' These issues are combined given
the similar nature and to streamline the review process. The revised
GEIS provides an analysis of this issue and concludes that the impacts
are generic to all plants undergoing license renewal.
(53) Tax Revenues--The proposed rule adds a new Category 1 issue,
``Tax revenues,'' to evaluate the impacts of license renewal on tax
revenues. Refurbishment activities, such as steam generator and vessel
head replacement, have not had a noticeable effect on the value of
nuclear plants, thus changes in tax revenues are not anticipated from
future refurbishment activities. Refurbishment activities involve the
one-for-one replacement of existing components and are generally not
considered a taxable improvement. Also, new property tax assessments;
proprietary payments in lieu of tax stipulations, settlements, and
agreements; and State tax laws are continually changing the amounts
paid to taxing jurisdictions by nuclear plant owners, and these occur
independent of license renewal and refurbishment activities.
(54) Community Services and Education--The proposed rule language
reclassifies two Category 2 issues, ``Public services: Public
utilities'' and ``Public services, education (refurbishment)'' as
Category 1 issues, and combines them with the Category 1 issue,
``Public services, education (license renewal term),'' and the ``Public
safety and social service'' portion of the Category 1 issue, ``Public
services: Public safety, social services, and tourism and recreation.''
The combined issue, ``Community services and education,'' is a Category
1 issue.
The four issues are combined as all public services are equally
affected by changes in plant operations and refurbishment at nuclear
plants. Any changes in the number of workers at a nuclear plant will
affect demand for public services from local communities. Nevertheless,
past environmental
[[Page 38126]]
reviews conducted by NRC have shown that the number of workers at
relicensed nuclear plants has not changed significantly because of
license renewal, so impacts on community services are not anticipated
from future license renewals. In addition, refurbishment activities,
such as steam generator and vessel head replacement, have not required
the large numbers of workers and the months of time that was
conservatively analyzed in the 1996 GEIS, so significant impacts on
community services are no longer anticipated. Combining the four issues
also simplifies and streamlines the NRC review process. The proposed
rule revises the finding column of Table B-1 accordingly.
(55) Population and Housing--The proposed rule language combines a
new Category 1 issue, ``Population,'' and a Category 2 issue, ``Housing
impacts,'' and names the combined issue, ``Population and housing.''
The combined issue is a Category 1 issue. The two issues are combined
as the availability and value of housing are directly affected by
changes in population and to simplify and streamline the NRC review
process.
As described in the revised GEIS, the NRC has determined that the
impacts of continued operations and refurbishment activities on
population and housing, during the license renewal term, would be
small, are not dependent on the socioeconomic setting of the nuclear
plant, and are generic to all plants. The proposed rule revises the
finding column of Table B-1 accordingly.
(56) Transportation--The proposed rule reclassifies the Category 2
issue, ``Public services, transportation,'' as a Category 1 issue and
renames it ``Transportation.'' As described in the revised GEIS, the
NRC has determined that the numbers of workers have not changed
significantly due to license renewal, so transportation impacts are no
longer anticipated from future license renewals. The proposed rule
revises the finding column entry of table B-1 for this issue
accordingly.
(xiii) Human Health
(57) Radiation Exposures to the Public--The proposed rule combines
two Category 1 issues, ``Radiation exposures to the public during
refurbishment'' and ``Radiation exposure to public (license renewal
term)'' and names the combined issue, ``Radiation exposures to the
public.'' The combined issue is a Category 1 issue. These issues are
combined given the similar nature and to streamline the review process.
The proposed rule revises the finding column of Table B-1 accordingly.
(58) Radiation Exposures to Occupational Workers--The proposed rule
combines two Category 1 issues, ``Occupational radiation exposures
during refurbishment'' and ``Occupational radiation exposures (license
renewal term)'' and names the combined issue, ``Radiation exposures to
occupational workers.'' The combined issue is a Category 1 issue. These
issues are combined given their similar nature and to streamline the
review process. The proposed rule revises the finding column of Table
B-1 accordingly.
(59) Human Health Impact from Chemicals--The proposed rule adds a
new Category 1 issue, ``Human health impact from chemicals,'' to
evaluate the potential impacts of chemical hazards to workers and
chemical releases to the environment.
The evaluation addresses the potential impact of chemicals on human
health resulting from normal operations of a nuclear power plant during
the license renewal term. Impacts of chemical discharges to human
health are considered to be small if the discharges of chemicals to
water bodies are within effluent limitations designed to ensure
protection of water quality and if ongoing discharges have not resulted
in adverse effects on aquatic biota.
The disposal of essentially all of the hazardous chemicals used at
nuclear power plants is regulated by Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act or National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits,
thereby minimizing adverse impacts to the environment and on workers
and the public. It is anticipated that all plants would continue to
operate in compliance with all applicable permits and that no
mitigation measures beyond those implemented during the current license
term would be warranted as a result of license renewal.
A review of the documents, as referenced in the GEIS; operating
monitoring reports; and consultations with utilities and regulatory
agencies that were performed for the 1996 GEIS, indicated that the
effects of the discharge of chlorine and other biocides on water
quality would be of small significance for all power plants. Small
quantities of biocides are readily dissipated and/or chemically altered
in the body of water receiving them, so significant cumulative impacts
to water quality would not be expected. Major changes in the operation
of the cooling system are not expected during the license renewal term,
so no change in the effects of biocide discharges on the quality of the
receiving water is anticipated. Discharges of sanitary wastes and heavy
metals are regulated by NPDES. Discharges that do not violate the
permit limits are considered to be of small significance. The effects
of minor chemical discharges and spills on water quality would be of
small significance and mitigated as needed.
(60) Microbiological Hazards to the Public (Plants with Cooling
Ponds or Canals or Cooling Towers that Discharge to a River)--The
proposed rule renames ``Microbiological organisms (public health)
(plants using lakes or canals, or cooling towers or cooling ponds that
discharge to a small river)'' as ``Microbiological hazards to the
public (plants with cooling ponds or canals or cooling towers that
discharge to a river);'' it remains a Category 2 issue. The proposed
rule makes minor clarifying changes to the Table B-1 finding column
entry for this issue.
(61) Microbiological Hazards to Plant Workers--The proposed rule
renames ``Microbiological organisms (occupational health)'' as
``Microbiological hazards to plant workers;'' it remains a Category 1
issue. There are no changes to the Table B-1 finding column entry for
this issue.
(62) Chronic Effects of Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs)--The proposed
rule renames ``Electromagnetic fields, chronic effects'' as ``Chronic
effects of electromagnetic fields (EMFs);'' it remains an uncategorized
issue. The proposed rule revises the Table B-1 finding column entry for
this issue.
(63) Physical Occupational Hazards--The proposed rule adds a new
Category 1 issue, ``Physical occupational hazards,'' to evaluate the
potential impact of physical occupational hazards on human health
resulting from normal nuclear power plant operations during the license
renewal term. The impact of physical occupational hazards on human
health has been raised by members of the public as well as Federal and
State agencies during the license renewal process. Occupational hazards
can be minimized when workers adhere to safety standards and use
appropriate protective equipment; however, fatalities and injuries from
accidents can still occur. Data for occupational injuries in 2005
obtained from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics indicate that the
rate of fatal injuries in the utility sector is less than the rate for
many sectors (e.g., construction, transportation and warehousing,
agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting, wholesale trade, and
mining) and that the incidence rate for nonfatal
[[Page 38127]]
occupational injuries and illnesses is the least for electric power
generation, followed by electric power transmission control and
distribution. It is expected that over the license renewal term,
workers would continue to adhere to safety standards and use protective
equipment, so adverse occupational impacts would be of small
significance at all sites. No mitigation measures beyond those
implemented during the current license term would be warranted.
(64) Electric Shock Hazards--The proposed rule renames
``Electromagnetic fields, acute effects (electric shock)'' as
``Electric shock hazards;'' it remains a Category 2 issue. The proposed
rule revises the Table B-1 finding column entry for this issue by more
accurately summarizing the discussion in the GEIS which focuses
attention on the potential of electrical shock from transmission lines.
(xiv) Postulated Accidents
(65) Design-Basis Accidents and (66) Severe Accidents--``Design-
basis accidents'' and ``Severe accidents'' remain Category 1 and 2
issues, respectively. The proposed rule makes minor clarifying changes
to the Table B-1 finding column entries for these issues.
(xv) Environmental Justice
(67) Minority and Low-Income Populations--The proposed rule adds a
new Category 2 issue, ``Minority and low-income populations,'' to
evaluate the impacts of nuclear plant operations and refurbishment
during the license renewal term on minority and low-income populations
living in the vicinity of the plant. This issue is listed in the
current Table B-1, but it was not evaluated in the 1996 GEIS. The
current Table B-1 finding column entry states that ``[t]he need for and
the content of an analysis of environmental justice will be addressed
in plant-specific reviews.''
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629; February 16, 1994) initiated the
Federal government's environmental justice program. The NRC's ``Policy
Statement on the Treatment of Environmental Justice Matters in NRC
Regulatory and Licensing Actions'' (69 FR 52040, August 24, 2004)
states ``the NRC is committed to the general goals of E.O. 12898, it
will strive to meet those goals through its normal and traditional NEPA
review process.'' Guidance for implementing Executive Order 12898 was
not available prior to the completion of the 1996 GEIS. To accomplish
these goals, NRC requires the assistance of applicants in identifying
minority and low-income populations and communities residing in the
vicinity of the nuclear power plant and determining whether there would
be any disproportionately high and adverse human health and
environmental impacts on these populations from continued power plant
operations and refurbishment activities during the license renewal
term.
(xvi) Solid Waste Management
(68) Low-Level Waste Storage and Disposal--``Low-level waste
storage and disposal'' remains a Category 1 issue. The proposed rule
makes clarifying changes to the Table B-1 finding column entry for this
issue.
(69) Onsite Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel--The proposed rule
renames ``On-site spent fuel'' as ``Onsite storage of spent nuclear
fuel;'' it remains a Category 1 issue. The proposed rule does not
change the finding column entry of Table B-1 for this issue.
(70) Offsite Radiological Impacts of Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-
Level Waste Disposal--The proposed rule renames ``Offsite radiological
impacts (spent fuel and high level waste disposal)'' as ``Offsite
radiological impacts of spent nuclear fuel and high-level waste
disposal.'' It remains a Category 1 issue. The proposed rule summarizes
the lengthy discussion in the finding column of Table B-1 for this
issue, and incorporates specific dose limits obtained from the recent
docketing by the NRC of the application for the proposed repository at
Yucca Mountain, Nevada.
(71) Mixed-Waste Storage and Disposal--``Mixed-waste storage and
disposal'' remains a Category 1 issue. The proposed rule revises the
Table B-1 finding column entry for this issue by more accurately
summarizing the discussion in the GEIS.
(72) Nonradioactive Waste Storage and Disposal--The proposed
language renames ``Nonradiological waste'' as ``Nonradiological waste
storage and disposal;'' it remains a Category 1 issue. The proposed
rule makes minor clarifying changes to the finding column of Table B-1
for this issue.
(xvii) Cumulative Impacts
(73) Cumulative Impacts--The proposed rule adds a new Category 2
issue, ``Cumulative impacts,'' to evaluate the potential cumulative
impacts of license renewal. The term ``cumulative impacts'' is defined
in Sec. 51.14(b) by reference to the Council on Environmental Quality
(CEQ) regulations, 40 CFR 1508.7, as ``the impact on the environment
which results from the incremental impact of the action when added to
other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions
regardless of what agency (Federal or non-Federal) or person undertakes
such other actions.''
For the purposes of analysis, past actions are considered to be
when the nuclear power plant was licensed and constructed, present
actions are related to current plant operations, and future actions are
those that are reasonably foreseeable through the end of plant
operations including the license renewal term. The geographic area over
which past, present, and future actions are assessed depends on the
affected resource.
The NRC requires the assistance of applicants in identifying other
past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions, such as the
construction and operation of other power plants and other industrial
and commercial facilities in the vicinity of the nuclear power plant.
Therefore, this environmental impact is considered a Category 2 issue.
(xviii) Uranium Fuel Cycle
(74) Offsite Radiological Impacts--Individual Impacts from Other
than the Disposal of Spent Fuel and High-Level Waste--``Offsite
radiological impacts--individual impacts from other than the disposal
of spent fuel and high-level waste'' remains a Category 1 issue. The
proposed rule makes minor clarifying changes to the findings column of
Table B-1 for this issue.
(75) Offsite Radiological Impacts--Collective Impacts from Other
than the Disposal of Spent Fuel and High-Level Waste--The proposed rule
renames ``Offsite radiological impacts (collective effects)'' as
``Offsite radiological impacts--collective impacts from other than the
disposal of spent fuel and high-level waste''; it remains a Category 1
issue. The proposed rule summarizes the discussion in the Table B-1
finding column entry for this issue.
(76) Nonradiological Impacts of the Uranium Fuel Cycle--
Nonradiological impacts of the uranium fuel cycle'' remains a Category
1 issue. The proposed rule makes minor clarifying changes to the
finding column of Table B-1 for this issue.
(77) Transportation--``Transportation'' remains a Category 1 issue.
The proposed rule revises the Table B-1 finding column entry for this
issue by retaining the significance level assigned to this
environmental issue as applicable to the uranium fuel cycle. The
specific technical discussion supporting these findings is retained in
the GEIS.
[[Page 38128]]
(xiv) Termination of Nuclear Power Plant Operations and Decommissioning
(78) Termination of Nuclear Power Plant Operations and
Decommissioning--The proposed rule combines one new Category 1 issue,
``Termination of nuclear power plant operations'' with six other
Category 1 issues, ``Radiation doses,'' ``Waste management,'' ``Air
quality,'' ``Water quality,'' ``Ecological resources,'' and
``Socioeconomic impacts,'' listed in the 1996 GEIS under the resource
area, ``Decommissioning'' and names the combined issue, ``Termination
of plant operations and decommissioning.'' This combined issue is a
Category 1 issue.
The 1996 GEIS analysis indicates that the six decommissioning
issues are expected to be small at all nuclear power plant sites. The
new issue addresses the impacts from terminating nuclear power plant
operations prior to plant decommissioning. Termination of nuclear power
plant operations results in the cessation of activities necessary to
maintain the reactor, as well as a significant reduction in plant
workforce. It is assumed that termination of plant operations would not
lead to the immediate decommissioning and dismantlement of the reactor
or other power plant infrastructure.
These environmental issues and the termination of nuclear power
plant operations issue would be combined into one Category 1 issue to
simplify and streamline the NRC review process. These issues are also
addressed in the ``2002 Generic Environmental Impact Statement on
Decommissioning of Nuclear Facilities: Regarding the Decommissioning of
Nuclear Power Reactors,'' NUREG-0586, which is incorporated by
reference in the revised GEIS. The proposed rule revises the findings
column of Table B-1 accordingly.
VI. Section-by-Section Analysis
The following section-by-section analysis discusses the proposed
modifications to the Part 51 provisions.
Proposed Sec. 51.14(a)
The proposed rule adds to Sec. 51.14(a) a definition for the term
``historic properties.'' The term is intended to be an overarching term
that includes those historic, archaeological, and Native American
traditional religious and cultural properties (districts, sites,
buildings, structures, objects, artifacts) that are covered by the
various Federal preservation laws, including the National Historic
Preservation Act, and where applicable, the Archaeological Resources
Protection Act and the Native American Graves Protection and
Repatriation Act.
Proposed Sec. 51.53(c)(2)
The NRC proposes to clarify the required contents of the license
renewal environmental report which applicants must submit in accordance
with Sec. 54.21 by revising the second sentence in this subparagraph
to read, ``This report must describe in detail the affected environment
around the plant, the modifications directly affecting the environment
or any plant effluents, and any planned refurbishment activities.''
Proposed Sec. Sec. 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(A), (B), and (E)
For those applicants seeking an initial license renewal and holding
either an operating license, construction permit, or combined license
as of June 30, 1995, the environmental report shall include the
information required in Sec. 51.53(c)(2), but is not required to
contain analyses of the environmental impacts of certain license
renewal issues identified as Category 1 (generically analyzed) issues
in Appendix B to Subpart A of Part 51. The environmental report must
contain 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 (plant specific
analysis required) issues in Appendix B to Subpart A of Part 51 and
must include consideration of alternatives for reducing adverse impacts
of Category 2 issues. In addition, the environmental report must
contain any new and significant information regarding the environmental
impacts of license renewal of which the applicant is aware. The
required analyses are listed in Sec. Sec. 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(A)-(P).
The proposed language for Sec. Sec. 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(A), (B), and
(E) consists of changes to conform to the proposed changes in Table B-
1, which in turn, reflects the revised GEIS. The NRC proposes to modify
these paragraphs to more accurately reflect the specific information
needed in the environmental report that will help the NRC conduct the
environmental review of the proposed action.
Section 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(A) is revised to incorporate the findings
of the revised GEIS and to require applicants to provide information in
their environmental reports regarding water availability and competing
water demands and related impacts on instream (aquatic) and riparian
(terrestrial) communities.
Section 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(B) is revised to replace ``heat shock''
with ``thermal changes'' to reflect the proposed changes made in the
revised Table B-1 as described earlier in this document under ``(ix)
Aquatic Resources,'' environmental impact issue, ``(39) Thermal Impacts
on Aquatic Organisms (Plants with Once-Through Cooling Systems or
Cooling Ponds).''
Section 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(E) is revised to expressly include power
plant continued operations within the scope of the impacts to be
assessed by license renewal applicants. The paragraph is further
revised to expand the scope of the provision to include all Federal
wildlife protection laws and essential fish habitat under the Magnuson-
Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act.
Proposed Sec. 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(I)
The NRC proposes to remove the language in Sec. 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(I)
to conform with the proposed changes made in the revised Table B-1 and
to reserve the paragraph. These Category 2 issues were changed to
Category 1 because significant changes in housing availability, land-
use, and increased population demand attributable to the proposed
project on the public water supply have not occurred at relicensed
nuclear plants. Therefore, impacts to these resources are no longer
anticipated from future license renewals. In addition, refurbishment
activities, such as steam generator and vessel head replacement, have
not required the large numbers of workers and the months of time that
was conservatively analyzed in the 1996 GEIS. As such, significant
impacts on public schools are no longer anticipated from future
refurbishment activities. Applicants would no longer need to assess the
impacts of the proposed action on housing availability, land-use, and
public schools (impacts from refurbishment activities only) within the
vicinity of the plant. Additionally, applicants would no longer need to
assess the impact of population increases attributable to the proposed
action on the public water supply.
Proposed Sec. 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(J)
The NRC proposes to remove the language in Sec. 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(J)
to conform with the proposed changes made in the revised Table B-1 and
to reserve the paragraph. This Category 2 issue, ``Public service,
Transportation'' was changed to Category 1, ``Transportation,'' and
remains under resource area, ``Socioeconomic'' because refurbishment
activities, such as steam generator and vessel head replacement,
[[Page 38129]]
have not required the large numbers of workers and the months of time
that was conservatively analyzed in the 1996 GEIS; therefore
significant transportation impacts are not anticipated from future
refurbishment activities. Applicants would no longer need to assess the
impact of the proposed action on local transportation during periods of
license renewal refurbishment activities.
Proposed Sec. 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(K)
The proposed language for Sec. 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(K) deletes the
phrase, ``or archaeological.'' This term is encompassed by the use of
the term ``historical,'' as defined in the proposed rule language under
Sec. 51.14, ``Definitions.''
Proposed Sec. 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(N)
The NRC proposes to add a new paragraph (c)(3)(ii)(N) in Sec.
51.53 to conform with the proposed changes made in the revised Table B-
1. A new Category 2 issue, ``Minority and low-income populations''
under resource area, ``Environmental Justice'' addresses the issue of
determining the effects of nuclear plant operations and refurbishment
on minority and low-income populations living in the vicinity of the
plant. This issue is listed in the current Table B-1, but was not
evaluated in the 1996 GEIS. The finding stated that: ``The need for and
the content of an analysis of environmental justice will be addressed
in plant-specific reviews.'' Guidance for implementing E.O. No. 12898,
``Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income Populations,'' (Section 1-101) (59 FR 7629)
and dated February 16, 1994 was not available before the completion of
the 1996 GEIS.
In August 2004, the Commission issued a policy statement on
implementation of E.O. 12898: NRC's Policy Statement on the Treatment
of Environmental Justice Matters in NRC Regulatory and Licensing
Actions (69 FR 52040). As stated therein, ``the NRC is committed to the
general goals of E.O. 12898, it will strive to meet those goals through
its normal and traditional NEPA review process.'' To accomplish these
goals, NRC requires the assistance of applicants in identifying
minority and low-income populations and communities residing in the
vicinity of the nuclear power plant and determining if there would be
any disproportionate and adverse human health and environmental impacts
on these populations. The NRC will then assess the information provided
by the applicant.
Proposed Sec. 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(O)
The NRC proposes to add a new paragraph (c)(3)(ii)(O) in Sec.
51.53 to conform with the proposed changes made in the revised Table B-
1. A new Category 2 issue has been added to the GEIS to evaluate the
potential contamination of soil and groundwater from industrial
practices at nuclear plants. Industrial practices at all plants have
the potential to contaminate site groundwater and soil through the use
and spillage of solvents, hydrocarbons, heavy metals, or other
chemicals, especially on sites with unlined wastewater lagoons and
storm water lagoons. Any contamination by these substances is subject
to characterization and clean-up by EPA and State remediation and
monitoring programs. NRC requires the assistance of applicants to
assess the impact of the industrial practices involving the use of
solvents, hydrocarbons, heavy metals, or other chemicals where there is
a potential for contamination of site groundwater, soil, and subsoil.
Proposed Sec. 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(P)
The NRC proposes to add a new paragraph (c)(3)(ii)(P) in Sec.
51.53 to conform with the proposed changes made in the revised Table B-
1. A new Category 2 issue has been added to the GEIS to evaluate the
potential cumulative effects of license renewal and refurbishment at
nuclear plants. Cumulative impacts was not addressed in the 1996 GEIS,
but is currently being evaluated by the NRC in plant-specific
supplements to the GEIS. The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), in
40 CFR 1508.7, defines cumulative effects as ``the impact on the
environment which results from the incremental impact of the action
when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future
actions regardless of what agency (Federal or non-Federal) or person
undertakes such other actions.'' The NRC considers potential cumulative
impacts on the environment resulting from the incremental impact of
license renewal when added to other past, present, and reasonably
foreseeable future actions.
The NRC requires the assistance of applicants in identifying other
past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions, such as the
construction and operation of other power plants and other industrial
and commercial facilities in the vicinity of the nuclear power plant.
Proposed Sec. 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(Q)
The NRC proposes to add a new paragraph (c)(3)(ii)(Q) in Sec.
51.53 to conform with the proposed changes made in the revised Table B-
1. A new Category 2 issue has been added to the GEIS to evaluate the
potential impact of discharges of radionuclides, such as tritium, from
plant systems into groundwater. The issue is relevant to license
renewal because virtually all commercial nuclear power plants have
spent fuel pools, liquid storage tanks, and buried piping that contain
liquids with radioactive material that have a potential over time to
degrade and release radioactive liquid into the groundwater. The NRC
has investigated several cases where radioactive liquids have been
inadvertently released into the groundwater in an uncontrolled manner.
Any residual activity from these inadvertent releases of radioactive
material is subject to characterization and possible remediation by the
licensee in order to comply with NRC requirements. NRC requires the
assistance of applicants in assessing the impact of any inadvertent
releases of radioactive liquids into the groundwater.
Proposed Sec. 51.71(c)
The proposed language for Sec. 51.71(c) deletes the term
``entitlement'' and ``entitlements.'' These terms are not applicable in
a license renewal context.
Proposed Sec. 51.71(d)
The proposed language for Sec. 51.71(d) consists of minor
conforming word changes to clarify the readability and to include the
analysis of cumulative effects. Cumulative impacts were not addressed
in the 1996 GEIS, but are currently being evaluated by the NRC in
plant-specific supplements to the GEIS. The NRC proposes to modify this
paragraph to more accurately reflect the cumulative impacts analysis
conducted for environmental reviews of the proposed action.
Proposed Sec. 51.95(c)
The proposed language changes for Sec. 51.95(c) is administrative
in nature, and replaces the reference to the 1996 GEIS for license
renewal of nuclear plants with a reference to the revised GEIS.
Proposed Sec. 51.95(c)(4)
The proposed language for Sec. 51.95(c)(4) consists of minor
grammatical word changes to enhance the readability of the regulation.
VII. Specific Request for Comments
The NRC seeks comments on the proposed Part 51 provisions described
in this document and on the regulatory
[[Page 38130]]
analysis and the information collection aspects of this proposed rule.
The NRC also seeks voluntary information from industry about
refurbishment activities and employment trends at nuclear power plants.
Information on refurbishment would be used to evaluate the significance
of impacts from this type of activity. Information on employment trends
would be used to assess the significance of socioeconomic effects of
ongoing plant operations on local economies.
Refurbishment
Table B.2 in the 1996 GEIS lists major refurbishment or replacement
activities that the NRC used to estimate environmental impacts. The NRC
recognizes that the refurbishment impact analysis in the 1996 GEIS may
not accurately reflect industry experience performing the activities
identified in Table B.2. Please provide (1) the estimated frequency for
each activity (e.g., annually, once in the lifetime of a power reactor,
as-needed based on inspections, etc.), (2) the duration (in weeks), (3)
the peak number of project workers in full-time equivalents (FTEs), (4)
the timing of these activities (e.g., during planned refueling or
maintenance outages), and (5) whether the period of extended operation
(i.e., license renewal term) has triggered a need for these activities.
Employment Trends
Please provide data on the annual average number of permanent
operations workers (in FTEs by year) after commencement of nuclear
plant operations. If possible, the information should include a short
non-proprietary discussion about general employment trends and include
reasons for any significant changes in employment.
VIII. Guidance Documents
In addition to issuing the revised GEIS for public comment, the NRC
is also issuing a revised RG 4.2, Supplement 1, Revision 1 and a
revised ESRP, Supplement 1, Revision 1. Both documents are being
published concurrently with these proposed amendments. Revised RG 4.2,
Supplement 1, Revision 1, provides general procedures for the
preparation of environmental reports, which are submitted as part of an
application for the renewal of a nuclear power plant operating license
in accordance with Title 10, Part 54, ``Requirements for Renewal of
Operating Licenses for Nuclear Power Plants,'' of the Code of Federal
Regulations (10 CFR Part 54). More specifically, this revised
regulatory guide explains the criteria on how Category 2 issues are to
be addressed in the environmental report, as specified in the proposed
amendments to Part 51.
The revised ESRP, Supplement 1, Revision 1 provides guidance for
NRC staff on how to conduct a license renewal environmental review. The
ESRP parallels the format in RG 4.2, Supplement 1, Revision 1. The
primary purpose of the ESRP is to ensure that these reviews focus on
those environmental concerns associated with license renewal as
described in Part 51. Additionally, in order to enhance public
openness, the NRC committed to issuing for public comment with the
proposed rule, the RG 4.2, Supplement 1, Revision 1 and ESRP,
Supplement 1, Revision 1.
IX. Agreement State Compatibility
Under the ``Policy Statement on Adequacy and Compatibility of
Agreement States Programs,'' approved by the Commission on June 20,
1997, and published in the Federal Register (62 FR 46517; September 3,
1997), this rule is classified as compatibility category ``NRC.''
Agreement State Compatibility is not required for Category ``NRC''
regulations. The NRC program elements in this category are those that
relate directly to areas of regulation reserved to the NRC by the
Atomic Energy Act or the provisions of 10 CFR. Although an Agreement
State may not adopt program elements reserved to NRC, it may wish to
inform its licensees of certain requirements via a mechanism that is
consistent with the particular State's administrative procedure laws,
but does not confer regulatory authority on the State.
X. Availability of Documents
The NRC is making the documents identified below available to
interested persons through one or more of the following methods, as
indicated.
Public Document Room (PDR). The NRC Public Document Room is located
at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
Regulations.gov (Web). These documents may be viewed and downloaded
electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal http://www.regulations.gov Docket number NRC-2008-0608.
NRC's Electronic Reading Room (ERR). The NRC's public electronic
reading room is located at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm.html.
________________________________________________________
Document PDR Regs.gov Web ERR (ADAMS) NRC staff
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Draft NUREG-1437, Vols. 1 and 2, X X X ML090220654 X
Revision 1--``Generic Environmental
Impact Statement for License Renewal of
Nuclear Plants''.......................
Draft Regulatory Guide (RG) 4.2 X X X ML091620409 X
Supplement 1, Revision 1--``Preparation
of Environmental Reports for Nuclear
Power Plant License Renewal
Applications''.........................
Draft NUREG-1555, Supplement 1, Revision X X X ML090230497 X
1--``Standard Review Plans for
Environmental Reviews for Nuclear Power
Plants, Supplement 1: Operating License
Renewal''..............................
Draft Regulatory Analysis for RIN 3150- X X X ML083460087 X
AI42 Proposed Rulemaking Revisions to
Environmental Review for Renewal of
Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses.
Draft OMB Supporting Statement for RIN X X X ML090260568 X
3150-AI42 Proposed Rulemaking Revisions
to Environmental Review for Renewal of
Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses.
Summary of Public Scoping Meeting to X X X ML032170942 X
Discuss Update to the Generic
Environmental Impact Statement for
License Renewal of Nuclear Plants,
Atlanta, GA............................
Summary of Public Scoping Meeting to X X X ML032260339 X
Discuss Update to the Generic
Environmental Impact Statement for
License Renewal of Nuclear Plants
(NUREG-1437), Oak Lawn, IL.............
Summary of Public Scoping Meeting To X X X ML032260715 X
Discuss Update to the Generic
Environmental Impact Statement for
License Renewal of Nuclear Plants
(NUREG-1437), Anaheim, CA..............
[[Page 38131]]
Summary of Public Scoping Meeting to X X X ML032170934 X
Discuss Update to the Generic
Environmental Impact Statement for
License Renewal of Nuclear Plants
(NUREG-1437), Boston, MA...............
Liquid Radiation Release Lessons Learned X X X ML062650312 X
Task...................................
NUREG/CP-0108, ``Proceedings of the X ............ ............ .............. X
Public Workshop on Nuclear Power Plant
License Renewal'' (April 1990).........
NUREG-1411, ``Response to Public X ............ ............ .............. X
Comments Resulting from the Public
Workshop on Nuclear Power Plant License
Renewal'' (July 1990)..................
``Addressing the Concerns of States and X ............ ............ .............. X
Others Regarding the Role of Need for
Generating Capacity, Alternate Energy
Sources, Utility Costs, and Cost-
Benefit Analysis in NRC Environmental
Reviews for Relicensing Nuclear Power
Plants: An NRC Staff Discussion Paper''
NUREG-0586, ``2002 Generic Environmental X ............ ............ .............. X
Impact Statement on Decommissioning of
Nuclear Facilities: Regarding the
Decommissioning of Nuclear Power
Reactors''.............................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
XI. Plain Language
The Presidential memorandum dated June 1, 1998, entitled ``Plain
Language in Government Writing'' directed that the Government's writing
be in clear and accessible language. This memorandum was published on
June 10, 1998 (63 FR 31883). The NRC requests comments on the proposed
rule specifically with respect to the clarity and effectiveness of the
language used. Comments should be sent to the NRC as explained in the
ADDRESSES heading of this document.
XII. 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 using such a standard is inconsistent with
applicable law or is otherwise impractical. The NRC is not aware of any
voluntary consensus standard that could be used instead of the proposed
Government standards. The NRC will consider using a voluntary consensus
standard if an appropriate standard is identified.
XIII. Finding of No Significant Environmental Impact
The NRC has determined that this proposed regulation is the type of
action described in categorical exclusion Sec. 51.22(c)(3). Therefore,
neither an environmental impact statement nor an environmental
assessment has been prepared for this proposed regulation. This action
is procedural in nature in that it pertains to the type of
environmental information to be reviewed.
XIV. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement
This proposed rule would contain new or amended information
collection requirements that are 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 (OMB) for review and approval of
the information collection requirements.
Type of submission, new or revision: Revision.
The title of the information collection: 10 CFR Part 51
Environmental Review for Renewal of Nuclear Power Plant Operating
Licenses, Proposed Rule.
The form number if applicable: Not applicable.
How often the collection is required: Once per license renewal.
Who will be required or asked to report: Applicants for license
renewal.
An estimate of the number of annual responses: Six.
The estimated number of annual respondents: Six.
An estimate of the total number of hours needed annually to
complete the requirement or request (net one-time reporting): 1,944.00
hours
Abstract: 10 CFR Part 51 specifies information to be provided by
applicants and licensees so that the NRC can make determinations
necessary to adhere to the policies, regulations, and public laws of
the United States, which are to be interpreted and administered in
accordance with the policies set forth in the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969, as amended.
The NRC is seeking public comment on the potential impact of the
information collections contained in this proposed rule and on the
following issues:
1. Is the proposed information collection necessary for the NRC to
properly perform its functions? Does the information have practical
utility?
2. Is the burden estimate accurate?
3. Is there a way to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of
the information to be collected?
4. How can the burden of the information collection be minimized,
including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of
information technology?
A copy of the OMB clearance package may be viewed free of charge at
the NRC Public Document Room, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
Pike, Room O-1F21, Rockville, MD 20852. The OMB clearance package and
rule are available at the NRC worldwide Web site: http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/doc-comment/omb/index.htm for 60 days after the
signature date of this notice.
Send comments on any aspect of these proposed information
collections, including suggestions for reducing the burden and on the
above issues, by October 14, 2009. Comments received after this date
will be considered if it is practical to do so, but assurance of
consideration cannot be given to comments received after this date.
Comments submitted in writing or in electronic form will be made
available for public inspection. Because your comments will not be
edited to remove any identifying or contact information, the NRC
cautions you against including any information in your submission that
you do not want to be publicly disclosed. Comments submitted should
reference Docket No. NRC-2008-0608. Comments can be submitted in
electronic form via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov by search for Docket No. NRC-2008-0608. Comments
can be mailed to NRC Clearance Officer, Tremaine Donnell (T-5F52), U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
[[Page 38132]]
Washington, DC 20555-0001. Questions about the information collection
requirements may be directed to the NRC Clearance Officer, Tremaine
Donnell (T-5 F52), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
20555-0001, by telephone at (301) 415-5258, or by e-mail to
[email protected]. Comments can be mailed to the Desk
Officer, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, NEOB-10202,
(3150-0021), Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503, or
by e-mail to [email protected] or by telephone at (202)
395-4638.
XV. Regulatory Analysis
The Commission has prepared a regulatory analysis on this proposed
regulation. The analysis examines the costs and benefits of the
alternatives considered by the NRC. The two alternatives considered (a)
No Action--no change to applicable license renewal portions of Part 51
regulations, including Table B-1, which would require applicants
seeking license renewal to comply with the existing provisions; or (b)
review and update the environmental impact issues and findings and
amend applicable license renewal portions of Part 51 and Table B-1. The
conclusions of the regulatory analysis show substantial cost savings of
alternative (b) over alternative (a).
The NRC requests public comments on this regulatory analysis.
Information on availability of the regulatory analysis is provided in
Section X of this document. Comments on the regulatory analysis may be
submitted to the NRC as indicated under the ADDRESSES heading of this
document.
XVI. Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), the
Commission certifies that this rule would not, if promulgated, have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
This proposed rule would only affect nuclear power plant licensees
filing license renewal applications. The companies that own 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 (Sec. 2.810).
XVII. Backfit Analysis
The NRC has determined that the requirements in this proposed rule
do not constitute backfitting as defined in Sec. 50.109(a)(1).
Therefore, a backfit analysis has not been prepared for this proposed
rule.
List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 51
Administrative practice and procedure, Environmental impact
statement, 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. 553; the NRC is proposing to
adopt the following amendments to 10 CFR Part 51.
PART 51--ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION REGULATIONS FOR DOMESTIC
LICENSING AND RELATED REGULTORY FUNCTIONS
1. The authority citation for Part 51 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Sec. 161, 68 Stat. 948, as amended, sec. 1701, 106
Stat. 2951, 2952, 2953 (42 U.S.C. 2201, 2297f); secs. 201, as
amended, 202, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended, 1244 (42 U.S.C. 5841,
5842); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note). Subpart A
also issued under National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, secs.
102, 104, 105, 83 Stat. 853-854, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4332, 4334,
4335); and Pub. L. 95-604, Title II, 92 Stat. 3033-3041; and sec.
193, Pub. L. 101-575, 104 Stat. 2835 (42 U.S.C. 2243). Sections
51.20, 51.30, 51.60, 51.80, and 51.97 also issued under secs. 135,
141, Pub. L. 97-425, 96 Stat. 2232, 2241, and sec. 148, Pub. L. 100-
203, 101 Stat. 1330-223 (42 U.S.C. 10155, 10161, 10168). Section
51.22 also issued under sec. 274, 73 Stat. 688, as amended by 92
Stat. 3036-3038 (42 U.S.C. 2021) and under Nuclear Waste Policy Act
of 1982, sec. 121, 96 Stat. 2228 (42 U.S.C. 10141). Sections 51.43,
51.67, and 51.109 also issued under Nuclear Waste Policy Act of
1982, sec. 114(f), 96 Stat. 2216, as amended (42 U.S.C. 10134(f)).
2. Section 51.14(a) is amended by adding the term Historic
properties in alphabetical order to read as follows:
Sec. 51.14 Definitions.
(a) * * *
Historic properties means any prehistoric or historic districts,
sites, buildings, structures, or objects included in, or eligible for
inclusion in, the National Register of Historic Places maintained by
the Secretary of the Interior. This term includes properties of
traditional religious and cultural importance to an Indian Tribe or
Native Hawaiian organization and that meet the National Register
criteria. The term also includes archaeological resources, such as
artifacts, records, and remains, that are related to and located within
such prehistoric or historic districts, sites, buildings, or
structures.
* * * * *
3. Amend Sec. 51.53 to revise the second sentence of paragraph
(c)(2), revise the first sentence of paragraph (c)(3)(ii)(A), revise
the second sentence of paragraph (c)(3)(ii)(B), revise paragraph
(c)(3)(ii)(E), to remove and reserve paragraphs (c)(3)(ii)(I) and (J),
to revise paragraph (c)(3)(ii)(K) and to add paragraphs (c)(3)(ii)(N),
(O), (P), and (Q) to read as follows:
Sec. 51.53 Postconstruction environmental reports.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(2) * * * This report must describe in detail the affected
environment around the plant, the modifications directly affecting the
environment or any plant effluents, and any planned refurbishment
activities. * * *
(3) * * *
(ii) * * *
(A) If the applicant's plant utilizes cooling towers or cooling
ponds and withdraws make-up water from a river whose annual flow rate
is less than 3.15x10\12\ ft\3\/year (9x10\10\m\3\/year), an assessment
of the impact of the proposed action on water availability and
competing water demands, the flow of the river, and related impacts on
instream (aquatic) and riparian (terrestrial) ecological communities
must be provided. * * *
(B) * * * If the applicant can not provide these documents, it
shall assess the impact of the proposed action on fish and shellfish
resources resulting from thermal changes and impingement and
entrainment.
* * * * *
(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 threatened or endangered species in accordance with Federal
laws protecting wildlife, including but not limited to the Endangered
Species Act, and essential fish habitat in accordance with the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act.
* * * * *
(I) [Reserved]
(J) [Reserved]
(K) All applicants shall assess whether any historic properties
will be affected by the proposed project.
* * * * *
(N) Applicants shall provide information on the general demographic
composition of minority- and low-income populations and communities (by
race and ethnicity) residing in the immediate vicinity of the plant
that could be affected by the renewal of the
[[Page 38133]]
plant's operating license, including any planned refurbishment
activities, and ongoing and future plant operations.
(O) If the applicant's plant conducts industrial practices
involving the use of solvents, hydrocarbons, heavy metals, or other
chemicals and has unlined wastewater lagoons, the applicant shall
assess the potential for contamination of site groundwater, soil, and
subsoil. The applicant shall provide an assessment of dissolved
chemical and suspended sediment discharge to the plant's wastewater
lagoons in addition to National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) compliance data collected for submittal to the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or designated State agency. A
summary of existing reports describing site groundwater and soil
contamination should also be included.
(P) Applicants shall provide information about past, present, and
reasonably foreseeable future actions occurring in the vicinity of the
nuclear plant that may result in a cumulative effect. For example, the
applicant should include information about the construction and
operation of other power plants and other industrial and commercial
facilities in the vicinity of the nuclear plant.
(Q) An applicant shall assess the impact of any inadvertent
releases of radionuclides into groundwater. The applicant shall include
in its assessment a description of any groundwater protection program
for the site, including a description of any monitoring wells, leak
detection equipment, or procedures for the surveillance of accessible
piping and components containing radioactive materials. The assessment
shall also include a description of any past inadvertent releases,
including information on the source of the release, the location of the
release within the plant site, the types of radionuclides involved,
including the quantities, forms, and concentrations of such
radionuclides, and the projected impact to the environment during the
license renewal term, including the projected transport pathways,
concentrations of the radionuclides, and potential receptors (e.g.,
aquifers, rivers, lakes, ponds, ocean).
* * * * *
4. Amend Sec. 51.71 to revise paragraphs (c) and (d) to read as
follows:
Sec. 51.71 Draft environmental impact statement--contents.
* * * * *
(c) Status of compliance. The draft environmental impact statement
will list all Federal permits, licenses, and approvals which must be
obtained in implementing the proposed action and will describe the
status of compliance with those requirements. If it is uncertain
whether a Federal permit, license, or approval is necessary, the draft
environmental impact statement will so indicate.
(d) Analysis. Unless excepted in this paragraph or Sec. 51.75, the
draft environmental impact statement will include a preliminary
analysis that considers and weighs the environmental effects, including
any cumulative effects, of the proposed action; the environmental
impacts of alternatives to the proposed action; and alternatives
available for reducing or avoiding adverse environmental effects.
Additionally, the draft environmental impact statement will include a
consideration of the economic, technical, and other benefits and costs
of the proposed action and alternatives. The draft environmental impact
statement will indicate what other interests and considerations of
Federal policy, including factors not related to environmental quality,
if applicable, are relevant to the consideration of environmental
effects of the proposed action identified under paragraph (a) of this
section. The draft supplemental environmental impact statement prepared
at the license renewal stage under Sec. 51.95(c) need not discuss the
economic or technical benefits and costs of either the proposed action
or alternatives except if benefits and costs are either essential for a
determination regarding the inclusion of an alternative in the range of
alternatives considered or relevant to mitigation. In addition, the
supplemental environmental impact statement prepared at the license
renewal stage need not discuss other issues not related to the
environmental effects of the proposed action and associated
alternatives. The draft supplemental environmental impact statement for
license renewal prepared under Sec. 51.95(c) will rely on conclusions
as amplified by the supporting information in the GEIS for issues
designated as Category 1 in appendix B to subpart A of this part. The
draft supplemental environmental impact statement must contain an
analysis of those issues identified as Category 2 in appendix B to
subpart A of this part that are open for the proposed action. The
analysis for all draft environmental impact statements will, to the
fullest extent practicable, quantify the various factors considered. To
the extent that there are important qualitative considerations or
factors that cannot be quantified, these considerations or factors will
be discussed in qualitative terms. Consideration will be given to
compliance with environmental quality standards and requirements that
have been imposed by Federal, State, regional, and local agencies
having responsibility for environmental protection, including
applicable zoning and land-use regulations and water pollution
limitations or requirements issued or imposed under the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act. The environmental impact of the proposed action
will be considered in the analysis with respect to matters covered by
environmental quality standards and requirements irrespective of
whether a certification or license from the appropriate authority has
been obtained.\3\ While satisfaction of Commission standards and
criteria pertaining to radiological effects will be necessary to meet
the licensing requirements of the Atomic Energy Act, the analysis will,
for the purposes of NEPA, consider the radiological effects of the
proposed action and alternatives.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Compliance with the environmental quality standards and
requirements of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (imposed by
EPA or designated permitting states) is not a substitute for, and
does not negate the requirement for NRC to weigh all environmental
effects of the proposed action, including the degradation, if any,
of water quality, and to consider alternatives to the proposed
action that are available for reducing adverse effects. Where an
environmental assessment of aquatic impact from plant discharges is
available from the permitting authority, the NRC will consider the
assessment in its determination of the magnitude of environmental
impacts for striking an overall cost-benefit balance at the
construction permit and operating license and early site permit and
combined license stages, and in its determination of whether the
adverse environmental impacts of license renewal are so great that
preserving the option of license renewal for energy planning
decision-makers would be unreasonable at the license renewal stage.
When no such assessment of aquatic impacts is available from the
permitting authority, NRC will establish on its own, or in
conjunction with the permitting authority and other agencies having
relevant expertise, the magnitude of potential impacts for striking
an overall cost-benefit balance for the facility at the construction
permit and operating license and early site permit and combined
license stages, and in its determination of whether the adverse
environmental impacts of license renewal are so great that
preserving the option of license renewal for energy planning
decision-makers would be unreasonable at the license renewal stage.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
5. Amend Sec. 51.95 to revise the introductory text of paragraph
(c), and the second sentence of paragraph (c)(4) to read as follows:
Sec. 51.95 Postconstruction environmental impact statements.
* * * * *
(c) Operating license renewal stage. In connection with the renewal
of an operating license or combined license
[[Page 38134]]
for a nuclear power plant under parts 52 or 54 of this chapter, the
Commission shall prepare an environmental impact statement, which is a
supplement to the Commission's NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental
Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants'' [(Month
20XX)], which is available in the NRC Public Document Room, 11555
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland.
* * * * *
(4) * * * In order to make recommendations and reach a final
decision on the proposed action, the NRC staff, adjudicatory officers,
and Commission shall integrate the conclusions in the generic
environmental impact statement for issues designated Category 1 (with
the exception of offsite radiological impacts for collective effects
and the disposal of spent fuel and high level waste) with information
developed for those open Category 2 issues applicable to the plant
under Sec. 51.53(c)(3)(ii), and any new and significant information. *
* *
* * * * *
6. In Appendix B to Subpart A of Part 51, Table B-1 is revised to
read as follows:
Appendix B to Subpart A--Environmental Effect of Renewing the Operating
License of a Nuclear Power Plant
* * * * *
Table B-1--Summary of Findings on NEPA Issues for 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 the
license renewal term
would be a small
fraction of any 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
from continued
operations and
refurbishment
associated with the
license renewal term.
Offsite land use in transmission 1 SMALL. Use of
line rights-of-way (ROWs). transmission line ROWs
from continued
operations and
refurbishment
associated with the
license renewal term
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 the
license renewal term.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air Quality
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air quality (non-attainment and 2 SMALL, MODERATE, or
maintenance areas). LARGE. Air quality
impacts of continued
operations and
refurbishment
activities associated
with the license
renewal term are
expected to be small.
However, emissions
during these activities
could be a cause for
concern at locations in
or near air quality
nonattainment or
maintenance areas. The
significance of the
impact cannot be
determined without
considering the
compliance status of
each site and the
activities that could
occur. These impacts
would be short-lived
and cease after
projects were
completed.
Emissions from testing
emergency diesel
generators and fire
pumps and from routine
operations of boilers
used for space heating
would not be a concern,
even for those plants
located in or adjacent
to nonattainment areas.
Although particulate
emissions from cooling
towers may be a concern
for a very limited
number of plants
located in States that
regulate such
emissions, the impacts
in even these worst-
case situations have
been small.
Air quality effects of 1 SMALL. Production of
transmission lines. ozone and oxides of
nitrogen 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 the
license renewal term.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Geology and Soils
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impacts of nuclear plants on 1 SMALL. Impacts on
geology and soils. geology and soils would
be small at all nuclear
plants if best
management practices
were employed to reduce
erosion associated with
continued operations
and refurbishment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Surface Water
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Surface-water use and quality.... 1 SMALL. Impacts are
expected to be
negligible if best
management practices
are employed to control
soil erosion and
spills. Water use
associated with
continued operation and
refurbishment projects
for license renewal
would not increase
significantly or would
be reduced if a plant
outage is necessary to
accomplish the action.
Altered current patterns at 1 SMALL. Altered current
intake and discharge structures. patterns 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.
[[Page 38135]]
Altered salinity gradients....... 1 SMALL. Effects on
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 stratification of 1 SMALL. Effects on
lakes. 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 1 SMALL. Scouring effects
cooling water. 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 1 SMALL. Discharges of
system effluent. metals have not been
found to be a problem
at operating nuclear
power plants with
cooling-tower-based
heat dissipation
systems and have been
satisfactorily
mitigated at other
plants. Discharges are
monitored as part of
the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permit
process.
Discharge of biocides, sanitary 1 SMALL. The effects of
wastes, and minor chemical these discharges are
spills. regulated by State and
Federal environmental
agencies. Discharges
are monitored as part
of the NPDES permit
process. These impacts
have been small at
operating nuclear power
plants.
Water use conflicts (plants with 1 SMALL. These conflicts
once-through cooling systems). have not been found to
be a problem at
operating nuclear power
plants with once-
through heat
dissipation systems.
Water use conflicts (plants with 2 SMALL or MODERATE.
cooling ponds or cooling towers Impacts could be of
using make-up water from a river small or moderate
with low flow). significance, depending
on makeup water
requirements, water
availability, and
competing water
demands.
Effects of dredging on water 1 SMALL. Dredging to
quality. remove accumulated
sediments in the
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.
Temperature effects on sediment 1 SMALL. These effects
transport capacity. have not been found to
be a problem at
operating nuclear power
plants and are not
expected to be a
problem during the
license renewal term.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Groundwater
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Groundwater use and quality...... 1 SMALL. Extensive
dewatering is not
anticipated from
continued operations
and refurbishment
activities associated
with the license
renewal term. The
application of best
management practices
for handling any
materials produced or
used during activities
would reduce impacts.
Groundwater use conflicts (plants 1 SMALL. Plants that
that withdraw less than 100 withdraw less than 100
gallons per minute [gpm]). gpm are not expected to
cause any groundwater
use conflicts.
Groundwater use conflicts (plants 2 SMALL, MODERATE, or
that withdraw more than 100 gpm LARGE. Plants that
including those using Ranney withdraw more than 100
wells). gpm could cause
groundwater use
conflicts with nearby
groundwater users.
Groundwater use conflicts (plants 2 SMALL, MODERATE, or
with closed-cycle cooling LARGE. Water use
systems that withdraw makeup conflicts could result
water from a river). from water withdrawals
from rivers during low-
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 1 SMALL. Groundwater
resulting from water withdrawals. withdrawals at
operating nuclear power
plants would not
contribute
significantly to
groundwater quality
degradation.
Groundwater quality degradation 1 SMALL. Sites with closed-
(plants with cooling ponds in cycle cooling ponds
salt marshes). could degrade
groundwater quality;
however, because
groundwater in salt
marshes is brackish,
this is not a concern
for plants located in
salt marshes.
Groundwater quality degradation 2 SMALL, MODERATE, or
(plants with cooling ponds at LARGE. Sites with
inland sites). closed-cycle cooling
ponds could degrade
groundwater quality.
For plants located
inland, the quality of
the groundwater in the
vicinity of the ponds
could be affected. The
significance of the
impact would depend on
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.
Groundwater and soil 2 SMALL or MODERATE.
contamination. Industrial practices
involving the use of
solvents, hydrocarbons,
heavy metals, or other
chemicals and unlined
wastewater lagoons have
the potential to
contaminate site
groundwater, soil, and
subsoil. Contamination
is subject to State and
Environmental
Protection Agency
regulated cleanup and
monitoring programs.
Radionuclides released to 2 SMALL or MODERATE.
groundwater. Underground system
leaks of process water
have been discovered in
recent years at several
plants. Groundwater
protection programs
have been established
at all operating
nuclear power plants.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 38136]]
Terrestrial Resources
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impacts of continued plant 2 SMALL, MODERATE, or
operations on terrestrial LARGE. Continued
ecosystems. operations,
refurbishment, and
maintenance activities
are expected to keep
terrestrial communities
in their current
condition. Application
of best management
practices would reduce
the potential for
impacts. The magnitude
of impacts would depend
on the nature of the
activity, the status of
the resources that
could be affected, and
the effectiveness of
mitigation.
Exposure of terrestrial organisms 1 SMALL. Doses to
to radionuclides. terrestrial organisms
are expected to be well
below exposure
guidelines developed to
protect these
organisms.
Cooling system impacts on 1 SMALL. No adverse
terrestrial resources (plants effects to terrestrial
with once-through cooling plants or animals have
systems or cooling ponds). been reported as a
result of increased
water temperatures,
fogging, humidity, or
reduced habitat
quality. Due to the low
concentrations of
contaminants in cooling
system effluents,
uptake and accumulation
of contaminants in the
tissues of wildlife
exposed to the
contaminated water or
aquatic food sources
are not expected to be
significant issues.
Cooling tower impacts on 1 SMALL. Impacts from salt
vegetation (plants with cooling drift, icing, fogging,
towers). or increased humidity
associated with cooling
tower operation have
the potential to affect
adjacent vegetation,
but these impacts have
been small at operating
nuclear power plants
and are not expected to
change over the license
renewal term.
Bird collisions with cooling 1 SMALL. Bird collisions
towers and transmission lines. with cooling towers and
transmission lines
occur at rates that are
unlikely to affect
local or migratory
populations.
Water use conflicts with 2 SMALL or MODERATE.
terrestrial resources (plants Impacts on terrestrial
with cooling ponds or cooling resources in riparian
towers using make-up water from communities affected by
a river with low flow). water use conflicts
could be of moderate
significance in some
situations.
Transmission line ROW management 1 SMALL. Continued ROW
impacts on terrestrial resources. management during the
license renewal term is
expected to keep
terrestrial communities
in their current
condition. Application
of best management
practices would reduce
the potential for
impacts.
Electromagnetic fields on flora 1 SMALL. No significant
and fauna (plants, agricultural impacts of
crops, honeybees, wildlife, electromagnetic fields
livestock). on terrestrial flora
and fauna have been
identified. Such
effects are not
expected to be a
problem during the
license renewal term.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aquatic Resources
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impingement and entrainment of 2 SMALL, MODERATE, or
aquatic organisms (plants with LARGE. The impacts of
once-through cooling systems or impingement and
cooling ponds). entrainment are small
at many plants but may
be moderate or even
large at a few plants
with once-through and
cooling-pond cooling
systems, depending on
cooling system
withdrawal rates and
volumes and the aquatic
resources at the site.
Impingement and entrainment of 1 SMALL. Impingement and
aquatic organisms (plants with entrainment rates are
cooling towers). lower at plants that
use closed-cycle
cooling with cooling
towers because the
rates and volumes of
water withdrawal needed
for makeup are
minimized.
Thermal impacts on aquatic 2 SMALL, MODERATE, or
organisms (plants with once- LARGE. Most of the
through cooling systems or effects associated with
cooling ponds). thermal discharges are
localized and are not
expected to affect
overall stability of
populations or
resources. The
magnitude of impacts,
however, would depend
on site-specific
thermal plume
characteristics and the
nature of aquatic
resources in the area.
Thermal impacts on aquatic 1 SMALL. Thermal effects
organisms (plants with cooling associated with plants
towers). that use cooling towers
are small because of
the reduced amount of
heated discharge.
Effects of cooling water 1 SMALL. Gas
discharge on dissolved oxygen, supersaturation was a
gas supersaturation, and concern at a small
eutrophication. number of operating
nuclear power plants
with once-through
cooling systems but has
been satisfactorily
mitigated. Low
dissolved oxygen was a
concern at one nuclear
power plant with a once-
through cooling system
but has been
effectively mitigated.
Eutrophication
(nutrient loading) and
resulting effects on
chemical and biological
oxygen demands have not
been found to be a
problem at operating
nuclear power plants.
Effects of non-radiological 1 SMALL. Best management
contaminants on aquatic practices and discharge
organisms. limitations of NPDES
permits are expected to
minimize the potential
for impacts to aquatic
resources. Accumulation
of metal contaminants
has been a concern at a
few nuclear power
plants but has been
satisfactorily
mitigated by replacing
copper alloy condenser
tubes with those of
another metal.
Exposure of aquatic organisms to 1 SMALL. Doses to aquatic
radionuclides. organisms are expected
to be well below
exposure guidelines
developed to protect
these aquatic
organisms.
Effects of dredging on aquatic 1 SMALL. Effects of
organisms. dredging on aquatic
resources tend to be of
short duration (years
or less) and localized.
Dredging requires
permits from the U.S.
Army Corps of
Engineers, State
environmental agencies,
and other regulatory
agencies.
Water use conflicts with aquatic 2 SMALL or MODERATE.
resources (plants with cooling Impacts on aquatic
ponds or cooling towers using resources in instream
make-up water from a river with communities affected by
low flow). water use conflicts
could be of moderate
significance in some
situations.
Refurbishment impacts on aquatic 1 SMALL. Refurbishment
resources. impacts with
appropriate mitigation
are not expected to
change aquatic
communities from their
current condition.
[[Page 38137]]
Impacts of transmission line ROW 1 SMALL. Application of
management on aquatic resources. best management
practices to ROW near
aquatic systems would
reduce the potential
for impacts.
Losses from predation, 1 SMALL. These types of
parasitism, and disease among losses have not been
organisms exposed to sublethal found to be a problem
stresses. at operating nuclear
power plants and are
not expected to be a
problem during the
license renewal term.
Stimulation of aquatic nuisance 1 SMALL. Stimulation of
species (e.g., shipworms). nuisance organisms has
been satisfactorily
mitigated at the single
nuclear power plant
with a once-through
cooling system where
previously it was a
problem. It has not
been found to be a
problem at operating
nuclear power plants
with cooling towers or
cooling ponds and is
not expected to be a
problem during the
license renewal term.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Threatened, Endangered, and Protected Species and Essential Fish Habitat
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Threatened, endangered, and 2 SMALL, MODERATE, or
protected species and essential LARGE. The magnitude of
fish habitat. impacts on threatened,
endangered, and
protected species and
essential fish habitat
would depend on the
occurrence of listed
species and habitats
and the effects of
power plant systems on
them. Consultation with
appropriate agencies
would be needed to
determine whether
special status species
or habitats are present
and whether they would
be adversely affected
by activities
associated with license
renewal.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Historic and Cultural Resources
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Historic and cultural resources.. 2 SMALL, MODERATE, or
LARGE. Continued
operations and
refurbishment
associated with the
license renewal term
are expected to have no
more than small impacts
on historic and
cultural resources
located onsite and in
the transmission line
ROW because most
impacts could be
mitigated by avoiding
those resources. The
National Historic
Preservation Act (NHPA)
requires the Federal
agency to consult with
the State Historic
Preservation Officer
(SHPO) and appropriate
Native American tribes
to determine the
potential impacts and
mitigation. See Sec.
51.14(a).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Socioeconomics
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Employment and income, recreation 1 SMALL. Although most
and tourism. nuclear plants have
large numbers of
employees with higher
than average wages and
salaries, employment
and income impacts from
continued operations
and refurbishment are
expected to be small.
Nuclear plant
operations, employee
spending, power plant
expenditures, and tax
payments have an effect
on local economies.
Changes in plant
operations, employment
and expenditures would
have a greater effect
on rural economies than
on semi-urban
economies.
Tax revenues..................... 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 from
continued operations
and refurbishment is
not expected to change,
since the assessed
value of the power
plant, payments on
energy production and
PILOT payments are also
not expected to change.
Community services and education. 1 SMALL. Changes to local
community and
educational services
would be small from
continued operations
and refurbishment
associated with the
license renewal term.
With no increase in
employment, 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.
Changes in employment
and tax payments would
have a greater effect
on jurisdictions
receiving a large
portion of annual
revenues from the power
plant than on
jurisdictions receiving
the majority of their
revenues from other
sources.
Population and housing........... 1 SMALL. Changes to
regional population and
housing availability
and value would be
small from continued
operations and
refurbishment
associated with the
license renewal term.
With no increase in
employment expected
during the license
renewal term,
population and housing
availability and values
would not be affected
by continued power
plant operations.
Changes in housing
availability and value
would have a greater
effect on sparsely
populated areas than
areas with higher
density populations.
Transportation................... 1 SMALL. Changes to
traffic volumes would
be small from continued
operations and
refurbishment
activities associated
with the license
renewal term. Changes
in employment would
have a greater effect
on rural areas, with
less developed local
and regional networks.
Impacts would be less
noticeable in semi-
urban areas depending
on the quality and
extent of local access
roads and the timing of
plant shift changes
when compared to
typical local usage.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Human Health
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Radiation exposures to the public 1 SMALL. Radiation doses
to the public from
continued operations
and refurbishment
associated with the
license renewal term
are expected to
continue at current
levels, and would be
well below regulatory
limits.
[[Page 38138]]
Radiation exposures to 1 SMALL. Occupational
occupational workers. doses from continued
operations and
refurbishment
associated with the
license renewal term
are expected to be
within the range of
doses experienced
during the current
license term, and would
continue to be well
below regulatory
limits.
Human health impact from 1 SMALL. Chemical hazards
chemicals. to workers would be
minimized by observing
good industrial hygiene
practices. Chemical
releases to the
environment and the
potential for impacts
to the public are
minimized by adherence
to discharge
limitations of NPDES
permits.
Microbiological hazards to the 2 SMALL, MODERATE, or
public (plants with cooling LARGE. These organisms
ponds or canals or cooling are not expected to be
towers that discharge to a a problem at most
river). operating plants except
possibly at plants
using cooling ponds,
lakes, or canals that
discharge to rivers.
Impacts would depend on
site-specific
characteristics.
Microbiological hazards to plant 1 SMALL. Occupational
workers. health impacts are
expected to be
controlled by continued
application of accepted
industrial hygiene
practices to minimize
worker exposures.
Chronic effects of N/A \4\ Uncertain impact.
electromagnetic fields (EMFs) Studies of 60-Hz EMFs
\5\. 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 is of small
significance if the
workers adhere to
safety standards and
use protective
equipment.
Electric shock hazards........... 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
each nuclear plant
transmission line
conformance with NESC
criteria, 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................. 2 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. However,
alternatives to
mitigate severe
accidents must be
considered for all
plants that have not
considered such
alternatives.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Environmental Justice
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minority and low-income 2 SMALL or MODERATE.
populations. Impacts to minority and
low-income populations
and subsistence
consumption will be
addressed in plant-
specific reviews. See
NRC Policy Statement on
the Treatment of
Environmental Justice
Matters in NRC
Regulatory and
Licensing Actions (69
FR 52040).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Solid Waste Management
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-level waste storage and 1 SMALL. The comprehensive
disposal. regulatory controls
that are in place and
the low public doses
being achieved at
reactors ensure that
the radiological
impacts to the
environment would
remain small during the
term of a renewed
license.
Onsite storage of spent nuclear 1 SMALL. The expected
fuel. increase in the volume
of spent fuel from an
additional 20 years of
operation can be safely
accommodated onsite
with small
environmental effects
through dry or pool
storage at all plants,
if a permanent
repository or monitored
retrievable storage is
not available.
Offsite radiological impacts of 1 For the high-level waste
spent nuclear fuel and high- and spent-fuel disposal
level waste disposal. component of the fuel
cycle, the EPA
established a dose
limit of 15 millirem
(0.15 mSv) per year for
the first 10,000 years
and 100 millirem (1.0
mSv) 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.
[[Page 38139]]
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 1 SMALL. No changes to
disposal. 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.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cumulative Impacts
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cumulative impacts............... 2 Cumulative impacts of
license renewal must be
considered on a plant-
specific basis. Impacts
would depend on
regional resource
characteristics, the
resource-specific
impacts of license
renewal, and the
cumulative significance
of other factors
affecting the resource.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Uranium Fuel Cycle
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offsite radiological impacts-- 1 SMALL. The impacts to
individual impacts from other the public from
than the disposal of spent fuel radiological exposures
and high-level waste. have been considered by
the Commission in 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-- 1 There are no regulatory
collective impacts from other limits applicable to
than the disposal of spent fuel collective doses to the
and high-level waste. general public from
fuel-cycle 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 1 SMALL. The
uranium fuel cycle. nonradiological impacts
of the uranium fuel
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 1 SMALL. License renewal
and decommissioning. is expected to have a
negligible effect on
the impacts of
terminating operations
and decommissioning on
all resources.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Data supporting this table are contained in NUREG-1437, Revision 1,
``Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of
Nuclear Plants'' (XX 20XX).
\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 collective off site
radiological impacts from the fuel cycle and from high level waste and
spent fuel disposal); 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 likely not 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\ NA (not applicable). The categorization and impact finding
definitions do not apply to these issues.
\5\ 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.
[[Page 38140]]
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 24th day of July 2009.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Annette L. Vietti-Cook,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. E9-18284 Filed 7-30-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P